Winston Shrout Charged

[David Merrill]

P.S. Allodial,


I would like to view some of the BoE examples in evidence. I am not sure that grand jury indictments become available for public viewing. I doubt that so not to influence a trial. But when it comes to a complaint in federal court maybe I can find it on PACER?

[David Merrill]

All of the folks that tried to talk me into creating 300 Billion bonds all went to jail. Every single one. And those who tried to do something called Accepted for Value with the IRS are now all sitting in jail.

This so called "secured party creditor" stuff never made any sense to me and I deem it as trying to "tap the stock" of a corporation. That is stealing and I deem it not a good idea.

Remedy is written into the Code - it goes against God's Law and man's law to steal and to be lazy. For the Scriptures declare "go to the ant thou sluggard."

With best regards,
MJ

I think that you are right. Remedy is written into the Code. I am getting a good demonstration of how the Code is not limited to the US too; maybe all Bretton Woods countries...

[Michael Joseph]

I think that you are right. Remedy is written into the Code. I am getting a good demonstration of how the Code is not limited to the US too; maybe all Bretton Woods countries...

No amount of codes developed by man can release one from Divine Law. The debtor is slave to the lender.

[David Merrill]

Thanks - that is always a good reminder to stay out of debt. The Grace of God is about Redemption in my opinion - not sacrifice.

I have pruned the thread. I was taking advantage of the Topic Title as evidence repository. SHROUT is likely getting a lot of hits on the search engines this week. My packages have been delivered. Interestingly I was so convinced that there would be interference with my process, now I feel that I projected it into creation:

[xparte]

Negotiable and Non-Negotiable Instruments". A corporation cannot arrest it's members, but it can "Make Offers" to the "public". The opposite of an "Offer is an "Acceptance". When you don't "Accept", you are in "Dishonour". You cannot pay a debt with a debt and all of the money, credits, Bank notes, checks, money orders etc. are ALL debt instruments, since they are all borrowed into circulation. If you don't understand this part, then ask yourself this question : "Did you create that money?" ? If the answer is no, then IT IS DEBT, TO YOU. The only way we can pay is (WE CAN'T)...but we can make an engagement to pay by "Acceptance for Value". Then they have to adjust our account, because there is our remedy, since they took away our ability to pay with real substance.lawful money The Emergency Banking Act (1934) and HJR 192 and other actions set up a fixed
"dollar for dollar" exchange rate allowing the perpetrators operating the "Federal
Reserve System" to exchange their Promissory Notes known as "Federal Reserve
Notes" for our United States Dollars defined as one ounce of fine silver.
They traded their paper promises for our actual silver and gold, and when it was time
for them to make good on their Notes, they declared bankruptcy and named us as
their sureties--- that is, they pretended to "represent" us and said we were
responsible for their debts after they siphoned off the entire value of our National
Credit, which by definition is equal in value to their National Debt. When the state or federal government is making us offers, i.e. warrants, indictments, fines, tickets etc., they are making us "Offers" and we are "Dishonoring" them. BECAUSE we are not "Accepting" them. When we "Accept" them, and we ask them to "adjust our account", they now have the obligation of "settlement". If they refuse, then they are in a position of "dishonor" now, and they are stepping out of their bounds as our Trustees in Bankruptcy. Now they are the ones with a Tax obligation on their hands because they have everything "ACCOUNTED FOR" in their system. "Accepting" how is "Dishonoring"a fictional offer or debt When you don't "Accept", you are in "Dishonour" only if your a person Can a Man be a DEBT . Might ask who can dishonour a TRUST accountability for lawful money is a demand on the Non-Negotiable Instruments a Man is non Negotiable until re venued. Been here before acceptability is Non-Negotiable.

[David Merrill]

I have some PACER information. You can bring in more information if you sign up for PACER. I find it sad that Winston could have avoided this headache by applying remedy, by demanding lawful money.

Since I find enjoyable things much more enjoyable, I may not be spending a lot of time on this.

[David Merrill]

Negotiable and Non-Negotiable Instruments". A corporation cannot arrest it's members, but it can "Make Offers" to the "public". The opposite of an "Offer is an "Acceptance". When you don't "Accept", you are in "Dishonour". You cannot pay a debt with a debt and all of the money, credits, Bank notes, checks, money orders etc. are ALL debt instruments, since they are all borrowed into circulation. If you don't understand this part, then ask yourself this question : "Did you create that money?" ? If the answer is no, then IT IS DEBT, TO YOU. The only way we can pay is (WE CAN'T)...but we can make an engagement to pay by "Acceptance for Value". Then they have to adjust our account, because there is our remedy, since they took away our ability to pay with real substance.lawful money The Emergency Banking Act (1934) and HJR 192 and other actions set up a fixed
"dollar for dollar" exchange rate allowing the perpetrators operating the "Federal
Reserve System" to exchange their Promissory Notes known as "Federal Reserve
Notes" for our United States Dollars defined as one ounce of fine silver.
They traded their paper promises for our actual silver and gold, and when it was time
for them to make good on their Notes, they declared bankruptcy and named us as
their sureties--- that is, they pretended to "represent" us and said we were
responsible for their debts after they siphoned off the entire value of our National
Credit, which by definition is equal in value to their National Debt. When the state or federal government is making us offers, i.e. warrants, indictments, fines, tickets etc., they are making us "Offers" and we are "Dishonoring" them. BECAUSE we are not "Accepting" them. When we "Accept" them, and we ask them to "adjust our account", they now have the obligation of "settlement". If they refuse, then they are in a position of "dishonor" now, and they are stepping out of their bounds as our Trustees in Bankruptcy. Now they are the ones with a Tax obligation on their hands because they have everything "ACCOUNTED FOR" in their system. "Accepting" how is "Dishonoring"a fictional offer or debt When you don't "Accept", you are in "Dishonour" only if your a person Can a Man be a DEBT . Might ask who can dishonour a TRUST accountability for lawful money is a demand on the Non-Negotiable Instruments a Man is non Negotiable until re venued. Been here before acceptability is Non-Negotiable.

Thank you X;

You just explained that with all things SHROUT to choose from, this indictment is simply failure to file income tax returns on what can be proven to a grand jury is taxable income.

[Kelly-Anne]

Shouts case number is 3:15-cr-00438-JO

on Pacer I believe it will show up as 15-cr-00438

[xparte]

Identified as such a legal name is just wholesale standing on further development do we need to SHROUT it out for ya. MEADS VS MEADS all the private persona standing any licensed legal marriage or legal tax paying Name can stand.I may not be spending a lot of time on this.nothing too see here Winstomb more -hereditary brilliance [RIP]no thanks.

[allodial]

I have to agree. The thing that always fails, in my opinion is that assertion debt has value. Everybody else thinks it does, and so that is supposed to maintain the delirium.

Maybe one of the first illusions pierced is like Michael Joseph called on as bullshit from the cartoon about money. The illusion debt has value is why it is so easy to misstate it that money is conjured out of thin air. It is backed by a naked contract (endorsement) and the security is slave-like substance.

An unsecured loan. Unsecured doesn't mean 'not secured', it simply points to all assets of the debtor underwriting the loan rather than a specific asset (floating debentures vs fixed debentures). I suppose a promise to pay can be 'created out of thin air'. Whether any given promise to pay is worth anything or not might be subject to inspection. Why do banks want collateral? Hmmmm. In any case, it is well established that an unconditional promise to pay a sum certain in money is itself money.

...the Bretton Woods proposal of yours Allodial...

How is it mine? I take the stance that the likes of exemption, immunity, forgiveness (cancellation of debt) have value. Afterall, if it is the extant sovereign that declares what is or what is not money, then at the fount of money would be sovereign prerogative, no? Relevantly, a sovereign's duty to promote equity goes without saying IMHO. [Is a ruler that is a terror to good works a ruler at all?]

***

I've been endeavoring to obtain specimens of the IBOEs that he specifically utilized. I suspect they are the same as the type shown above. However, templates for them are apparently part of this 'course material'. Anyone have copies? Here's more...


Note that the foregoing is a promise to pay not an order to pay. It is not a bill of exchange.


... and...

Attachment 3763
Much the same as the letter-sized ones shown a few posts back. It is of such poor form even according to the most Kindergarten-level of comprehension of BOEs.

***

For edification and comparison, here is specimen of a simple, textbook, non-defective bill of exchange:


There are at least three key role with respect to a bill of exchange:

1. the drawers (or issuer)
2. the payees (original payee as opposed to subsequent payees or endorsers)
3. the drawee (or payee--why do they specify the drawee twice?)

If a bill of exchange is payable through a bank rather than payable at a bank then the payable-through bank would be an additional (i.e. fourth) role player. Point being: it is rather easy to spot a defective instrument.