Common Law
For the definitions of words see
Common Law Words and Definitions, or the more extensive
Law Dictionary that has many of the same words as well as legal terms including comments from a common law perspective. The web page
Written English is also available to help with grammar and punctuation. The notes found on this page are continually updated. If you come across any inaccuracies or corrections that need to be made or wish to contribute please use the
contact form. Thank you.
Introduction
The 'common law' of the people as distinct from 'English Common Law'
(a system established at the time of Magna Carta) goes back centuries; and its origins because it was based on the beliefs and customs of the people and not so much committed to writing are difficult to determine. To prosecute a
claim in common law requires the use of simple words preferably with one syllable and the knowledge your cause is the truth. Learning common law is unlike studying to become a Lawyer because a
claim can only be prosecuted as to first hand knowledge of the facts and evidence in a case; where because a Lawyer is not a material witness and has no first hand knowledge of the facts and evidence cannot address a court where required to do so under oath. No amount of study can impart what underpins the ability of a
man to stand on his own
claim or give an answer to the
claim of another man, or as to complaints from Government Departments.
As the foundation of common law is unwritten so its understanding is best grasped by experience; by either a man's own experiences; or by carefully
listening to those of others. Much as the salvation of the soul is slowly infused with a spirit that grows close to the likeness of our creator so the understanding of common law also becomes infused as part of our being manifesting itself in a temporal understanding that stands beside our likeness in Christ; deficient though that likeness is; but subordinate in the sense that it deals only with the things of this world.
What is written on this web page draws heavily from the teachings of
Karl Lentz and
quotes from William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England; where I've made some of my own observations; and there are comments from Judges and others that I've included where it seemed important. For the most part everything on this web page is open to question, to be corrected, and or edited at any time; where I've included supporting commentary on the history of law in our country in support of common law but what is written here stands for the most part as universal with respect to all common law countries.
Foundational aspects of common law
Possibly the most important foundational aspect of common law is the right of a
man to secure his
rights by making a
claim against another man; making; by right; simple wishes, demands, and orders before a Jury of 12 or before a Magistrate under oath or affirmation. Common law is the supreme and overruling jurisdiction in the USA, Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom and other formerly established British settlement colonies such as India, and Fiji. Common law is defined in most law books as the unwritten law and distinct from legislative rules and acts of Parliament, being described as the long held traditions, customs, and beliefs of the people.
If you are charged with a crime unless a
man can
verify under oath or affirmation he is due compensation for harm, injury, or loss as to your actions or inactions there is no case; all legislative rules, policies, acts of parliament, government entities, government officials, court officers, the men and women of the public service, and corporations are not recognised in common law. The concepts of common law when properly grasped ensure the
rights of a
man are upheld, and stand in contrast to the deficiency's of prosecuting or giving an answer to complaints that concede the
rights of a
man to the extent of his standing as a defendant in courts of a lower or inferior jurisdiction.
Living in a common law Country; what maintains the balance between aristocratic despotism and freedom is the rule of law by way of a Jury of 12 the simple mechanism given us by our ancestors going back centuries before the time of King John and Magna Carta. It is the only avenue by which our
rights are upheld; where our
rights are not expressly written according to statute but are inherent; they are within us; our
rights exist to the extent and are covered by the conscience of the 12 men and women who would rule according to what we bring before them and unless claimed to the contrary stand as the truth and stand as law.
Notes on Blackstone's commentaries.
The Commentaries on the laws of Eng
land by William Blackstone are the main source for citations in this document. The commentaries are amongst a number of texts know as Books of authority and along with famous authors such as Glanvill, Coke, and Bracton to name a few can be quoted in court where they are treated as authoritative statements of law as distinct from general textbooks that cant. In essence the commentaries are law and a road map as to how our system of law is structured and administered clearly outlining in common law the
rights of man.
Common law (the unwritten law)
The commentaries of William Blackstone give common law as the unwritten law of reason and in various parts this is expanded upon when describing the distinctions between the unwritten and statute law. What follows are some excerpts from Section 1 “Study of the Law” on page 8 and 9 that go some way in helping to understand common law by taking a brief glimpse into how it was viewed at this time in history.
"That ancient collection of unwritten
maxims and customs, which is called the common law, however compounded or from whatever fountains derived, had subsisted immemorially in this kingdom ; and, though somewhat altered and impaired by the violence of the times, had in great measure weathered the rude shock of the Nor
man conquest.” where reference to unwritten
maxims and customs is made in distinction to the civil or Ro
man law which was prevalent throughout Europe at this time. Another example from the same page when describing an aversion to the common law by foreign clergy went on to say “But the common law of England, being not committed to writing, but only handed down by tradition, use and experience, was not so heartily relished by the foreign clergy” which makes known in expressed terms that common law was something always understood by Englishmen to be a law not being committed to writing but handed down by tradition use and experience, and so firm was the position of the English nobility and laity in their stance against the civil and Ro
man law they went on to say “the realm of Eng
land hath never been, unto this hour, neither by the consent of our Lord the King and the lords of parliament
shall it ever be", "ruled or governed by the civil law.”
Murray Gleeson on altering common law being subversion
Important comments from Murray Gleeson in an address to the Victoria Law foundation in regards to the meaning of Legislation in discussing the context, purpose and respect for fundamental
rights makes the point that a dilemma Judges face in Australia is that claim’s or defence’s brought before the courts will relate to a breach of Federal or state Acts where because of the intertwining nature of legislation, and the need of extensive interpretation, the work load of Judges has greatly increased as opposed to hearing claims in common law based upon the ancient laws, customs, rights, and privileges of the people where he gives the quote “Alteration of the ancient laws and customs,
rights and privileges of the people was regarded as subversive of good order. Law in general was something that was declared, not freshly made.” Where maxim’s of the law and long held customs and traditions of the people can be considered sacrosanct as to defining the framework and boundaries within which a Judge can operate according to good conscience in applying judgements to individual claims as being separate from acts of Parliament.
Courts
Courts have a duality in the sense of being both a public building and an assembly gathered according to a framework or set of laws that form a specific jurisdiction giving a court the power to act. In public courts more than one jurisdiction can operate at the same time; that is; the prosecution can move a
complaint according to the rules of civil procedure while a
man can prosecute his own
claim according to the common law. In many cases courts will be set up to hear cases according to one set of statutes ie. the Marriage Act; but a constant that remains in the public courts of all common law countries is that if the court has the power to fine and imprison for contempt it is immediately a court of record where; by default all other jurisdictions set up; become; and are subordinate to any
claim or answer given in common law.
Communication in Court
In court a Magistrate or Judge unless given the power by the parties can only arbitrate or rule; where there is no Jury; according to facts and evidence and conclusions of law. All questions put to you by a Magistrate or Judge; as in the game jeopardy;
must be returned in the form of a question where it is only
man who is able to prosecute a case in common law; where if asked a question attempting to alter terms you should
require a stay of proceedings to provide a proper answer to the court which is always done in writing. Unless there is a compelling reason to the contrary all communication in court should be done in writing where your answer should always refer back to what has already been established in writing and read onto the record. Writing is the thing that establishes a case and the only thing you should use to answer a claim/
complaint or create a novation or alteration in terms.
Courts of Record
A Court of Record only moves under the Common-Law (Blacks Law Dictionary)
An excerpt from Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England: “All courts of record are the king’s courts, in right of his crown and royal dignity, and therefore no other court has authority to fine or imprison; so that the very erection of a new jurisdiction with power of fine or imprisonment makes it instantly a court of record. A court not of record is the court of a
private man, whom the law will not entrust with any discretionary power over the fortune or
liberty of his fellow-subjects. Such are the courts-baron incident to every manor, and other inferior jurisdictions”
This excerpt was expanded upon in Tomlin's
Law Dictionary describing the status of the King’s subjects by quantifying their relationship to the courts as follows.
Every court of record is the king’s court in right of his crown and dignity, though his subjects have the benefit of it; and therefore no other court hath authority to fine and imprison : so that the very erection of a new jurisdiction, with the power of fine or imprisonment, makes it instantly a court of record. Salk. 200: 12 Mod. 388: Finch. L. 231. The free use of all courts of record and not of record is to be granted to the people.
Blacks law dictionary (4th edition) page 425 classifys a court of record as follows
Courts maybe classified and divided according to several methods, the following being the more usual:
Courts of record and courts not of record. The former being those whose acts and judicial proceedings are enrolled, or recorded, for a perpetual memory and testimony, and which have power to fine or imprison for contempt. Error lies to their judgements, and they generally possess a seal. Courts not of record are those of inferior dignity, which have no power to fine or imprison, and in which proceedings are not enrolled or recorded. 3 BI. Comm. 24; 3 Steph . Comm. 383; The Thomas Fletcher, C.C.Ga., 24 F. 481; Ex parte Thistleton, 52 Cal. 225; Erwin v. U. S., D.C.Ga., 37 F. 488, 2 L.(Untitled 199).A. 229; Heininger v. Davis, 96 Ohio St. 205, 117 N.E. 229, 231.
A "court of record" is a judicial tribunal having attributes and exercising functions independently of the
person of the magistrate designated generally to hold it, and proceeding according to the course of the common law, its acts and proceedings being enrolled for a perpetual memorial. Jones v. Jones, 188 Mo.App. 220, 175 S.W. 227, 229; Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc., Mass., 171, per Shaw, C. J. See, also, Ledwith v. Rosalsky, 244 N.Y. 406, 155 N.E. 688, 689.
Courts may be at the same time of record for some purposes and not of record for others. Lester v. Redmond, 6 Hill, N.Y., 590; Ex parte Gladhill, 8 Metc., Mass., 168.
The 5 elements of a Court of Record
1. Keeps a Record of the proceedings
2. Does not move according to legislative rules, codes, or acts of Parliament; but proceeds so as to determine the truth and law as a matter of right according to the law of the land, or by the course of the 'common law'.
3. Has the power to fine and imprison for contempt.
4. Generally has an optional Seal.
5. The Tribunal is independent of the Magistrate (Judge)
Australia and common law
Because of a British Act of Parliament to Provide for the Administration of Justice in New South Wales and Van Diemen's
Land in 1828; and it being the birthright of every British subject they carry with them to a new colony the laws of England; we as Australians and subjects of the Crown through inheritance can call upon at any time the laws of Eng
land in pursuit of the
restoration of our rights; where we are a common law Nation; memorialised by a monument to Magna Carta in Canberra; where common law is intrinsically linked by virtue of our rich history and is the foundational jurisdiction of every court of record held before King's/Queens bench, where common law belongs to the people, who are of the Land, where the King/Queen, land, and the People are on equal footing and for the purposes of common law synonymous.
common law as opposed to statute
Of the Laws of Eng
land in Blackstone’s commentaries he divides the municipal law or rule of civil conduct into two kinds the
lex non scripta, the unwritten, or common law, and the
lex scripta, the written, or statute law. Where the lex non scripta or unwritten law
includes not only general customs, on the common law properly so called; but also on the particular customs of certain parts of the kingdom and likewise those particular laws, that are by custom observed only in certain courts and jurisdictions. Tomlin’s popular
law dictionary 1838 gives common law as the term used for the law of the kingdom of England, simply “without other laws” as it was generally administered before any known act of Parliament made to alter or qualify it.
On the importance of Retaining the trial by Jury.
The key mechanism whereby cases are tried in common law is the trial by Jury. Blackstone when talking about retaining the trial by Jury mentioned it as the right and preserve of
liberty and went on to say; It is therefore, upon the whole, a duty which every
man owes to his country, his friends, his posterity, and himself, to maintain to the utmost of his power this valuable constitution in all its rights; to restore it to it’s ancient dignity, if at all impaired by the different value of property, or otherwise deviated from its first institution; to amend it, wherever it is defective; and, above all, to guard with the most jealous circumspection against the introduction of new and arbitrary methods of trial, which, under variety of plausible pretences, may in time imperceptibly undermine this best preservative of English liberty.
On Juries determining both fact and law
Blackstone's commentaries (Of the trial by Jury)
Book III Chapter 23 Section 378
But in both these instances the jury may, if they thing proper,
take upon themselves to determine at their own hazard, the complicated question of fact and law; and, without either special verdict or special case, may find a verdict absolutely either for the plaintiff or defendant.
On the oppression of arbitrary rule as opposed to a trial by Jury
Id
But in settling and adjusting a question of fact, when entrusted to any single magistrate, partiality and injustice have an ample field to range in; either by boldly asserting that to be proved which is not so, or more artfully by suppressing some circumstances, stretching and warping others, and distinguishing away the remainder. Here therefore a competent number of sensible and upright jurymen, chosen by lot from among those of the middle rank, will be found the best investigators of truth, and the surest guardians of public justice. For the most powerful individual in the state will be cautious of committing any flagrant invasion of another’s right, when he knows that the fact of his oppression
must be examined and decided by twelve indifferent men, not appointed till the hour of trial; and that, when once that fact is ascertained, the law
must of course redress it. This therefore preserves in the hands of the people that share which they ought to have in the administration of public justice, and prevents the encroachments of the more powerful and wealthy citizens. Every new tribunal, erected for the decision of facts, without the intervention of a jury, (whether composed of justices of the peace, commissioners of the revenue, judges of a court of conscience, or any other standing magistrates) is a step towards establishing aristocracy, the most oppressive of absolute governments.
Important Points for court cases.
Never say No! in open court, to do so is dishonourable where you only conditionally accept all placed upon the record in such a way as to create no controversy.
Karl Lentz makes the point when asked if he would be ‘here’ in regard to a future court proceeding; answering of course I will be ‘here’; where expressed in the present tense he could be at no other place other than ‘here’ wherever that place may be at that moment in time. A scriptural approach could be to say that "
but for the will of god withstanding I shall be at this venue at that time".
requiring leave of court
In keeping with communicating in writing and posed with questions that may create a novation
(alteration of the terms of a contract) in open court you can say [kar lentz] "I
require leave so I may answer the
claim that is before the court in a proper manner"
silent responses in court
When posing questions to a court and you are met with silence your response should be “for the record because no
man has objected i can only assume what is claimed stands as the truth and if any
man has a
claim to the contrary may he speak now or forever hold his peace.”
To prove a case in Common Law before a Judge or Magistrate a third party impartial witness is always required.
If challenged as to the validity of Common Law one could ask where a statute might be that outlawed Common Law in a Court of Record as being the highest law in the Land
studying points
common law (
Man v. Man)
common law the unwritten law.
Handling a Judge ex parte or in consultation with respect to altering a claim
If given any directions or advice from a Judge with regard to the alteration of a
claim always take the matter on advisement; and make no alterations. Claims in common law are different to statutory complaints in that they are not bared by statute; where once a
man has been brought before a court to answer a claim; the resulting judgement stands as law for perpetuity where the
man had an opportunity to rebut the
claim but made no effort to do so.
Dealing with public servants on paper, and private jurisdiction.
Public Servants who would refuse to take receipt of a notice tendered by a member of the public would be doing so in dishonour; where their subsequent actions are nullified in terms of prior dishonourable actions, inactions, or misconduct. All communication dealing with public servants or officials should be in writing serving as documentary evidence that does away with hearsay. What is spoken verbally is not heard as distinct from the two dimensional world on paper in which public servants and officers of courts operate. Any public official who would attempt to carry out the direction of a court
order without being bonded when and where required to put up a
bond is acting unlawfully and any such
man can be refused entry to a dwelling where further actions in forcing entry can be considered a trespass, and any verbal intimidation considered extortion and communicating threats where they can be sued.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIK8X7VMXis
Points with regard to filing a claim
When filing a
claim often court staff will ask for forms that only make allowance for civil complaints that follow guidelines set down by the rules of civil procedure; in these instances it is best to include stylised forms that best reflect in comparison would be contained in your claim; but with a notice that these forms “have been included for the ease of filing practices only and do not negate what is contained in the case or alter your
claim in any way, where you will provide what has been requested but at the same time stipulate your own requirements as being in nature prosecuted by a
man with inherent jurisdiction and belonging to the claims side of the court."
Given the unfamiliarity of court staff with common law claims, and the small frequency of claims prosecuted in common law; best practice is to communicate with the head clerk or Magistrate indicating your
wish to prosecute a
lawful claim; and your intention to file paperwork stylised to reflect both a civil complaint, and a claim; but that you
require the claim; only; be recognised both by its nature and content as having any force and effect.
Boxed of in red within paperwork
This indicates that nothing within the area indicated by red ink or box is negotiable and is to remain unaltered. According to
Karl Lentz the significance of the red line goes back to the time of Hannibal who used elephants to intimidate enemies but because the elephants were easily stopped by covering the ground with the blood of horses or bulls the scent of which they picked up on their tusks these elephants became more of a liability than a help. This concept of a red line not to be crossed was picked up by Rome and ended up being used in Papal Bulls which set the precedent for further use in the same way in law.
Foundational terms in Notice and Answer
PROPERTY
TRESPASS
WRONG
HARM :
Harm is distinct from injury where injury encompasses things, only
harm can be done to a man.
RESTORATION
The Top 10 words in common-law proceedings are
CLAIM : A
Demand by authority and right made to a court with you as the claimant or prosecutor never a Pro se’, Litigant, Plaintiff, or Counter Claimant where these are terms of art. It
must be noted the term Pro Se’ refers to part time litigants who are given the legal entitlement to practice Law but are subject to statute, and the rules of civil procedure in the same way the law society are required to operate before the bar. Being a Pro Se’ you are at the discretion of the court and despite being competent with a strong command of English and the ability to be persuasive in all facets law you are merely making the petitions of a titled
person on the same level as an attorney who cannot
issue orders or swear under oath as to what is the truth. One could liken the bar society as to a rowing club where you have become a champion rower having been invited to take part in com
petition but ultimately because you are not an official member your victory can be taken away and be made null and void.
COMPLAINT : A
complaint is the only avenue by which a Government can move a case. Governments unlike a
man cannot make a
'claim' a word exclusively for the use of man. i.e. when asked in court wether you plead guilty, or not guilty to an offence, your response, or notice to the court should be that you humbly accept there may be a controversy but
require to know the nature of the party in whom the court seeks, where you can only assume there is a verifiable
claim before the court for a trespass, wrong, harm, or in compensation for a
debt the result of which your actions or in actions have caused, which
man or wo
man is willing to
verify under oath or affirmation that what occurred is true, or all charges be discharged.
YOU : In an address 'you' can be plural or singular, It can mean you the 'man', you the 'woman', or you the 'legal person'. In court it is a general form of address that when accepted bares liability. 'You' can also be used to gain or move jurisdiction to the common law, or claims side of the court. In common law when asking questions of any member of the public service ie. "do
'you' believe such and such is true" and if they choose to answer they have accepted or given an answer that bares liability as a man.
MAN : Man was created by God in his image; where when referring to yourself as a
man or wo
man on paper it is with a lower case ‘i’; Summed up from the perspective of common law, only a
man can make a
claim a position a governing body cannot take and it is from this position as being the creator of the court system a
man can
require of the court what he wishes in
order to either prosecute his own
claim or give notice in answer to the
claim of another man. A
claim from a
man can be made in concurrence with a complaint, where the
claim is prosecuted before Queen’s Bench a position encapsulating the inherent nature of our position as the King or Queen’s subjects, where evidence is heard from both sides of the court and because a
claim is made as being in inherent jurisdiction it nullifies complaints that can only be prosecuted to the extent that they address persons or corporations of whom subscribe to a certain society or belief.
BELIEVE : When you
believe something you hold it as being true and as a consequence a
man cannot be held liable for what he believes. Only a
man has the capacity to
believe Government departments do not; they can only maintain a position. When asking a Judge, Attorney or public officer if they
believe something and they choose to answer they are responding as a
man and can be held liable as such.
REQUIRE : When issuing orders and directions to a court according to law; or by way of your own
claim established in your own court; these orders are given by authority and by right where you "require" something be done or carried out. If asked do you “want” something; a Judge has the discretion to deny what is asked for; where a
man “wants” for nothing from another man; God providing all that he needs. When you
REQUIRE something be done by authority and right it cannot be denied.
WRONG : Deliberate and wanton intent to cause
harm to your fellow man. noun : Whatever deviates from moral rectitude; any injury done to another; a trespass; a violation of right. Wrongs are
private or public.
Private wrongs are civil injuries, immediately affecting individuals; public wrongs are crimes and misdemeanors which affect the community.
TRESPASS : “a transgression” c. 1300, "transgress in some active manner, commit an aggressive offence, to sin,”. [Websters 1828] To pass over the boundary line of another’s land, to enter unlawfully on the
land of another, to commit any offence or to do any act that injures, annoys, or does
harm to another; to
violate any rule of rectitude to the
harm of another. In a moral sense, to transgress voluntarily any divine law or command; to
violate any known rule or duty. An act of
trespass is also encompassed as the breaking of any of the inherent
rights of man. See the
Law Dictionary; rights
PROPERTY : The earliest definition of the word
property is from the Latin
proprietatem meaning "ownership, a property, propriety, quality," literally "special character" and is also a noun of quality from Latin
proprius and the word
proper meaning "one's own, or particular to itself"
The use of the word
property is due largely to the influence of John Locke who gave
property written in the second
person as
"all that a man claims is proper to his person; that he has exclusive rights to control and enjoy exclusive of all others in a society" where the enjoyment of
property is not merely a temporal passing but that which makes a
man whole as extending to his hopes and dreams and to the members of his family the presence of without which would cause him harm.
The mission statement of the Governments of all common law countries is to secure and protect
property generally defined as;
1) That which is peculiar or proper to any person, that which belongs exclusively to one.
2) In the strict legal sense it is an aggregate of
rights which are guaranteed and protected by the Government.
3) The term is said to extend to every valuable right and interest where interest is said to be that which is gained through having invested time, labour or part of one's being into something.
Because the use of the word
property is so compelling and all encompassing in terms of prosecuting a claim; Judges generally have an aversion for, and attempt to steer away from its use preferring instead to offer an amended word defined under a statute. Any offer made by a judge as such should be taken on advisement in the understanding that such an offer can only be interpreted as legal advice where any alteration of a
claim made in this manner could potentially cause
harm by changing the outcome of, and abrogating the
rights of the
man or wo
man making it. The only time as such however where a
man gives up control over
property is when there has been a breach of the peace.
Used in law the meaning of the word
property goes beyond simply the possession of an inert object where children can be regarded as
property belonging to
man who having laboured and invested his very being and to whom he owes an obligation has every right to
claim them as such.
CHARGE : c. 1200, “A load or a weight”. From old French a load, or a burden imposed upon.
DISCHARGE : [Websters 1828] 8 law. To clear from an accusation or crime; to acquit; to absolve; to set free; with of; as, to
discharge a
man of all blame.
Answer in reply to a Judge
If told by a Judge your request is not necessary, you should
reply “Not only is my request necessary but it is necessary and proper” where what is necessary is what is essential for life and the existence of a
man or wo
man and what is proper is what intrinsically pertains or belongs to oneself as an individual, or "adapted to some purpose, fit, apt; commendable, excellent". This essentially relates to the necessary and proper clause.
Remaining in Honour
In common law it is important to remain in honour, in a court of record facing a
complaint with regard to a traffic citation making demands can be dishonourable, i.e. I “order” this case be dismissed immediately with prejudice as the party to the case is not present, makes no allowance for the capacity of the
man in question who may have been involved in an accident rendering him unable to attend proceedings. The honourable rebuttal would be to say “with all due respect I understand the other party to the case may be incapacitated, or have another reason requiring him to be away, and
require a stay of proceedings until such time as the party is able to attend with a valid claim, or the case be dismissed without prejudice until such time as the
man is able to come forth to present his
claim [
Karl Lentz]. On the flip side if it is only a statutory
complaint before the court and not a claim, which can be established by asking is this a valid claim, or complaint, and requiring that all charges be discharged with prejudice because there is no
man and as such no valid
claim before the court, and if the judge and counsel would dishonourably continue to impose a trespass,
wrong or a
harm against you, that a
claim with respect to such trespass,
harm or
wrong would be made in a civil suit against them in they’re capacity as a
man where you
require fair and just compensation.
When pressing a
claim it is always for fair and just compensation for the wrong, trespass, or
harm done, or in restitution for a debt. Nothing can be ordered by or from your fellow
man reciprocally without fair and just compensation.
As a
man we have no duty or obligation to an agency; our duty and obligation only extends to another
man for fair and just compensation if what he can
verify under oath or affirmation is true in his claim. As a
person however we have duties, obligations, and responsibilities to the society in which we may subscribe or ascribe.
Arraignments
An arraignment is only preliminary to a court hearing where a defendant enters a plea and possibly bail is set for his/her release etc depending on the seriousness of the crime. At an arraignment if asked to take a plea without having given notice, you can ask the Judge what is the nature of the Party in whom the court seeks (essentially establishing your status as a
man in common law).
For the most part it is not possible to speak at an arraignment so you
must require a pen and paper to provide a Notice requiring to know if there is a proper
claim before the court that it can be verified by a
man under oath or affirmation, that he has been done a harm,
wrong or trespassed against which
debt you are willing to settle, and that you
require if no
man does appear the case be discharged.
A Judge may upon reading a notice such as this try to draw you into conversation at which point a new oral contract has been entered into nullifying your previous notice to the court. It is imperative to always direct any assertions put to you back to your original notice. It is the notice and the Language within that establishes your jurisdiction in the court, and being common law is unquestionable.
In the case of the following video 001 -
Karl Lentz - How to handle an arraignment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPzieVzG7E0 Karl talks about an arraignment in regard to a criminal
complaint having been assigned a public defender where you would ask for a pen and paper and provide a notice to the court as follows “Is there a verified criminal
complaint before this court, if there is a verified
complaint I have caused another
man harm or injury, I
require a 72 hour stay of proceedings in
order to compensate the
man for his injuries. If after 72 hours I have been unable to settle with this
man I will return to this court in
order to have this matter settled in a trial by Jury”.
A point to be clarified with regards to an arraignment is that you do not address questions put to you in
person but
require leave of court in
order to answer the court properly by way of notice, and once having provided an answer do not diminish your position established within that notice by way of any form of conversation that could be construed as an alteration of your position in any way. A maxim or foundation of law that comes to mind here is that “law = contracts & contracts = law” and by engaging in conversation with a Judge you can easily be drawn into contractual negotiations without realising it where this is a novation, which in turn hands the power of discretion back to a Judge.
If after having provided an answer to the court the Judge would
order you enter a plea of Guilty or Not Guilty, you once again would
require leave of court to provide a notice that should anyone enter a plea on your behalf they bare all liability for they’re actions. This is based on the premise that a case cannot move forwards unless both party’s to the case are ready and by compelling the case move forwards by entering a plea on your behalf the Judge is accepting the benefit of a contract on your behalf without consent and as such is liable for the abrogation of your
rights the result of which is a
trespass having caused
harm injury or loss.
Orders & Arraignment Hearings
Distinctions have to be made between judicial orders made as the result of a judgement, and orders given invoice. This will extend to arraignments where if you are compelled to enter a plea with regard to the burden of an administrative, or criminal
complaint that would ultimately cause you harm, the presiding Judge and Prosecutor can both be held liable for fair and just compensation with regard to the outcome of the
order they have chosen to give. In the same breath it can be required of any court appointed attorney or lawyer that if they choose to “represent you” without having received your consent that they also bare full liability for the consequences that follow on from such representation, noting that in these cases the party has chosen to accept the benefit of a contract on your behalf which is an un
lawful action where you are due fair and just compensation.
From the perspective of contracts if asked to enter a plea notice can be given in writing that you
recognise no
man before the court; and have expressed neither by your actions or inactions the intention to be bound by any terms that would
require a plea be entered; and should anyone move forward entering a plea for you; they would be unlawfully accepting the benefit of a contract on your behalf and held liable as a
man for any such burden or
trespass the result of which would be to cause you harm.
Orders
Sick of taking Orders and earning no
money from complying with the Orders?
Buy an Invoice Pad today, to
BILL the next Public SERVANT that Orders thou [You] !
(thou = singular cf. Ye - Nominative / You - Objective which are Plurals... i will explain later)
Example:
When A[NY] Public SERVANT stops thou at the side of the road and Orders a PERFOR
MANCE of and/or from thou by way of the use of His (or Her) Voice, these UTTERANCES are defined as HIS (or HER) Wishes AND Orders delivered upon thou (placing a Burden Upon thou!)
Example(s) :
ORDERS thou as a [wo]
man to get out of YOUR car !
ORDERS thou, as a [wo]
man to "GIVE-UP" up his or her "GIVEN-name"!
ORDERS thou, as a [wo]
man to perform ANY task (such as hand-over a Licence)!
et ceteras, et cetaras, et ceteras...
Deliever Upon HIM (or HER) a
BILL (an INVOICE) !
(
BILL / INVOICE: c. 1400; that of "
order to pay" ( technically '
Bill of Exchange' is from 1570s)
Example:
When "HE" or "SHE" ( a Public Servant) makes their
WISHES to perform known and
ORDER(s) Upon thou ( a
man or woman) make sure to
require of Him or Her to remember "Fair-and-Just" COMPENSATION, is now due for carrying-out His or Her Wishes and
ORDER(s)!
You 'must' do as your told.
Government departments will often use the word 'must' to compel performance from a man. A notice or variant of it can be given stating you
believe their notice is in error where it makes a
demand on 'You'; and
believe no standing obligation exists under which can be imposed upon you or your
person an allotted portion or duty; where if what they are asking for is an
order that you will carry out the
order but will
require prior aid and assistance where carrying out such an
order or orders would otherwise cause
harm injury or loss; and will
require compensation for which a true
bill will be issued upon the completion of said
order or orders.
Court Summonses
When ordered to appear in court; as a
man or woman; you have no duty or obligation to the legal society, where because of the burden placed upon you with regard to the
order you
require that fair and just compensation is due to the amount of such and such etc.
Common Law Contracts
The prerequisites for Common Law Contracts are simple in that contracts
must be entered into 1) knowingly, 2) Voluntarily, and 3) Intentionally.
Contracts general
To qualify to your intentions as not accepting an offer to contract at the behest of persistent importunings from a Judge or prosecuting attorney you should say "let alone".
Motions
Motions come from the "common law system" or "English Common Law" which was developed in Eng
land from the time of Magna Carta and largely practised by lawyers. A
man prosecuting a
claim in common law issues orders as a Judge would and has no need for motions; however Billy Thornton has used them to vacate judgements that may lack jurisdiction sufficient to uphold such a Judgement. ie
Writ of Error : Is a direct
order used to vacate a Judgment
Notices to all mankind
Notices are to make your wishes and intentions known to all mankind and are given in writing. A notice is not addressed to a Prosecutor, Judge, or legal entity so is not a judicial notice. When a notice is given it
must be simple and if challenged attempting to draw a novation (alteration in terms); the
person asking the question should be refereed back to your original notice.
Many people attempt to navigate court offering a notice viva voce' (by voice or from the mouth) in which case as with law Merchant Courts re
petition of the notice to the court 3 times establishes jurisdiction; that is; the 1st time a notice is voiced it could be regarded as a mistake, the 2nd time may be a coincidence, but the 3rd time is a pattern and regarded as what was intended to be communicated and meant.
However attempting to navigate court proceedings by voice alone is a dangerous practice as mistakes can be made in referring back to previous statements; making it essential all interaction unless unavoidable be communicated in writing. Underscoring this is that what is given by mouth could be misinterpreted by a judge as a bad attitude or divisive behaviour; where having a notice or communication in writing answers the court in a proper manner where it is pressed upon the record.
Notices & Judicial Notices
In general; notices in a court are to all mankind as distinct from a Judicial Notice. If told "Your Notice has no standing" you should ask the Judge if in this court he is acting as a Judge where upon acknowledgement you should point out the notice you have placed before the court it is not a Judicial notice but has been served upon, and bares witness to all mankind that you have been harmed or trespassed against and you
require compensation.
Karl Lentz emphasises this point going on to say
"This is a notice that there is another man who is holding your property and you require the return of your property immediately; it is a notice to all Mankind that another man has done you wrong and you require the restoration of your property and fair and just compensation for the trespass and the declared wrongs (harm caused.)"
Notices to a wrongdoer
What follows is from Bill Thornton on notices.
When notice is given to a party regarding a trespass,
debt or
claim the following sets out points to follow when formatting the notice; It's effect should be to dissuade the other party from continuing in the same way and compel them to make reparations by way of some type of monetary exchange or by righting a wrong.
In the first instance send a ‘notice and demand’ or notice of 'cease and desist' depending on the circumstances making the party aware of exactly in what manner by their actions or inactions the have trespassed against you. It could be they are unaware of what it is they have done. If there is no
reply or inaction a case has been established
In the notice make them aware of the injury they have caused, wether it be a burden as the result of an inaction required of them as public servants, or possibly
harm caused to you physically, or it could be
harm caused by way of trespassing a right etc. In this instance citation of both
private and public law where possible should be made in support.
Let the party know that he has breached his duty as outlined in item 3 Cite the damages involved, where the public law can be used as a guide but in the understanding it is a reference only and set aside by four corners.
Require and
demand the party in good faith stop what he is doing and make reparations with regard to the damages in item 5 within a given time period usually 30 days for members of the public or 60 days for members of the Government.
Point out if no effort is made to make good the damages within the allotted time you will by way of tacit procuration assume power of attorney and determine for him the facts, his duties, and the damages owed.
Finally point out if no performance is forth coming
lawful action will be taken against him either personally In Personam or In Rem against his
property in defence of your own
person against him. In saying this it is most important not to make threats that amount to extortion. Quite simply everybody has the right to defend themselves against an unreasonable or un
lawful attack, where you make it clear that if the other party does not stop what they are doing you will be taking measures to defend yourself in
order to secure your rights; and seek compensation for the damages.
Divorce
A
Claim for divorce can be made on the grounds of unreasonable behaviour [drunkenness]
In divorce court there can be several Jurisdictions with Civil Jurisdiction administering the Marriage Act. Despite the fact under the act you are bound by statute this does not preclude you from asserting your right to a Jury at common law, having said this your standing and
claim in common law need to be unequivocal. The videos below are recordings of the Karl lentz radio show and should give more information.
[
Karl Lentz]
https://youtu.be/-lpKZcXegKY?t=1663 27:43 - 30:30
Karl Lentz 146 - A license doesn't negate a trial by jury, and stick to what you say in court
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVJi7jAJahU
What is important in this case is that the Sister of
Karl Lentz, 3 times made it known to the Judge that she and her case where before the court by saying. “I Karen Lentz now present my case to court” where this statement is pressed on to the record.
Summonses
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVCuXsJnQEc
Bar Association Membership
The Bar Association would rather not have licensing as other Trades and Services with Government because they would then come under an independent code regulated ultimately by the people through independent Government Bodies.
You and I
If sent a letter saying 'You'
Must appear in Court, you send back a letter saying who is the
Man or Wo
man that is requiring of I to appear. Using “I” instead of “Me” establishes you as “I” and upon the next correspondence saying “You”
must appear you send back a letter saying; maybe you did not receive my first communication because I clearly said “I” to appear and never used the word “You”. And finally when sent another letter saying You
Must appear you return a letter saying Please See exhibit A the previous attached communication between You and I where it clearly stipulates I’m an I not a You
Compelling a Court of Record
Court houses or venues are public buildings and as such like Libraries and other public facilities are for public use. Each new case brought before the courts is prosecuted in specific areas of jurisdiction but what remains constant is the right of a
man to be heard as such before a Jury of his peers.
Note: What follows are examples of what could be used in establishing a court of record for the purposes of a
lawful claim, or prosecuting erroneous complaints. In all cases establishing communication with the court in relation to standing, and with regard to the styling and form of paperwork affords respect due to staff who may be unfamiliar with the style of your paperwork and establishes the conditions under which you bring your
claim to the court. It may also be prudent to make allowance for a preliminary hearing with regard to the scope of details outlined in your
claim and the particular Jurisdiction the accused may
wish to use in prosecuting his
claim if any. Doing this streamlines the preparedness due a solemn action of this type for all concerned including officers of the court and court staff who’s co-operation can only engendered further.
If the Judge and Prosecutor are relying on the rules and contract before them and there is no provision in their rules with respect to the Bible, the Constitution, or common law; unless you have established yourself previously in writing as prosecutor in your own case, your position is as a defendant and you have to argue your case accordingly. What has to be established in writing is a common law court of record under the Constitution i.e. i a man, Firstname Lastname [establishes common law]
require a court of record to move a
lawful claim to determine and render a verdict as to the
lawful etc. etc.
Handling the all caps name & establishing standing
There are many and varied ways of handling the all caps name and below are some examples of what has been used before.
appearing as the person and the man
https://youtu.be/DEvB8krNYz0?t=786
First is to
require in writing that an itemised
bill be tendered establishing the charges and related damages from the
man who is making a claim. This challenges jurisdiction by making it clear that you will only answer a
claim as to harm, injury, or loss and not as to a legal proceeding you have neither consented to, or are required by law to make representation in. When before the court you would also establish in writing that both you the
man and your
person are present but
require to be only recognised as a
man where if the persons of the court; being the Judge, and prosecutor; were to move forward without your consent in attempting to intercourse with your
person in a legal proceeding they would be doing so unlawfully and as such become subject to a
claim before an independent tribunal regards to any harm, injury, or loss as a result.
If the Judge, and Prosecutor continue in their pursuit of you in this manner the result of which is to cause you
harm after being repeatedly made aware that you have no comprehension of the rules and practices of the legal society where it has been your
wish for them to stop and for you to be left alone; a notice should be tendered that what was presented to you in the form of options as constituting un
lawful threats and demands will be used as evidence in a subsequent claim.
from what they are doing where it has been repeatedly made aware to them in expressed terms that you have no comprehension of the rules nor are you a member of their legal society and it has been your
wish the entire time to be left alone; and continue by saying; however you have continued to pursue and prosecute me in this manner where I will tender as part of my
claim what was presented to me as options regard to un
lawful threats and demands made upon i
In a case involving a traffic citation the
man summonsed; when asked if he was FIRSTNAME LASTNAME; said; I am sorry but I did not hear you correctly could you please repeat that; once again he was asked if he was FIRSTNAME LASTNAME; and he said once again I am sorry but I am still unable to hear you properly and unsure as to who you are referring; could you please put that in writing; at which point he was handed a piece of paper with his name written in all capital letters at which point he responded by saying "I am not the author of that name" and because the court had no joinder the case had to be discharged.
When brought before a Judge and asked are you MR FIRSTNAME LASTNAME to sidestep semantics with regard to establishing your status as a Man, your question could be, It appears you could be addressing me however, because I cannot make a
lawful determination as to the nature of the Party’s in the case, respectfully establish standing as a
man before the court with the same name referred to by the trust you
wish to administer, and
require to know if the Plaintiff brings a
lawful claim upon which relief can be granted; which
claim he is willing to
verify under oath or affirmation is true and correct.
or: It appears you could be referring to
property in which I have an interest, but I cannot answer your question because I cannot make a
lawful determination as to the nature of the Party’s in which the court seeks, so respectfully establish standing as a
man before the court and
require to be addressed using the same name as the
property to which you refer.
or: Sir I am the
person FIRSTNAME LASTNAME, and the
man Firstname Lastname the name given to me by my mother at birth, who is it you seek ?; because, I will only appear as a man.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oYNlbBbEck
A note written to a court by a caller to the
Karl Lentz show continued as follows. We apologise for any confusion as we the aggrieved come on a
lawful basis and
require the use of this venue as a court of record to seat a jury in which we
wish to move our
claim before to determine and render a verdict as to who has the
lawful right to tender or administrate our property, we the aggrieved signed etc. etc.
Another notice written by a listener who had to go through the process of a faretta hearing in Canada continued as follows. Title “NOTICE ERRORS” I do not understand legalese, legal meaning terms, nor the customs of the legal society so rescind anything I have said or not said, or implied by my actions or inactions that may have indicated I am anything other than a man, or in any other Jurisdiction than a common law court of record. This notice according to the caller had an incredible effect when challenged about the amount of discovery The prosecuting attorney had in the plaintiffs case, to which he answered addressing the bench, “I am not familiar with the word Discovery, does this mean the discovery of a Country or could it mean something else”.
Common law is what guarantees the
rights of man, where asked in a court if you understand your
rights and the charges against you; you could
reply, i am aware i am a
man with inherent
rights but cannot legally or lawfully determine the nature of the party in whom this court seeks; so now respectfully
require these proceedings move to the
claim side of the court; where i am present and available to give answer to the
claim of any
man who I may have harmed or wronged by my actions or inactions, or owe compensation for a debt, essentially establishing the Habeas Corpus
claim of conusance which moves jurisdiction.
Language for the most part beside notices to the court is what establishes common law, where reliance upon the plaintiff appearing in
person can give way to statements such as “Excuse me, we can not begin proceedings as the Plaintiff as yet has not arrived, to which a question received from a Judge eluding to feigned ignorance may follow as what do you mean the Plaintiff has not arrived to which you would respond I
require this case be discharged on the grounds the fictitious Plaintiff has failed to state a verified
claim upon which relief can be granted” where the definition of a “fictitious plaintiff” in Blacks Law 7th edition summarised states that a fictitious Plaintiff is perpetrating a fraud upon the court, and Blacks Law 5th edition giving a fictitious plaintiff as being in contempt of the court.
Refusal to recognise a claim
The job of a Judge is to arbitrate with impartiality, however Depending on the circumstances, the Judge, the case, and who may have a vested interest, a Judge can only be sued when a
claim is placed before him and he has allowed through his behaviour his actions to be swayed so far out of character it would cause a dereliction of duty by refusing to acknowledge such a
claim knowing full well common law is the supreme law of the land. A Judge has both a duty and obligation to hear a
claim and can be otherwise held liable it being a sad set of circumstances when a Judge has allowed him or herself to be manoeuvred into a position beyond impartiality becoming liable for his or her inactions as a
man or a wo
man and the subject of a suit. At this point your suit would be against the
man or woman, where no reference to their position need be cited where they were derelict in their duty as a public servant having refused to provide the service they had previously subscribed to and in so doing did breach the contract they swore under oath to uphold by altering the course of events that would have led to you receiving Justice and because justice was not served the result was to cause you harm.
Notice to a Judge appointing council without consent.
If the judge without your consent; acting under his own volition; would appoint council he now bares full liability for the actions or inactions; competency or incompetency of the
man so appointed the outcome of which would be to cause your
person harm injury or financial loss. Where he would be subject to a
claim for any such trespass; as a man; before a Jury of his peers.
Handling the legal person
note: the following relates to the youtube video
https://youtu.be/H5rODaAudBw?t=3316
Mr Clifford is the name my mother gave me, and if we are here to talk
man to
man you can call me Mr Clifford, however if this is a legal proceeding and you are looking for the legal
person the legal name of Dean Clifford that legal
person is not i, i’m not a legal person.
After your name has been called out in court, you could say did someone just call out my name ?, what name did you just call out ? to which a Judge would respond FIRSTNAME LASTNAME, where you would respond are you talking about my legal name, or the name given to me by my mother, to which a Judge might respond well I’m referring to your legal name, where you would respond I don’t have a legal name; this is a legal proceeding is this correct ? to which a Judge might respond yes, where you would say if this is the case I am not a legal
person and cannot continue as such in these proceedings in legalese, and can only respond as a man. I do have a given name which is
Karl Lentz that was given to me by my mother, and if it is your
wish that i give you this name to use in these proceedings you do understand that i will
require fair and just compensation for any burden placed upon me in regard to charges brought upon i as a man.
Maxims in common law
Law that once existed, having not been outlawed is still good law, and is still true law. [
Karl Lentz]
Failure to deny an allegation to a claim/
complaint is to admit to the allegation. acquiesce = abandonment
Good law has to be expressed not implied.
failure to object is acting in agreement.
Every case is the same, but every case is unique.
An action is not given to him who has received no damages. Actio non datur non damnificato.
In law none is credited unless he is sworn. All the facts
must when established, by witnesses, be under oath or affirmation. Cro. Car. 64. In judicio non creditur nisi juratis.
He who holds legal title cannot hold equity without license.
If you no not the name of a thing, the thing itself is surely lost.
Government Departments
When requiring a Government Department to direct one of its employees with regard to any action i.e.
trespass or the wrongful administration of property, you
require of them to train, discipline, and monitor their employees. The men and women working in government departments have no rights; they only have duties, obligations and responsibilities and can only make complaints on behalf of the agency they represent. The whole charter of Government is to secure and protect
property where
property also encompasses an aggregate of
rights afforded to the people, they cannot compel performance from a
man for any reason or at any time unless by prior agreement and only in exchange for fair and just compensation. Relating to documents government departments are said to
maintain care custody and control of such records in their possession.
Communicating with Government Departments
Because Government Departments are entities they have no ability to act, feel, order,
believe or wish, and it is only the men and women who work in these Departments that give life to the entity. When communicating with government departments any language that would suggest that for instance “This Department feels or believes you owe a debt” etc. is attempting to take the place of
Man where only a
man can
require of another
man fair and just compensation for a
debt owed, a wrong, trespass, or
harm done.
Addressing Orders from Councils and Government
Note: video reference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEU_Lp0RotM
Often people receive orders from local councils or government department directing them to make alterations to
property etc. Often the orders place a burden to the extent it will cause
harm both financially and psychologically. One
must understand living in a judaeo christian country nobody can be ordered to comply with or do anything without fare and just compensation. In the instance where one would receive such an
order the agency in question should be approached and required to place their wishes in the form of an
order for which a true
bill can be issued upon the completion of such an order.
Karl Lentz in the video makes the point that in most cases the agency in question understanding they cannot compel anything from
man will then mitigate the
order to something like a recommendation, or an advisory.
Common law principle & Executive Immunities
The following was taken from the the Australian Law Reform Commission website.
https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/common-law-principle-2#_ftn1
"17. Executive Immunities
A common law principle
17.1 It is a fundamental tenet of the rule of law that no one is above the law. This principle applies to the government, its officers and instrumentalities: their conduct should be ruled by the law. AV Dicey wrote that the rule of law encompasses:
equality before the law or the equal subjection of all classes to the ordinary law of the land administered by the ordinary Law Courts; the ‘rule of law’ in this sense excludes the idea of any exemption of officials or others from the duty of obedience to the law which governs other citizens or from the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals.[1]"
Where what is often expressed as the "law of the land" or the "old law" and the like; is the 'common law' as distinct once again from 'English Common Law'. Some statutes also reference the liability public officers hold at common law ie. in Section 4 of the NSW Law Enforcement Powers and Responsibilities Act where it does not limit the liability of Police Officers as individuals at common law. Despite this legislation is often put in place to shield Public officers from being sued but this only underpins the deficiencies of statute in that public officers and officials are not beyond the reach of the common law in terms of an obligation not to cause
harm injury or loss where they may have abused the title of the office they hold. AV Dicey makes it very clear when referring to the 'rule of law' that nobody great or small is exempt from the jurisdiction of ordinary tribunals administered by the ordinary courts of justice where all public courts are courts of record the magistrate, court clerk's, and court staff being independent of the tribunal where the case is considered the
property of another
man remaining sealed and independent of review until brought before a tribunal consisting of; the prosecutor, the wrongdoer, and jury.
The question of rights.
In the pyramid scheme with regard to the relationship
man has with government,
man is always on top having the inherent
rights he was born with afforded to him first as a
child of God, and then in common law. The government or more specifically government employees have no rights, they only hold duties, obligations, responsibility’s, and privileges, and the authority to carry these out.
Handling Threats
Government Departments act honourably in most cases with the public good in mind. However if left unchallenged with regards to extortionate threats by way of a systemic culture; they will continue to act against people relying on their ignorance of the law. In the case of receiving letters of
demand from the Tax department in regards to an outstanding debt, if threats are made in terms of a prison sentence, fines, being taken to court etc. this is classed as extortion or communicating a threat and can be prosecuted as such. Correspondence after receiving such a letter would point to it as being evidence in the form of a written document of both extortion and communicating a threat and should the sender choose to prosecute a
complaint that this evidence would form part of a
claim of extortion and communicating threats to your fellow
man that would be prosecuted concurrently and that they would have to answer to before a jury.
In most instances after receiving a letter such as this the department in question will usually request the signing a letter of confirmation with a view to dropping the case in its entirety releasing them from the obligation to move forward with the
complaint and at the same time be released from facing a concurrent claim.
Debts
If you have made an offer to pay a
debt and it is not accepted by way of outright refusal, the
debt is payed and no longer due. Living in a Judaeo Christian Country you have to be forgiven of your debts. In essence when offering to pay a
debt the other
man or wo
man to whom the offer has been made has the option to negotiate a settlement or payment options, if they choose to dishonourably reject an offer on any level i.e. by tacit procuration or by the issuance of a rejection notice, the
debt is no longer due. By the action of sending you a notice of rejection they have given up the right of negotiation and of recovery being the first to create a matter of controversy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gUej6aASZg
Sometimes the imposition of a
debt upon a
man will cause him
harm which is un
lawful from the perspective of the Judicial branch of Government where in common law countries a
man has to be forgiven of his debts and not harmed. A point in support is that how can an organisation by not taking the possessions of a
man be harmed where they be required to show damages.
Debts owed to Govt Departments handling proceedings
https://youtu.be/9VLzsbfY41U?t=507
When receiving some type of
complaint you owe a
debt where it could be for
child support etc. you state you are willing to pay any
debt due and
require a signed
bill be tendered stating it is owed, is true, and is post due. In this case Karl mentions the Lady Judge upon receiving this notice exploded threatening if the
debt was not paid Karl would be sent to jail; to which Karl replied I think what your doing is communicating a threat, giving legal advice from the bench and you do realise what your doing is extortion; to which she replied you better just pay it where he said; is that legal advice? are you my attorney? are you accepting a benefit on my behalf; where he continued by saying Ma'am I want to pay it; I would love to pay it; all I asked was a simple question; who do I owe the
money to? and you replied pointing over there "The State of Alabama" where did you not hear me say to "The State of Alabama" Give me a signed itemised
bill in writing stating it is owed; it is true; and post due and I will tender payment immediately.
Court proceedings in debt cases with regard to a civil complaint
If you are at short notice for somebody coming after you for a
debt that is in dispute; in court the Judge can be informed of your intention to serve the
man a notice of cease and desist with a view to settling the matter on the
private side where at this time it is not your
wish details of the case be made public and you
wish for a stay of proceedings until such time all administrative remedies have been exhausted. Because a court case cannot continue until all parties are ready and the court see's you are acting in honour where it is your intention to negotiate a settlement they will grant a stay. In negotiating the
debt and in keeping with proper decorum everything should be done on paper where the principles of offer and acceptance/conditional acceptance come into play; where even in terms of the adequacy of the consideration all language has to be in polite honourable terms. Ultimately the process is like the game of chicken where the first to refuse an offer and move the dispute into court has brought the controversy into the public where you would instantly file a concurrent
claim the other side moved in dishonour by not accepting payment on a
debt in which you where more than willing to settle in good faith.
Credit card Debt
When summonsed to appear everything is done on the
private side, where you
require to see the law before the court, this in the most succinct terms hamstrings the party bringing suit before the court.
Dealing with credit card
debt joinder between the parties is the first thing established i.e. that you know each other, and there has been no error or mistake made in receiving the notice. The next thing is to show obligation of the debt; that is; to show proof an obligation exists where you might say “In all honesty I cannot remember you or remember ever having had business dealings with you” or “I do not remember that number being that exact amount”. In the United States they are Governed by Statutes at Large which
require for any business dealings or contracts over $500 to have a written contract before the
claim is enforceable, so requiring the law be brought before the court at a hearing would have the case discharged if the relief sort is over $500 and there is no contract. Another thing to remember when dealing with a
debt collector or anyone charged with recovering a
debt is they are required to have some form of Delegation of Authority or power of attorney from the company or individual giving them the power to act. In the case of dispute between you and another
man you would
require of them their power of attorney if they say they are acting on behalf of a relative etc.
What can also be asked is for Validation of the
debt and the highlighted law in the contract allowing the charges they
claim make up the debt.
Also when addressing a court with regard to credit card debt, it has to be kept in mind that most Credit Card Companies bring actions based on fraud, where you can ask if they have accrued any kind of financial loss, harm, or damage by your actions or inactions, to which usually would come a denial, where you would
reply, well who are you to move a fraudulent
complaint such as this in an open court, because you do realise! that no actions can arise without damages.
Tax Court
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SvZ3g7ScpI
(051 - Karl Lentz - Take IRS to Court)
With tax debts best is to have a concurrent
claim with regard to the harassment at the hands of the Tax Department while they attempt to prosecute a
complaint with regard to a
debt they will never
claim is true under oath. To dispense with attorneys giving testimony in court, you would
require the attorneys not speak in your case because they have no first hand knowledge of what transpired between you and “Mr Tax Department” and that you
require a nihil dicit judgement if the claimant/plaintiff refuses to show.
Constructive trusts can be used as an instrument by transferring the control of a persons assets to a Judge in lieu of a pending outcome in a court case, where the Judge ultimately will dispense the
money or assets after a final judgement has been entered.
Tax Demands
Income Tax is %100 Voluntary if sent some type of
Demand from any Tax Department a
reply should be sent as follows, I
believe there is no standing obligation attached to i or my
person to comply with such orders
Habeas Corpus
Video:
Karl Lentz 135
Habeas corpus has its roots in the 18th Century where Courts of Equity and Courts of Law would be at odds over who had Jurisdiction over the Body which because of the continual back and forth nature of the use of the writ of Habeas corpus led to the amalgamation of courts of equity and law. Jurisdiction in this sense means control over, where a writ of habeas corpus claims and then requires that
property be in a certain Jurisdiction. If a Magistrate would refuse a writ of Habeas Corpus; because his position is only Administrative he can be asked to bring forth his findings of facts, and conclusions of law which hold him liable for what goes beyond a simple administrative decision to let
property be returned to its
lawful Jurisdiction.
FOF : Findings of Facts
COL : Conclusions of Law
By requiring a magistrate give his ‘Findings of Facts’, and ‘Conclusions of Law’ you are compelling him to take on the liability of such conclusions where magistrates are only allowed to administer proceedings according to the law and facts and not as to conclusions they may have reached on a personal level. Having this on the record may form the basis for suit with regards to the abrogation of rights.
POL : Point of Law
Habeas Corpus in common law claims
See reference Episode 07 @28 minutes of Uncommonlaw by
Karl Lentz
The writ of habeas corpus under the rules of civil procedure can be refused by a Judge if it is not properly ordered and filed a certain way. In a common law
claim for the return of
property i.e. (children, money, a car etc) it is wise to include a properly formatted writ of habeas corpus but as an exhibit only, in these instances it is the wording of an
order for the return of
property that compels performance and is nothing to do with the exhibit tendered with the claim. You make an
order for the return of
property compared with [cf. writ of habeas corpus] see exhibit A, where you
require the return of your
property to the exclusive jurisdiction of its proper place of origin where the
man or wo
man making the
claim is the source and origin of the property. Judges in these cases are bound to carry out orders where they are not being petitioned in terms of a civil
complaint but are required by the
man or wo
man prosecuting the
claim to carry out their
lawful wishes. A point in situations of
child custody is that the State be required to press their
claim upon the record which can only be done by another
man or wo
man not an attorney; where the
man or wo
man would have to
claim and show a vested interest in that property.
The foundational point of the writ of Habeas Corpus is the right to question your accuser, where if brought to a court you should ask has the writ of habeas corpus been repealed or suspended, where you would then ask exactly who? or what? is making the accusation I have caused them harm, injury, or loss. In many cases a Judge will say that Habeas corpus ‘in’ [see the definition for in] this case does not apply, to which you would respond that I am now electing to withdraw myself from this case and now stand before the court as a
man and
require to know under the writ of habeas corpus who it is that is my accuser etc.
Court Continuing with you as the Person
Video:
Karl Lentz 321 - Evoking Habeas Corpus
If you give up playing the role of defendant as you see no further benefit in continuing in this way, you would then
require another
man as your accuser to come forward or the case be discharged. If the Judge would then suggest they would be continuing in your absence (unwillingness to appear in the manner in which the Judge wishes) you could then point out to the Judge that only he as a
man has the power to order/
wish another
man to do something and is it his
wish that you appear as a
man because this is the only way you will appear. [comment] The point to note is that by asking the Judge if it is his
wish for you to appear in any form you are compelling him to address you one
man to another conceding by his actions that you are in fact a
man before the court.
References that come to mind in this instance are extortion with regard to the implication of the Judges choosing to ignore your presence which ultimately would lead to the burden of an arrest upon your
person with no regard for your
rights as a man, redress, or for the institution of the common law of the people. At this point the Judge could also be asked for a point of law with regard to compelled performance from you with regard to any contract you have entered into voluntarily that would
require you to enter a plea, other than a temporal contract you may have entered into implied by your actions that led to a harm, trespass, or a
wrong done to another
man or woman.
In this conversation it is pointed out when the Defendant tried to invoke the writ of Habeas Corpus that the Judge said the writ of Habeas Corpus does not apply in this case to which it was pointed out that he as the defendant wished to withdraw himself from the case using the writ of Habeas Corpus in
order to enter a concurrent claim.
Constructive Trespass & Constructive Possession
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1J7W2kYWjE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncq1eT2F5xU
Constructive trespass is where you may have allowed a
person on your
property but because of other reasons you now
require of that
person to leave or their presence, actions, or inactions become a Trespass. The same can be said for
Constructive possession where at one time you may have seen a benefit in having possession of an item you now see no benefit in it and
wish to divest yourself of it. A Notice by
Karl Lentz for a "Defendant" who was encumbered with an ankle bracelet continued as follows.
On or about July 3rd 2013 I the defendant made a
wish to posses maintain and requested the immediate placement of an article known as a home monitor ankle bracelet to be bound to my
person in concurrence with the go between agents of the United States of America (said Plaintiff), and upon said date it was my belief that it would be of a benefit to I and my
person if I where to
claim a vested interest and or ownership of and or the stewardship of said article.
At this present date Aug 19 2013 I now
claim to maintain
constructive possession (what is interpreted as possession) of said article, and I as of this Date August 16th do in hindsight
believe I erred on July 3rd being in a state of disequilibrium incapacitation to have made such a wish, for the go between is to bind my
person with said article, so as of today August 19th I
wish the immediate removal of said article from
property and I. From this date after whoever he she saith said article is to remain about thy
person will be the causal agent of
trespass to
property and will be held liable for monetary compensation and damages.
After this letter was sent the attorney acting on behalf of "the United States of America" called the Defendant/
man indicating she does nothing in writing also stating "they" would not pay attention to "it" where Karl makes the point correspondence should have been immediately returned asking for the Lady to send a letter stating for the record that she does nothing in writing and this is the way she works. The point being it is dishonourable to refuse the presentment of correspondence relating to a case you or your client has initiated, and the only way your
rights can be truly secured is by pressing all communication on the record in the form of written notices, letters or documents.
Another letter relating to the same case to the attorney went as follows. Thank you for your phone call regarding the situation between the United States of America and I, phone calls are at times a useful form of communication but you do understand as I do phone calls are not proper decorum within a court room setting. I communicated with you in a written form to secure and protect my rights, I now
require of you to preserve and create a record by pressing our telephone call upon paper. I now
require of you to make delivery of said paper to my
person post haste. I now
require of you to answer the following questions.
Is it true I made a presentment of a letter to you
Is it true you said “they” are not going to pay attention to it.
is it true when you said
“they” are not going to pay any attention to
“it”, is
"it" in reference to a) My Letter, or b) My
wish to have the
“they” to remove they’re
property from I my person.
The important thing to note is that the word
“They” is a pro noun defining a
person or a thing, and can never be used as an adjective
Where the defendant not only wished for the removal of the article from himself as a
person (property: all that he only has an exclusive right to enjoy) he wished for it to be removed from himself as a Man.
lawsuit (recovery of property)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Cn7GIZRwNA
I Jessie…
claim the wrongdoers
trespass against my
property see exhibit A [i.e. picture of a
child etc.]
There is no law that exists which binds I to the wrongdoers.
I
require the delivery of all said
property to be under my jurisdiction no later than April the 18th 2013
I will place a charge of one thousand dollars per day per said trespasser and said agency for any failure in the
restoration of
property on said date.
If the placement of all said
property does occur on and or before April 18th I will forgive those who
trespass of their
debt as I would
wish others to forgive me of my trespasses or my debts.
Fair Warning Letter
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7WMX_py_lU
This letter or a variation of it should be used if your
property has been taken by Government
I, firstname lastname gave no entity [name of Government Dept.] the right to administrate my property.
2) I say that, “The Baby Johnson” is my property.
3) I say that no
man or wo
man will make a
claim saying my
claim is untrue.
4) I
require the return of that which is mine; said property.
5) Said
property is to be totally under my control post haste within 3 days.
6) I will charge the wrongful holder of said
property x dollars for each hour of delay in the return of said
property starting on the 22nd day beyond receipt of this summons and this suit, see attached claim. note: the 21 day period is to allow for a
private settlement should the wrongdoer choose to make amends.
This fair warning letter gives the Dept or entity in possession of your
property time to settle your
claim or face paying a specified sum until the
property is returned. In the interim it should be required in the suit the
claim be before a Jury.
Common Law vs (English/Australian Common Law/Case Law)
The system of Law that operates in Australia has its foundation in common law, however what we, and most lawyers would understand as common law is in reality "English Common Law" that has morphed into "Australian Common Law" which constitutes a body of case law that stand beside the Acts and statutes Parliament bring into force which in turn provide the guidelines through which sentencing can be applied by Judges and Magistrates. This Body of English Common Law is then further regulated by the rules of court, and rules of civil procedure which ultimately; because of complexity; requires interpretation by Lawyers and or Barristers; where if you are unable to afford council you have no access to the courts in the simple pursuit of the
restoration of your rights, where what you have been led to
believe is 'common law' is in actual fact like many things a type and shadow of the truth.
Anyone should have access to a court where a
Simple Claim (lawsuit) is stated under oath and penalty of perjury where it is supported by facts and evidence before a tribunal or magistrate. What most are unaware of however is that this is in fact 'common law'; and what sets common law apart from English Common Law, is what is claimed can only come from a
man or wo
man and in turn can only be answered by a
man or woman. In all cases where a corporate entity would attempt to accuse a man; because only a
man can make a
claim the accusation or
complaint becomes void ab initio, common law essentially trumps all forms of English common law because of the nature of the Parties to the case.
From this we can see the simplicity of common law, but having said this common law still requires investigation in terms of what is the essence of the relationship between
man and Government, and of the English language and certain sibilith words used by courts. What most give no credence to now in terms of an education in Civics, and the fundamentals of our Constitution and Law; was once considered essential and what to a large degree insured that future generations of Australians retained the freedoms that for the most part we still enjoy but are in danger of losing; unless; an awakening as to these important truths once again takes root and is cherished as one of the most important parts of the foundation of our Nation.
One might say common law is from a by-gone era, but I would make the assertion that because of the advent of the Internet which has given people all over the world access to education on demand; that the common law we now see re-emerging; though it has been established on centuries old traditions, customs, and beliefs is just as relevant now to the plight of the poor, the needy, and the common
man as it always has been.
Conusance
1.CONUSANCE,
CLAIM OF, English law. This is defined to be an intervention by a third person, demanding judicature in the cause against the plaintiff, who has chosen to commence his action out of claimant’s court. 2 Wilson’s (Untitled 199). 409.
2.It is a question of jurisdiction between the two courts Fortesc. (Untitled 199) 157; 5 Vin. Abr. 588; and not between the plaintiff and defendant, as in the case of plea to the jurisdiction, and therefore it
must be demanded by the party entitled to conusance, or by his representative, and not by the defendant or his attorney. ld. ibid. A plea to the jurisdiction
must be pleaded in person, but a
claim of conusance may be made by attorney. 1 Chit. pl. 403.
3.There are three sorts of conusance. 1. Tentere placate, which does not oust another court of its jurisdiction, but only creates a concurrent one. 2. Cognito placitorum, when the plea is commenced in one court, of which conusance belongs to another. 3. A conusance of exclusive jurisdiction; as that no other court
shall hold pica, &c. Hard. 509 Bac. Ab. Courts, D.
Karl Lentz gives a
claim of conusance as requiring Jurisdiction return to the prosecuting party to a claim, where the transgressor/wrongdoer or council who for, has attempted to use citations and precedent belonging to another Jurisdiction paying no heed to the Jurisdiction of the
claim before the court.
Signing Documents
Documents are signed top left so as to bare no liability for anything contained within, by signing in this way you are indicating you bare no responsibility for; or give no undertaking to be bound by anything below your signature. The Queen when signing the Australia Act in 1986 did so in this way where her signature is clearly seen at the top of the act and not below, indicating she was nothing more than a witness, where no Royal assent was given. If signing documents under duress; V.C. "vi coactus"; meaning "having been forced" can be used; or instead an ellipses ... which indicates there was more the signing party was intending to express but was unable to; being under duress. Another way of signing documents is to use the acronym NA "Non Assumpsit" placed before your signature; indicating that though your signature appears on the document you have not undertaken or promised to carry out, or be bound by any obligation therein. Documents relating to the negotiation of a contract can also be signed using the term "Without Prejudice" indicating that whatever is communicated is part of a settlement process; it is understood that such communications at a later date be inadmissible as evidence in court should negotiations fail.
On The Statute of limitations
Nothing binds
man in terms of statutes and codes,
man being the creator of the judicial system, therefore because there are no rules in common law there is no statute of limitations. Lawyers and Attorneys however are bound but statutes and codes so only have right of appeal to the extent that statutes provide so consequently are hamstrung by the statute of limitations. In the Judiciary Act of 1793 US clause 31 it states if you where done
harm by way of a fraudulent judgement as a man, there is no time limit with regard to bringing a
claim against that judgement.
Diversity of the Party’s
Competency Hearings
The whole point of competency in terms of courts is that you are not competent to represent yourself with respect to the law society or with respect to that which is legal, or with the law before the court. If you are an Idiot however in terms of its earliest latin definition you are an outsider, a layman, a common man, or
private person acting on your own behalf having no obligation to a society, and cannot be compelled otherwise to conform to the rules or statutes of a society to which you do not ascribe or have subscribed.
Equity in respect of Common Law
Equity is the name of a court exercising jurisdiction at law but mainly in equity, Common Law Judges consider equity arbitrary and a royal encroachment on an independent judiciary “renowned 17th Century Judge John Sheldon” called equity a roguish thing, and noted that results in equity cases might as well depend on the size of the Chancellors foot. Karl lentz makes the point that equity is only an interpretation from a Judge, of one
man over another.
The difference between ‘In Law’ & ‘At Law’
‘In Law’ is in the state of law, ‘At Law’ is juxtaposed to it, where
man is the creator of that law which he brings before the court where it is his
wish to prosecute his case in that law, where because attorney’s would have to bear full liability being ‘in law’ can only operate ‘at law’ unless they have first hand knowledge [are a material witness], or have an interest in the case. The full implication of being ‘In Law’ is that you are bound by everything that law suggests, and are subject to whatever outcome is imposed as a result of that law being prosecuted.
Rescinding Contracts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvXz-EYvc2k&t
Most issues extending to children under the marriage act can be classified with regard to
property encompassed by one's inherent
rights and generally are handled with respect to contracts by the courts. Often these contracts are un
lawful and should be rescinded with a
claim stating the contract was not carried out in the manner in which it was offered and
require the
restoration of the
rights and status the parents had under the law ab initio
'from the beginning' in the understanding they believed it was presumed they where signing the contract without prejudice with it's terms and conditions open to challenge at any time. Another Latin term used to describe this is Nunc pro tunc [now for then] and though usually used to correct errors or omissions in court records to reflect what the court truly intended can be used in comparison
c.f. to correct the terms of a contract to reflect what they truly
believe was intended. In rescinding contracts they are also stating they
believe they where defrauded by being led to
believe the contract provided benefits that in its terms and conditions did not exist
[fraud in the inducement] or were led to sign a contract they believed represented one thing yet another thing entirely different was stated.
[fraud in the factum] ie. this often happens in cases where the unscrupulous children of elderly parents attempt to defraud them of
money by importuning them to sign a piece paper they think is for their benefit where the opposite is the case.
Notice of Recission
I a wo
man Belinda Painter
claim that there exists a contract also known as a safety plan between the parties known as Belinda Painter, and Harrisburg Social Services Department; see exhibit A. But I declare henceforth from this day in October 2013 the world is to take notice that said contract
1) provides no benefit to neither I nor my person
2) Is a causal source of
harm to, and lacks the capacity to compel performance from I or my person
3) It lacks the power to force I or my
person to be bound to perform under any and all of its terms and conditions.
Here in let it be known that if there be any
man or wo
man who wishes to make his or her
claim known that said contract has the capacity to bind I or my
person let them come forth now with a verifiable
claim and deny said notice or forever hold their peace.
The point of this notice to a Government Department is that
Man cannot be forced to do anything against his will, where a state attorney or cps/docs would not be able to compel performance from you as a
man before a court.
Parole contract recision
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-129947/TS-798424.mp3
If somebody is facing a parole violation or would want to retract and rescind a probation agreement where there is a victimless crime or no
lawful basis for prior imprisonment, it is best to run a
claim current to the hearing for the lifting of probation restrictions. Where a notice might run as follows. NOTICE At one time I thought it was of a benefit that I go on probation but in hindsight realise this was a victimless crime having plead to a crime in which nobody was caused
harm so now rescind any prior agreement to be on parole or probation, or otherwise and do now make a
claim that it is no longer of a benefit to I to be on parole. It is important to file a
claim before placing a notice of rescission into the court because once the contract is rescinded it is most likely you will be placed back behind bars.
NOTICE
At one time i believed it was of benefit to i; to go on parole and probation but in hindsight realise this was a victimless crime; and having pled to a crime in which no
man was caused
harm now retract and rescind any former agreement to go on parole and probation said agreement being now of no benefit to i and my person.
CLAIM
i a
man claim i have done no
wrong and
claim there is no
man who will come forth with a verifiable
claim in open court and
claim contrary, and
require my status returned as it was ab initio and all charges discharged with prejudice.
Court Orders
Only a
man and a Judge can
issue orders, an attorney or Barrister can only
petition or propose an
order to a Judge who’s discretion it is to grant the order.
Controversy
One cannot bring a controversy into the public without evidence to back it up. To bring continual suits against another
man or wo
man without a
lawful basis is described as barratry.
Creating/Holding a court
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnbi1QVgHsU
When you give notice to a court clerk in writing before the opposing party convenes their court you have essentially opened your own court or you are holding your own court in common law. It is imperative this be in writing, be succinct, to the point, and brief. After giving notice to the court clerk and receiving acknowledgement on any level i.e. a stare etc. your notice has been made to the whole world and your court now exists.
Answer in regard to request for discovery denial.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAKVDXHDUmw
In some cases when asked for documents relating to discovery the prosecution may say they cannot provide any written evidence and where it can be provided is only available come the day of trial. Where most may accept what they have been told ignorant of their
rights a proper response would be that you
require evidence to prepare a proper defence and obtain competent council and not having access to such evidence would amount to a trial by ambush. Where you could also state that “how am I to obtain competent council unless they know how to set a retaining fee”
If challenged as to the rules of discovery etc. a written
order can be given to them in a ‘NOTICE to schedule’ and a ‘NOTICE to
order full disclosure’ [cf. motion for discovery]
Executing Judgements
Upon receiving a judgement from a court a warrant in
debt or similar in Australia can be served on the other party by a sheriff or police where salaries can be garnished or what is owed can be physically taken in the form of
property or cash etc. The judgement can also be used as the basis for a
lien against the
property of the opposing party.
In NSW the defendant/wrongdoer etc is known as the judgement debtor and the
man pursuing the
claim a judgement creditor.
NSW orders for the sale of real
property are as follows
1. Writ for the delivery of goods.
Writ for the levy of property
Garnishee order.
Examination notice
Bankruptcy
Winding up a company
https://www.holdingredlich.com/dispute-resolution-litigation/enforcing-warrants-of-seizure-and-sale-hurdles-and-pitfalls
1. Writ of Possession or a Writ for the Levy of Property.
2. A Warrant of Seizure and Sale directs the Sheriff to seize and sell the judgment debtor's real estate (
land or house) to satisfy the
debt owed.
The you Game
https://youtu.be/RhmYgqrdcrE?t=1059
When sent correspondence from a government entity such as the tax department and referred to as ‘You’ the question should be asked are you referring to me as thee, thy, or thou in a singular sense or are you referring to me in the plural. Do you
believe there is joinder between I, a
man and my person, and do you
believe I am bound by some type of contract with certain rules or terms of obligation to which I have ascribed. The point being acknowledgement from a
man that there is some type of
debt owed where that
man can then be held liable for such a claim.
Trial by Ambush
In many cases but not always a trial by ambush refers to proceedings brought against an individual by a Government department, where the case file and supporting evidence in the Crown’s case is withheld from the defendant without any reason or law supporting that reason until the day of trial where the defendant walks into the trial knowing nothing of what is in support of the charges or action brought against him.
For statements condemning trial by ambush, see Nowlan v Marson Transport Pty Ltd (2001) 53 NSWLR 116 at [28]–[32], [40]–[46], Glover v Australian Ultra Concrete Floors Pty Ltd [2003] NSWCA 80 at [59]–[60], and Bellingen Shire Council v Colavon Pty Ltd [2012] NSWCA 34 at [28]–[33].
Traffic Court
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-80iVKTkat8
The courts operate hearing cases with different subject matter at different times i.e. Traffic related matters may be heard at one time where claims may be heard at another, in respect to this our notice to the court should outline in what capacity we where operating in at the time of receiving the traffic ticket or related matter in that whatever is before the court is a contract which it is alleged we have breached. In light of this if the point is made we where not operating in any capacity under the terms of the contract i.e. not acting as a licensed driver with a duty and obligation as outlined but as a
man traveling from point A to point B with your
property and because only summonsed as such and because the court has no jurisdiction to settle matters of
wrong they have the
wrong person and as a consequence you
require the case discharged. The statement should also be made that if the court believes you where acting as the licensed driver then the court would be in error.
Failure to appear
The following excerpt was taken from Blackstones commentaries on the Laws of England. “in case he fails in his suit, as a punishment for his false claim. To be amerced, or a mercie, is to be at the king’s mercy with regard to the fine to be imposed; in misericordia domini regis pro falso clamore suo [at the king’s mercy for his false claim]. The amercement is disused, but the form still continues; and if the plaintiff does not appear, no verdict can be given, but the plaintiff is said to be nonsuit, non sequitur clamorem suum [he does not pursue his claim]. Therefore it is usual for a plaintiff, when he or his counsel perceives that he has not given evidence sufficient to maintain his issue, to be voluntarily nonsuited, or withdraw himself: whereupon the crier is ordered to call the plaintiff; and if neither he, nor anybody for him, appears, he is nonsuited, the jurors are discharged, the action is at an end, and the defendant
shall recover his costs. The reason of this practice is, that a nonsuit is more eligible for the plaintiff, than a verdict against him: for after a nonsuit, which is only a default, he may commence the same suit again for the same cause of action; but after a verdict had, and judgment consequent thereupon, he is forever barred from attacking the defendant upon the same ground of complaint. But, in case the plaintiff appears, the jury by their fore
man deliver in their verdict.”
Need of a valid claim
If talking
man to
man to a Judge, Prosecutor etc. it can be asked of them what man’s
claim are they acting upon where the answer may be given they are acting on behalf of no
claim but a
complaint in respect to a statute or code, and as such there is no injured party where it
must be noted that a valid cause of action has to have at a minimum both damages and an injured party where without these requirements they can be challenged in terms of bringing a false
claim into the court.
With regard to taking on council
If a Judge would compel you to take on a public defender; notice should be immediately given stating "any
man who acts on my behalf assumes all liability".
Addressed as Mr
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsrpVd-AQaI
In an administrative hearing when asked are you Mr so and so your answer should be No I am not, I possess no titles in nobility I'm just a simple man.
Filing a claim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUFpmQrXSxw
Court staff cannot refuse to file a claim, claims are the only true mechanism whereby the
rights of
man are upheld in common law, and are so steadfastly a part of and intricately interwoven into the fabric of law that for staff to refuse to file a
claim would be in breach of their oath of office.
Karl Lentz makes mention the best way to file a
claim sidestepping in some cases the pitfalls of belligerent court staff is to mail it registered post retaining proof the documents where sent and accompanying the
claim should be a notice making mention the courthouse is free for public use and you expect the head clerk to carry out their duty and obligation to which they have been assigned and file the
claim without delay.
3 Step Process
The
claim process is a simple three step process that involves a Notice, a Notice/Letter to cease and desist, and finally a
claim involving what is claimed; what compensation is due and finally the
order authorising Sheriffs to take what is due in compensation.
1. Notice
2. Cease and Desist
3.
Claim {Claim, compensation, order}
Handling Nisi Prius courts
I
believe this is a nisi prius court; a court of no record; and
require proceedings continue according to the common law. Or unless there is a
claim before the court from another
man you would inform the court you
recognise no
man before the court, where
recognise is both in relation to the appearance of another
man and in relation to any contract that may have been implied.
Domestic Authority in Australia
In the United States the Fourth Amendment provides that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures,
shall not be violated. This amendment aligns with what are imparted as the inherent
rights of
man embodied by such documents as Magna Carta and the Universal Declaration of Hu
man Rights; but best summed up with respect to the law of nature; in that though it has no guiding principles it stands as law as does the common law in like manner; to quote William Blackstone; as the lex non scripta or the unwritten law; where in considering this immutable principle; it can be seen the common law has laid a foundation through our ancestors, customs, and
maxims that each
man likewise be secure in his person, his home, papers and personal effects and that any such breach thereof would serve to quicken the conscience of those who would serve upon our Juries in securing what in common law is our ancestry, and our right.
What underscores these principles is a quote from ex British Prime Minister William Pitt who went on to say "The poorest
man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown; it may be frail, its roof may shake, the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter, the rain may enter; but the King of Eng
land cannot enter; all his forces dare not cross the threshold of that ruined tenement."
The Course of justice free in vindication of right with regard to domestic authority
And in further support are the comments of William Blackstone when referring to the
rights or the liberties of Englishmen where he mentions in Book 1 these
rights consist, primarily, in the free enjoyment of personal security, of personal liberty, and of
private property; where to preserve these from violation, it is necessary that the constitution of parliaments be supported in it's full vigor; and limits certainly known, be set to the royal prerogative. And, lastly, to vindicate these rights, when actually violated or attacked, the subjects of Eng
land are entitled, in the first place, to the regular administration and free course of justice in the courts of law; next to the right of petitioning the king and parliament for redress of grievances.
note: in this case the limits to which Blackstone refers are those according to the constitutions of Parliaments where he mentions that in cases where the
rights of an English
man are violated his recourse is to the royal prerogative as one of the Kings subjects or as a man.
Of offenses against the habitations of individuals
[
from Blackstones commentaries in support of domestic authority.]
And the law of Eng
land has so particular and tender a regard to the immunity of a man’s house, that it stiles it his castle, and will never
suffer it to be violated with impunity: agreeing herein with the sentiments of ancient Rome, as expressed in the words of Tully;16 ”quid enim sanctius, quid omni religione munitius, quam domus uniuscujusque civium?” [“For what is more sacred, what more inviolable, than the house of every citizen?"] For this reason no doors can in general be broken open to execute any civil process; though, in criminal causes, the public safety supersedes the private. Hence also in part arises the animadversion of the law upon eavesdroppers, nuisancers, and incendiaries: and to this principle it
must be assigned, that a
man may assemble people together lawfully (at least if they do not exceed eleven) without danger of raising a riot, rout, or un
lawful assembly, in
order to protect and defend his house; which he is not permitted to do in any other case
ab initio (from the begining)
A Latin term used in law to express what was from the begining ie
"Void ab initio" meaning a judgement with no legal force or effect that has lacked jurisdiction over the subject matter or parties to a lawsuit from the begining. In a common law
claim because the term ab initio is a term of art it can only be referenced and not used directly where you
wish to go back to the status and standing you had as a
man before encountering the court and
believe they maintain the same position in statute they would refer to as ab initio.
Compelling a Court of Record by Requiring evidence be under Oath or Affirmation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbjZbZJINZ4
The premise is that for evidence to be recognised in case of an appellate review it has to have been entered into the court under oath or affirmation by way of a transcript that would not exist otherwise in
private or administrative courts.
It is my understanding that for any statement to be deemed admissible evidence it has to have been entered by way of oath or affirmation; where to satisfy the need for a transcript in making such statements and further facts and evidence available for, and in case of an appellate review; it is my
wish all parties including myself be sworn in under oath or affirmation.
Another form of the same statement can be given as follows. Your honour is it not true that for any statement to be deemed admissible evidence it has to be entered under oath or affirmation. Judge: Yes! man: Therefore before we proceed it is my
wish to be sworn in under affirmation therefore there can be admissible evidence pressed upon the record in the event of and for appellate review if it is necessary and it is my
wish the other side do the same.
Common Law Trusts
In trust law there is a distinct difference between a Commercial Public Trust, and
Private common law trust; the premise being in common law everything is open to interpretation according to the law which is the unwritten law according the customs of the people.
1. In common law a trust does not have to be recorded with the public
2. In common law the beneficiaries do not have to have knowledge of the grantor
3. In common law the Trustee does not have to disclose the beneficiaries.
In the best interest of justice
This is a statement often made by Judge's with respect to the exercise of discretion with regard to due process, and used; though not in every case; subjectively in interpreting the facts, evidence, people and circumstances of a case where rulings should be given in the interest of fairness and equity. However when a
claim is before a court a Judge being independent of the tribunal has no such discretion where because it comes from a
man it is unassailable unless it is but before a Jury.
A defendant
https://youtu.be/y-uGkAeGh-I?t=456
A defendant plays the part of a debtor a slave to his creditor; who has no rights, and carry's the burden of guilt associated with the
debt where the words
debt and guilt are synonymous. A defendant in administrative courts has no voice or standing and is solely at the mercy of the Judge's discretion. In qualification however is the fact that all state courts in Australia are common law courts providing the necessary avenue of redress afforded to every
man and wo
man by securing their
rights to make a claim; without which would be the abrogation of the foundation of law and freedom in our Country.
Running claims concurrently
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SraxCfAj74A
In
order to ease the burden of the courts limited resources; and in the interest of satisfying the requirements of related parties; I
require this
claim be heard at the same time and in concurrence with the related
claim from ... where
Notice (court of record)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hWZU5NyvDc&t=1500s
A court of record only moves according to the common law; the
claim of one
man against another in which an agent or officer of the Government cannot testify unless as a
man under oath who has first hand knowledge of the facts and evidence in the case. In a court of record the magistrate, court clerk's, and court staff are independent of the tribunal where the case remains sealed and independent of review until brought before a tribunal consisting of; the prosecutor, the wrongdoer, and jury so seated to hear the
claim in the case as stated. Any review independent of the tribunal so named is a
trespass upon
property and open to be separately prosecuted at the discretion of the court; whereby any
man who would
trespass in such an active manner bares liability for the outcome; the result of which his actions or inactions have caused.
Government employees liability (notice of cease and desist)
Until somebody is made aware they are committing a
trespass or doing something
wrong they cannot be held liable; where a letter of [cf. cease and desist] is sent to the party making them aware of the
trespass and requiring of them to stop or right the wrong.
Courts are free to use.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJEWozqTwsM&t=200s
I
believe I have chosen a simple method to move my case through the court choosing to appear before a federal district court in the capacity of a
man aggrieved making; by right; simple wishes, demands, and orders in seeking the
restoration of my rights, and compensation for the declared wrongs; this being said i now present to this "district court of the United States of middle Alabama" my case. whereby i; a man;
wish and respectfully
require of this court to.
1) File my suit
2) Give to me a case action number
3) Deliver closed summonses to the wrongdoers.
4) Deliver by mail; file and time stamped original copies of documents in my suit to my mailing address.
5)
Recognise out of necessity my limited resources available so to secure my rights; whereby to remain free from the
harm of any burden imposed it is my
wish no fee be charged; where evidence of my standing is available upon request, and my status be not diminished to that of a pauper, but remain that of a
man aggrieved.
At this time I do not
believe I have received a
bill for services rendered whereby i
claim no officer of this court can
claim i owe a
debt this court having been provided for the free use of
man and mankind in general in
order to settle contentious matters in a civil manner without a fee.
I declare i appear before this court to seek the
restoration of my
rights so upheld under common law before Queens Bench; whereby i bestow sovereign immunity upon all officers of the court in accepting their oaths whereby they have bound themselves under the Constitution to carry out their duty to do right by all people in carrying out all
lawful orders issued from this public court of record. This having been said if an officer of the court would
wish to maintain my belief is in error i have included a cheque for the filing fee demanded of me by the clerk of the court for this matter of controversy between i and the said wrongdoer whereby i
require the case move forward.
Comments from William Blackstone on the free course of Justice.
Taken from page 104 Chapter II Of the absolute rights of individuals
A third subordinate right of every English
man is that of applying to the courts of justice for redress of injuries. Since the law is in Eng
land the supreme arbiter of every man’s life, liberty, and property, courts of justice
must at all times be open to the subject, and the law be duly administered therein. The emphatical words of magna carta,(u) spoken in the
person of the king, who in judgment of law (says Sir Edward Coke)(w) is ever present and repeating them in all his courts, are these; nulli vendemus, nulli negabimus, aut differemus rectum vel justitiam
"to no one will we sell; deny; or delay; right or justice": “and therefore every subject,” continues the same learned author, “for injury done to him in bonis, in terris, vel persona, by any other subject, be he ecclesiastical or temporal, without any exception, may take his remedy by the course of the law, and have justice and right for the injury done to him, freely without sale, fully without any denial, and speedily without delay.”
Using precedent in cases
Because lawyers do not have first hand knowledge of the facts and evidence in a case they are unable to give testimony under oath so instead site cases of precedent in support of motions for a judge to grant an order. In common law a
man does not need to motion a court and can
issue orders where if supported by the
lawful ruling of a Jury, or law; have to be carried out. Cases of precedent however can be used in comparison within claims and orders issued by a
man using the abbreviation cf. within four corners eg. [cf. a writ of habeus corpus].
Licences
Licences should not be applied for in
person but as the agent or authorised representative ie.
"by : Your Name, Authorised representative"
Hearings & Court Decorum
[notes on Uncommonlaw by Karl Lentz episode 8] 24.11
Hearings are held before a trial or court case but in common law are not necessary as in most civil cases a hearing sets up the rules of court or will attempt to address a cause directly where the intention of a hearing initiated by the court system may be to novate the terms of a
claim in an attempt to shift jurisdiction from the claims side of the court. The rules in a common law
claim are established by the prosecuting party and not the court system so there is no need for a
'Hearing' where notice should be given in expressed terms it is not required. A
Preliminary Hearing however is different in that it is held or initiated by the prosecutor in
order to establish the rules of court prior to trial.
Claims unlawfully edited by court clerks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efn5Y5cbbTw&t=900
In cases where edits are made by court staff to lawfully submitted claims; a letter can be sent to the chief magistrate requiring a law that shows where a
man has to be fluent in legalese before being able to move a
claim and or invoke his right to a trial by Jury.
Is there a law that states that there is nowhere in Canada for a
man or wo
man not fluent in the legalese terms of your legal society to move a
claim and or invoke their
rights to a trial by jury.
Karl Lentz 162 - Holding your common law court at the courthouse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FERjJS6nGE
holding property without rights : [c.f. naked possession]
This can be used when seeking the return of
property from someone who has no
rights to hold it; where if the said
property is not under the care custody and control, or exclusive jurisdiction of its proper place of origin; the payment of a sum will be required of the said wrongdoer for each day said wrongdoer continues to hold said
property without right [c.f. naked possession]. Anybody who is involved in keeping
property from its rightful owner can be sued ie. social service workers, foster parents, lawyers, police where the suit would be in reference to them as a
man or woman.
Order for the return of property : I order the return of property to the exclusive jurisdiction of its proper place of origin.
Arrests
When arrested; a Police Officer is required to take you directly to a Magistrate to set bail or bond. From Blackstone's Commentaries Book 4, Chapter 21
Of Arrests; an arrest is described as the apprehending or restraining of one's person, in
order to be forthcoming to answer an alleged or suspected crime. To this arrest all persons whatsoever are, without distinction, equally liable to all criminal cases: but no
man is to be arrested, unless charged with such a crime, as will at least justify holding him to bail, when taken.
Cutting deals with a prosecutor
A prosecutor as part of a plea deal will try to get you to plead guilty to a lesser charge or in some cases under the threat of imprisonment
Notice: I'd like the court to notice that no
man has come before this court to
claim that I have done something wrong. I did not cause any injury, any damage, any harm, and nobody has accrued a loss as a result of my actions or inactions; this is a common law
land where
man is the creator of the Government,
man is the creator of this court,
man is the creator of the position you maintain in this court as a Judge and I am a man; and I am giving the court notice today that there is a
man before this court and do as you
wish
The power of the Judiciary must be substantiated.
This related to page 795 paragraph 4 of the Australian annotated constitution requiring any power vested in an organ of Government
must affirmatively be shown to have been granted.
Justice
Henry Bracton
Since from justice, as from a fountain-head, all
rights arise and what justice commands jus provides, let us see what justice is and whence it is so called. Also what jus is and whence it is so called and what its precepts are, and what law is and what custom, without which one cannot be just, so as to do justice and give just judgement between
man and man.
Simple claim (trespass upon land)
When someone has come on to your
land it is a
claim of
trespass for the
breach of enclosure; where a
trespass is the category of
wrong and the
breach of enclosure is the actual
wrong done.
claim "I; a man; Balraj mann claim the wrong of trespass; breach of enclosure; see exhibit A" where exhibit A could be any manner or amount of documentary evidence filed into a case on the following day. A mans
rights are a subset of
property where the breach of an enclosure could be anything from a mans
land to his body in terms of a medical procedure on his own body or that of his sons or daughters.
How to write a lawsuit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Cn7GIZRwNA
Orders
order for the return of
property [cf. writ of attachment]
The Right to Travel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGF2E8bWM7Q
A
man or wo
man should always conduct themselves and drive in a manner In keeping with what it takes to acquire an understanding of the common law and by honouring its precepts. If you
believe you have received a traffic ticket in error and/or as a result of Government overreach then it is your right to prosecute a
claim against those who engage in such practices. However I strongly advocate negotiating a settlement commensurate with your conduct in having endangered or caused the fear of
harm to those of the public if in fact you
believe you have done so.
A traffic ticket is a statutory instrument issued by the police or statutory authority, and essentially an offer to contract that unless responded to within three days stands as law. When handling traffic tickets or any statutory fine it is essential to be pro-active and as soon as the moving prosecutor has been contacted and there is no response a
claim should be filed stating there is a false
claim in which there is no injured party and no breach of contract. Every
man has the right; as he believes; to travel or move freely from point A to point B; where such a right or belief cannot be interpreted by a Government employee where you would respond with an offer stating that you
believe a police officer acted in error believing you had been extended a privilege under a statute or code to drive as defined but that it is your prerogative as a matter of right to move freely from point A to Point B as you
wish and in whatever manner you
wish without interference and that you
order and
demand they comply with your
wish to cease and desist in moving a false claim. requiring to know who it is that claims he has a right to
interfere with your right to travel. In most cases prosecutors knowing nothing of what constitutes the
rights of
man brush this of understanding nothing of the common law world to which they have just become a party.
At the time of a traffic stop a police officer may have believed you where operating a vehicle under the terms of a drivers
licence which you where not, or is making the
claim that by your actions or inactions you caused
harm to your fellow man; and that by continuing to pursue the
claim despite various requests to cease and desist the prosecutor is liable for continuing to prosecute a false
claim against you, and by committing barratry.
As long as a
man causes no
harm injury or loss; anything; though not necessarily beneficial; is possible; where a
man is only bound to a bureaucracy to the extent of his beliefs. The charter of Government is to protect and secure property; where in terms of cars; tracking stolen
property would be difficult without a robust system in the form of registration records that also insure cars are maintained to a road worthy standard, and where licences provide for a ready means of identifying those who have reached a level of driving proficiency. However as with all things there are good and bad aspects with this system; where beyond the
lawful functions it sets out to serve; it provides for an avenue of abuse in the form of over regulation administered by bureaucracies who in many cases; once signed; will securatise fines and the like by issuing them on
bond markets.
In common law the Government cannot
licence an activity that would otherwise be un
lawful so there is no obligation for a
man to carry a drivers licence; however, moving from point A to point B without a
licence and registration is impractical; where police are more observant of written codes, and largely ignorant of the
rights afforded to a
man under common law. I would advocate that people hold or carry a drivers license, and registration; and establish in writing that their use is maintained only so as to ease the interaction with, and satisfy police who are otherwise unaware of the obligations and
rights of a
man before common law, where at no time have you undertaken to drive or travel under any terms as defined by a government act or policy; your only obligation being to a matter of right such there is no breach of the peace, and such there is no harm, injury, or loss as to your actions or inactions and where no
claim is forthcoming such officer or employee of the government who would choose to arrest or accost you beyond a simple inquiry out of a courtesy, or as to a matter of right; can be liable for false imprisonment, and the un
lawful administration of
property without right; by way of words, and/or actions you would otherwise fear to disregard.
Having said this operating your
property in a manner which is un
lawful in the presence of Police can be prosecuted as a breach of the peace in terms of the fear of
harm it causes; much as is the case with an affray, or riot as a result of any disturbance your actions in operating your
property in such a manner has caused. In these cases where there has been a breach of the peace a
man forfeits his right to
property and it can be lawfully taken from him.
Where a Police officer believes privileges are extended to a driver as defined by a statute to travel or drive on the road; a
man can
claim as a matter of right it is his prerogative to move freely from point A to point B as he wishes, and in whatever manner he wishes.
Be well prepared
Preparing paperwork as part of establishing a case as soon as there is a matter of
issue is essential. When handling citations, fines, tickets and the like you can take various avenues to arrive at a more favourable outcome the first is by addressing the contract at hand and making an offer, the 2nd by approaching the prosecuting attorney and establishing that unless there is an injured party they have no
claim as a matter of right and would be committing barratry, filing a false claim, or malicious prosecution should they chose to continue to prosecute the matter in this manner.
Affidavits
Affidavits are not needed in common law but are a mechanism used by the law society and bar association to certify statements of truth to be presented in court and represent paperwork that has been filed: but do not reflect recorded testimony; rather only the possibility a
man or wo
man at some time may give voice; pressing upon the record; under oath; what has been recorded in a written form. An
affidavit does not stand as the truth until a
man or wo
man gives voice in answer to questions under cross examination so as to
verify the truth of what has been written thereon; however the
presumption is an
affidavit stands as true unless the defending party requires the
man or wo
man / affiant comes forth in open court to answer it point for point.
Valid Cause of Action (in a common law court)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NvbvLYjiZM
Before anything; a Judge is a man, a Prosecutor is a man, and all court officers or staff are either a
man or woman. The question can then be asked: is there any
man before the court with a verifiable claim; to which an answer from a Judge might be "no this is a statutory
complaint from a Government Agency" and because a valid cause of action has at least two elements that have to be satisfied; one being the nature of the wrong, and two an injured party; the Prosecutor in such cases would be committing Barratry by bringing a false
claim into the public.
Warrants
To be of force and effect warrants have to be "in hand" or "read aloud" where there is a demand, or there is no
lawful warrant and due process has not been served. On
private property it can be required a
bond accompany a warrant as surety for wilful damage or otherwise.
""
False Imprisonment
False imprisonment is a common law action that stands along side the
claim of a simple
trespass for the
administration of property without right.
It is the wrongful interference with the personal
liberty of an individual. The
wrong may be committed by words alone or by acts alone, or by both, and by merely operating on the will of the individual or by personal violence or both. All that is necessary for "false imprisonment" is that the individual be restrained of his
liberty without any sufficient
lawful reason, or legal cause therefore, and by words or acts which he fears to disregard. Any situation brought about by design by way of any action or inaction so as to render impossible the right of another in the exercising of one's
liberty if under obligation, or one's freedom if a
man is false imprisonment.
Who's Court
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Di0fmG2ifk
Though court houses and complexes may have operating hours; in reality public courts are the domain of the people and are open at their discretion; as the moving party in a common law claim, and are in session not at the time of filing but at the time the moving party is seated and convened as is their wish. Whatever time it is necessary to move a
claim magistrates are on call and can be summonsed to appear before the court at any time. The graveness of the ability for a
man to establish and hold his own court is sacrosanct as to ensuring his
claim is heard and his presence likened as to when a King or Queen convenes a royal court.
Due Process of law in Australia
In the United States due process of law is the established rules of conduct, modes, or principals at common law meant to protect the people from un
lawful searches and seizures of their persons or property. Essentially by way of provisions in the US constitution 'due process of law' and the 'law of the land' or 'common law' are synonymous. One may say there are no expressed provisions for due process in Australia, but by virtue of the fact we live in a common law
land our
rights predetermine that an arrest can only be carried out with a properly constituted warrant, or without a warrant; for a felony/indictable offence, or for a misdemeanor/summary offence accompanied by a breach of the peace in the presence of an arresting officer. Because 'common law' predetermines what the due process of law is in the United States; we in Australia can apply the same principals that before a Jury will always be upheld as being law established by custom and by right and as such the law of the land.
In determining the conditions for warrant-less arrests distinctions have previously been made between felonies and misdemeanour's; where felonies being of a nature more likely to constitute what would otherwise be a serious common law
trespass and misdemeanour's only relating to a breach of state codes; an arresting officer only has recourse to arrest someone for a felony without an accompanying warrant and not for a misdemeanour. In Australia today the terms felony and misdemeanor have been replaced by such as "indictable and summary offences" respectively; where common law principles can be applied in the same way; such that for a summary offence a police officer is only able to arrest someone if the offence is accompanied by a breach of the peace, but is able to arrest someone immediately for an indictable offence indicating that the conduct of the individual would otherwise be determined by way of reason as having been unlawful.
Due process is a framework of rules, conduct, modes and principals intrinsically linked to the common law as upholding the
rights afforded citizens and the people; and as such cannot be subject to a legislature to authorise what they would interpret as due process leading both to the abrogation of common law and by default the
rights of the people.
Due Process According to Reason
Due process should be the procedural outcome or circumstances that honor and seek to emulate the principles of common law in every respect. That is; a police officer following due process should
believe he has a right to make an arrest because of actions or inactions amounting to a breach of the peace, or by way of behaviour that infringes upon the
rights of himself or another. Anything beyond this is a
trespass where the officer is unable to justify as a matter of right his own actions.
The Bar Guilds or Law Societies
The Bar Guilds (Societies) are the direct descendants of the Florentine, Venetian and London Guilds of the middle ages that used merchant trading principles to commercialise law and personally profit from crime as demonstrated by the history of courts and their literal meaning. The Bar Guilds (Law Societies) now control almost 100% of judicial assemblies around the world as a result of both ignorance, and an abuse of discretion on behalf of public officers who's first allegiance is to these guilds over any public oath. It is a testament to our fallen nature that the ignorance of a populous has been allowed to flourish unchecked as to their standing and as to their
rights where there is no distinction in the minds of most between
private matters prosecuted in a legal proceeding and matters of law.
Official Bonds
There are generally three types of bonds
1) Official Bonds
2) Surety Bonds
3) Fidelity Bonds
Generally bonds to do with public officers are an official bond; an instrument under seal by which the public officer undertakes to pay a sum of
money if he does not faithfully
discharge the duties of his office, or by which a surety undertakes that if the officer does not do so; the surety will be liable in a penal sum. Or more generally an official
bond is the
bond of a public officer where it is held that every
bond executed by a public officer has to be in obedience to the law in which society undertakes that he
shall discharge a public duty imposed upon him by law being called an official bond. Where the filing of an official
bond is generally regarded as a necessary prerequisite to fulfill the title of an office; it is a condition precedent to the right of a
person elected or appointed to be inducted into office and without such a bond; one is not entitled to the office and may not legally hold or
discharge any of the functions of that office.
Writ of attachment and sequestration
A writ of attachment is a legal
order referred to in comparison only from within a common law
order for the return of
property which will accompany a judgment given to a sheriff for the execution of the
order to satisfy an outstanding debt. Before service of the
order generally the sheriff has to be satisfied sufficient surety exists to cover loss or damage that may occur whilst carrying the
order out.
Settlements
If accepting a partial payment as part of a settlement it is done as a conditional acceptance stating: that you are conditionally accepting the sum that has been offered but it still does not satisfy a balance that remains outstanding between the parties.
I conditionally accept your offer of one million dollars but this still does not negate the fact there is outstanding balance between us.
The return of property
A notice should be served on the offending party stating I; a man; being the source and orgin of
property (see exhibit A) now state
"You are wrongfully holding said property; that which is mine; without right [cf. naked possession]" it being said that no
man to this date has come forward with a superior
claim I now
require of you to forthwith without delay restore said
property to the exclusive jurisdiction of its proper place of origin.
Governing Bodies and Constitutions
Governing bodies have duties, obligations, and responsibilities; and have no rights; they are the creation of man, and are chartered; and as such bound by a piece of paper "a constitution" and are distinct from a
man in common law who is not. Much as the people who rose up against the monster; the creation of Frankenstein a man, and summarily slayed the monster so they have the same right and the will to control the function of Government especially where it would be a source or the cause of harm. The charter of government is to protect and secure
property along with all the aggregated
rights that this implies.
Barratry
Are the false claims or complaints of a practising law professional where a
claim is entered stating that they have not continued to pursue the
claim or
complaint to its conclusion in a proper manner having not been forthcoming as to requests for the evidence demanded of them.
Filing on demand
When it is required of a counter clerk to file paperwork on demand; because court staff are not qualified to make a legal or
lawful determination the paperwork has to be forwarded to a Judge or magistrate and is only open to review by an independent tribunal come the day of trial.
Notice of Limine, or Notice of limitation [cf. Request for admissions, request for production, interrogatories]
Where evidence has not been forth coming after a request has been made; a notice of Limine can be issued accepting the silence of the other side as an admission as to the truth. The notice limits the other side from speaking or communicating in a court case where they previously had the opportunity to make the truth known with facts and evidence but chose not to. The notice also establishes the law between the parties on a particular
issue and can be used itself as documentary evidence before a Jury.
Void Order [cf. void ab initio, writ of error]
reference: Tami Pepper
man & "EPISODE 56 - Unkommon Law w Mo"
The premise is that an
order from a magistrate or judge can be made void by virtue of having been issued from a court of inferior jurisdiction to that of the court of "King's or Queen's Bench" a jurisdiction that by its nature encapsulates the inherent
rights of
man as determined before an independent tribunal; in this case four independent witnesses; which becomes a "matter of public law
coram nobis". The notice/
order explains what was ordered by a presiding Judge, or in a judicial determination; contained within a provided bullet point list, and in the second paragraph states that "i a
man now does make void the above stated order" and following this are the points relied upon to void the
order ie. The Judge exceeded his jurisdiction not being authorised to preside on a matter of equity etc. An
order or notice voiding the
order has to be dated and signed by the
man making the
order and four witnesses who also sign the
order making it a matter of public law "
coram nobis; In the presence of us".
Accompanying the filing of a writ of error should be an
order to show cause why within a given time frame the
order should not stand as law.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5hQJGggU-U
Definition of the Latin
Order (
Bill Thornton 1215.org)
Writ of Error Quae Coram Nobis Residant
Quae = What, which or who
Coram = In the presence of, before, or personally.
Coram Vobis = Before you,
Coram Nobis = Before us, ourselves, the king (with reference to King's Bench)
Residant = resident, i.e. in this place
Writ of Error Coram Nobis.
Order of error, before us [to correct].
Modern English:
Order to correct our own error.
Order issued from a court to itself or its own personnel to correct an error in procedure or judgement.
Writ of Error Quae Coram Nobis Residant.
Order of error, what before us in this place [to correct].
Modern English:
Order to correct what is our own error in this place.
Order issued from a court to itself or its own personnel to correct an error in procedure or judgement.
Writ of Error Coram Vobis
Order of error, before you [to correct].
Modern English:
Order to correct your error.
Order issued from a higher court to a lower court to correct an error in judgement.
Being refused access to your accuser when he is being represented in the states case.
The doctrine of "equality of arms at law" requires a fair balance between the opportunities afforded the parties involved in litigation (for example, each party should be able to call and cross-examine witnesses called by the other side) and where discovery or [cf. exculpatory information] has not been provided by the opposing attorney this is a
trespass interfering with your right to properly prosecute your own
claim and in a notice you
require the judge or magistrate
discharge the case as the legal advisor has interfered with the
claim preventing any "equality of arms at law" by preventing discovery as to the facts and evidence that would either support or tend to disqualify the
claim of the other side.
Land in Australia and the Crown
The
land owned by all Australians is held in fee simple alienated from the Crown meaning that none of it is able to be taxed or legislative restrictions imposed against it.
Colonial laws validity act ?
Addressing the validity and lawfulness of moving a claim.
I
require to know Is there a law anywhere in Australia that states a
man or wo
man does not have a right to move a
claim before a Jury and
must be fluent in legalese and the terms of art used by the law society or bar association to do so.
Parking tickets issued by councils
Unless it can be established that
land is privately owned and parking is offered as a service on that
land fraud becomes an element if council officers
issue a parking ticket against your
property [cf. motor vehicle]. When dealing with councils best is to establish if they have the right of usufruct
(the right to derive income from the property of another) and wether the council can establish
private ownership of the
land and or roads that they choose to administer as such. In addition anyone who chooses to represent the council in any matters regarding policy or what could be interpreted as legal advice should be required to provide their legal qualifications and if they are unable to do so and identify who has placed the parking ticket on your vehicle they then become liable. Any judicial determination or process flowing from such matters can be made void by virtue of it not having been established as a matter of right and having been issued from a court of inferior jurisdiction to that of the court of Queens Bench.
Preservation of interest.
This is a common law
order similar to the legal 'lis pendens' used by lawyers.