Remaining In Honor In The Court

http://www.suijurislaw.net/

"Remaining in honor is as simple as offering discussion to avoid conflict before you get to court. That is all it requires. And using "notices" which are instruments of common law discussion, and the Notary Public, you can offer discussion to avoid conflict. Usually YOU will be ignored, placing your opponent in DIShonor, meaning you win by default. Remaining in honor is very simple. You just have to answer any notice you receive in writing.

See when people go to court they are not in trouble in court for example for what they did to receive a notice, like any form of traffic ticket. They are in trouble for what they did NOT do in the 30 days or so BEFORE court. This process of notices is an ancient common law process. It is the same process the police use with their tickets to get YOU into trouble. They expect you to either pay, or do nothing at all until the hearing and then create dispute or conflict without having first offered discussion. THIS is what puts you in DISHONOR.

ALSO another thing that will put you in DISHONOR is claiming to understand the cause and nature of the charges and proceeding against you, and then pleading not guilty. When you are in court and claim to understand like this, you have not said what you think you said. You just claimed to stand under the cause and nature of the charges and proceedings against you. THAT is your statement, and then you Plead or BEG to NOT PAY because not guilty means NOT GUILDED that you are refusing to pay, AFTER having claimed to stand under the cause and nature of the charges and proceedings against you.

If you have used notices through the Notary Public to offer discussion to avoid conflict, and were ignored, you are golden. You show up and when asked if you understand the cause and nature of the charges and proceedings you say NO, then you just hand the judge your notices which evidences that you are in honor and your opponent is in default and DISHONOR you win by default, case dismissed."
~Rob Johnson~

How to Present Yourself In Court

 

Re-Posted By: Jamie Weare Notsheep Barker

How to Present yourself.

"You start by NEVER claiming to RE-present yourself. Doing this aloe will give the court cause to determine you Non compos mentis. You are standing there, plain as day in the court, OBVIOUSLY yourself, claiming to RE-present yourself. Of course the judge looks down upon PRO SE and PRO PER litigants, they are both claiming a status of RE-presentation.

THESE are the fundamentals that make the difference between case dismissed or default judgment in YOUR favor, and extensive fines that YOU agreed to in ignorance or were decided upon your behalf because you went to court and claimed to be an idiot in front of the judge. Again not directing this anger at anyone in specific, just at the general state of knowledge. KNOWING YOUR STANDING is essential in court.

If you appear weak you are going to get walked all over, if you are confident because you know what you are talking about you will win.

Court is not a luck thing it is a LAW thing, and by the time my readers get to court they have already won. Jamie beat me to this a little bit, but i had to elaborate a bit. YOUR STANDING literally IS YOUR RIGHTS and STATUS.

When you go into court you claim to be nothing other than a sovereign inhabitant making special appearance only presenting yourself Sui Juris.

This is a powerful statement and if you know what it means, the judge will know you know what it means and will FIND a reason to dismiss the case.

They just DO NOT act against those who are aware. They depend upon fear to make people cower and intimidate them into contracting with them, and then they got ya. But not really.

Even agreements with courts can be undone if they were not willful and voluntary of fully informed consent.

If you were threatened with ANY consequence the contract is under protest and duress and is VOID"

~RJ~

Directions To A Notary Public

THIS IS SUPER IMPORTANT STUFF HERE IN THE NOTICE PROCESS! COPY AND SAVE TO YOUR COMPUTER! 

This is where I've been hung up. Trying to get a damn notary public to do their job! If you have had trouble with notary public's in the past, then you should be as excited as I am about this material.

 

By: Jamie Weare Notsheep Barker

 Administrative process of using notices to offer discussion, seek clarification/Directions to Notary and such
~The administrative process of using notices to offer discussion to avoid conflict and secure a declaratory judgement is the simplest remedy. Notaries are ranked above a justice of the supreme court when acting in their administrative capacity with respect to notices, drafts, checks, bills of exchange, notes, or other negotiable instruments, and protesting the same for non presentment or non acceptance~

____________________________________________

Whereas Section 18 of the Notary Act does empower you to perform any duties found under any statute and whereas I do believe justice will only be served by a member of the Notary Society as I have made claims against a member of the Law Society, you are hereby charged and empowered to do the following lawful actions in order to serve justice and your Oath:

1. You will witness the attestation of an Affidavit and of a Notice of Understanding and Intent and a Claim of Right (OR OTHER DOCUMENTS).

2. You will open up a file in your office and therein you will keep the originals of said instruments.

3. You will create certified true copies of those documents and give those to
______________________________________ for service upon affected parties as named within the Affidavit.

4.______________________________________ will serve those documents and then attest to the service by way of a Certificate of Service, which you will also witness. Said Certificate will then be placed in the file previously opened.

5. You will wait TEN DAYS from date of service in order to give the affected parties a chance to either accept the claims silently or send you a sworn and attested Affidavit created upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury contesting the beliefs, understandings and claims made in the originating Affidavit and Notice.

6. If within TEN DAYS you receive a proper Affidavit contesting the claims made you will contact the original Affiant and Claimant and inform them of the existence of contest. The contact number for said action is
________________________________.

7. In the absence of any contesting Affidavit you will sign a Default Judgment and Permanent Estoppel by Acquiescence barring the charging or prosecution of the claimant for the exercise of rights claimed and recognized by lack of contest.

8. All of these directives are completely lawful, within your mandate and necessary for the proper administration of justice. Failure to accept and follow these directives is an abandonment of your duties and a breach of your Oath.

 Notice process for statutory infractions

1) Notice of Conditional Acceptance / Notice of Discharge by way of Seeking Clarification /Notice of Permanent Estoppel by Acquiescence, Disclosure, Discovery (or whatever doc your seeking your ends with/to default)
2) Notice of dishonor
3) Notice of protest for non-acceptance (which once ignored BECOMES your declaratory judgment of permanent estoppel by silent acquiescence).

      "Remember this is the first of 3 notices, it is ALWAYS a 3 notice series cured through notice of dishonor and notice of protest for non acceptance which once ignored BECOMES your declaratory judgment of permanent estoppel by silent acquiescence. It flips their own script against them and they can NEVER respond. No one wins arguing with a thick headed cop on the roadside. So just sign everything under protest and duress, than when you and your property are safe you go right to a notary. If you got a ticket and demanded an original and a copy was imposed, you can jump immediately to notice of protest for non presentment.
make copies of every single notice you have served upon them and any and all affidavits you have filed...
and file a NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY or MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT, or WRIT FOR DEFAULT or whatever you want to call it.
and in it, explain when and to who you sent notices or affidavits and how long you gave them to respond
and attach copies of every single notice and return receipt labeled as exhibits assign them letters and refer to them in your notice/motion/writ
explain that you have exercised your administrative remedy and demand that the charges be removed for failure to prosecute on ANY AND ALL levels of a criminal procedure" R.J.

Side Note:I find it difficult to convince my notary to hold my originals, so i hold them myself and have the effected parties respond to an address i provide...



     "Notice, is everything. You are entitled to actual notice, fair and proper notice, and notice reasonably calculated to afford you an opportunity to respond with respect to each and every element of the charge and the process, clarification and definition of terms... IF YOU BOTHER TO ASK FOR IT... and if you don't ask, you WILL BE DENIED due process, because they are using two set of dictionaries, and cooking two set of books. Its the only way any one can be convicted of anything, the system has become so utterly contradicted. Notice of jurisdiction the charge is brought in, notice of the law or grounds upon which the claim or charge is brought, notice of the nature and cause for the charge or claim, notice of... evidence of your criminal intent... everything... clarification and definition of terms... until you UNDERSTAND that you are guilty, because you really, really, want to help them convict you, step by step, means, opportunity, and most importantly, MOTIVE.
When they say person, what do they mean? When they ask your name, are you asking if im the man or woman given that christian name, or are you addressing the incorporated creature of statute created by government. And in this, NOTICE, is victory. You can just keep asking questions, and one you learn to ask questions you already know the answer to, I one hundred percent in my full liability capacity guarantee and do so promise, that you will prevail, and they will give up.

It is only by NOT providing notice of the fact that they are misapplying something, or perverting something somewhere in the administration of law not in accordance with the rules of procedure, in violation of due process requirements, that they presume to prosecute any case at all. If you ask the right questions, they must, and will, run from the right line of questioning regarding procedure or the law (forget the facts), they must run and withdraw or convict themselves on record with their answer. And when you start asking the simplest, fundamental questions of law and procedure, the act is destroyed, the illusion is broken, the emperor has no cloths.

Do the crime, do the time. Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Fair notice, who am I to you and who are you to me? By what authority? By what law in what jurisdiction according to what rules? He who brings the claim must bring the remedy.

Ask and you shall receive.

Is this a court of the judiciary, or a for profit corporate business? Cause if its a for profit corporate business (they all are now since 69) they cannot exercise the powers of government or police, fairly and impartially, in accordance with the requirements of DUE PROCESS, because they are biased and prejudiced by dual obligation. Can you give me fair notice of how this game is played? What are the rules for natural persons, American citizens, incorrectly charged as artificial persons and US citizens by a court who refuses to recognize they are breathing and speaking and not a creature of statute created by government identity theft of your name to create a business front, fended at the derogatory name calling from the start, with intent to diminish your rights and legal status in law by false designation and classification of your person in law. Its a frame up, from the moment you receive the paper work to the DEFENDANT OR RESPONDENT CORPERATE FRANCHIZE PERSON" P.R.

Motion in the COURT

This is a point I've heard my friend Ray make on several occasions. When I hear someone talking about making a motion in court, I always shake my head. After reading this, you will too. Article taken from Facebook. I'll be bookmarking this post at the bottom of the page for easy reference.

By: Ray Cox

Options for this story

I figured maybe, I should post this on my wall too!

I had posted this before, but didn't put my 2 cents within the text so you could get what I was saying while you read it! Everything within ((and)) is my example.

Take an Object of any kind, and set it in front of you. Now, that area in front of you is evidence. If you were to take a picture, that would be evidence too. But, if you move the Object before you take the Picture, or have the Evidence accepted, you have destroyed the evidence. Same thing goes in the COURT. All Motions are the movement or motion of the evidence, and their design is to modify that evidence to deny truth, evidence, fact, or law into the COURT. Motion in the COURT is only allowed in ADJECTIVE LAW, or (Law without Noun) (Which means Law without People, Place, or Thing). ADJECTIVE LAW is known in the COURT as PROCEDURE. If you look up Procedure in Blacks Law, 4th Edition, you will see what I mean. ((Added by me below will be in brackets))

PROCEDURAL LAW. That which prescribes method of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion; ((Only the FICTION has to have Rights Enforced, our Rights are Natural)) machinery for carrying on a suit. Barker v. St. Louis County, 340 Mo. 986, 104 S.W.2d 371, 377, 378, 379. As relating to crimes, that which provides or regulates the steps by which one who violates a criminal statute is punished. ((Is it Possible for the Living to violate a CRIMINAL STATUTE?)) State v. Elmore, 179 La. 1057, 155 So. 896. PROCEDURE. .The mode of proceeding by which a legal right is enforced, as distinguished from 1367

PROCEDURE
the law which gives or defines the right ((didn't the Constitution do that)), and which, by means of the proceeding, the court Is to administer ((oh, ADMINISTERIAL COURT)); the machinery ((Machinery not the Living!)), as distinguished from its product. Per Lush, L. J., in 7 Q. B. Div, 333. That which regulates the formal steps in an, action ((Action is the command for the beginning of a Play! Take 2, and ACTION!!!)) ((It is not the Judgement of Law)) or other judicial proceeding; a form, man- ner, and order of conducting suits or prosecutions. ((Conducting SUITS and Pro Se Cutions, not Common Law))Mahoning Valley Ry. Co. v. Santoro, 93 Ohio St. 53, 112 N.E. 190, 191. The judicial process for enforcing rights and duties recognized by substantive ((What the hell is Substantive Law to the living?)) law and for justly administering redress for infraction of them. ((This is all Law for those in the FICTION, it is Administrative in nature, and is in direct violation of the Constitution)) Sims v. United Pacific Ins. Co., D.C.Idaho, 51 F.Supp. 433, 435. This term is commonly opposed to the sum of legal principles constituting the substance of the law ((Re-read that last sentence several times. "is commonly opposed to the sum of legal principles constituting the substance of the law" so, PROCEDURE is Opposed to Substance of Law!!)) , and denotes the body of rules, whether of practice or of pleading ((Practice and Pleading are for ATTORNEYS and SLAVES respectively)) , whereby rights are effectuated ((Why and how are Rights Effectuated)) through the successful application of the proper remedies. It is also generally distinguished from the law of evidence. ((Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, we have a winner folks! Read that last sentence a dozen or so times! Why would you distinguish something from the law of evidence, unless you were purposely committing a fraud????)) Brown; Sackheim v. Pigueron, 215 N.Y. 62, 109 N.E. 109, 111. Cochran v. Ward, 3 Ind.App. 89, 29 N.E. 795, 31 N.E. 581, 51 Am.St.Rep. 229. Procedure is the machinery for carrying on the suit, including pleading, process, evidence, and practice, whether in the trial court or the appellate court, or in the processes by which causes are carried to appellate courts for review, or in laying the foundation for such review. ((Procedure is not for the Living)) Jones v. Erie R. Co., 106 Ohio St. 408, 140 N.E. 366, 367. It not only embraces practice ((Not Law, but Practice)) in courts, but regulation of the conduct of the court itself wherein such practice takes place. State v. Greenwald, 186 Ind. 321, 116 N.E. 296, 297. The law of procedure is what is now commonly termed by jurists "adjective law," (q. v.). ((Adjective Law has no Noun, no Truth, no Evidence, no Fact, so in Adjective Law, nothing is real, it is all a FICTION, a CARTOON, it is all in MOTION!!))

JURISDICTIONAL CHALLENGE OF ANY COURT, ANYWHERE!

January 6, 2013 at 11:45pm

Challenging the Jurisdiction of ANY Court, anywhere!
By Robyna Choleton, 1-6-13

'Following are quotes issued by courts within the United States of America -- which attest to the fact that a court's jurisdiction over parties appearing before the court, may be challenged by any party, and at any time.  A court, upon such challenge, is compelled to answer the challenge, and prove to the challenger's reasonable doubt that it, the court, possesses jurisdiction for a particular action before the court.

Typically, challenges to a court's jurisdiction pertain to criminal proceedings and prosecutions -- whereby an accused, or a defendant, may challenge a court's jurisdiction to adjudicate a criminal case.  The maxim of law therefore, substantiated by numerous case cites, is that once challenged, a court's jurisdiction must be proven.

"Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but, rather, should dismiss the action."  Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026.

"Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted."
Latana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp. 150.

"The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven."
Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).

"Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time." and "Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided." 
Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F 2d 906, 910.

"Defense of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any time, even on appeal."
Hill Top Developers v. Holiday Pines Service Corp., 478 So. 2d. 368 (Fla 2nd DCA 1985)

"Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist."  Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 389.

"There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction."  Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215.

"The burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction."  Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F2d 416.

"A universal principle as old as the law is that a proceedings of a court without jurisdiction are a nullity and its judgment therein without effect either on person or property."  Norwood v. Renfield, 34 C 329; Ex parte Giambonini, 49 P. 732.

"Jurisdiction is fundamental and a judgment rendered by a court that does not have jurisdiction to hear is void, ab initio."
In Re Application of Wyatt, 300 P. 132; Re Cavitt, 118 P2d 846.

"Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term."  Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P 27.

"Where a court failed to observe safeguards, it amounts to denial of due process of law, court is deprived of juris."
Merritt v. Hunter, C.A. Kansas 170 F2d 739.



"An action by Department of Motor Vehicles, whether directly or through a court sitting administratively as the hearing officer, must be clearly defined in the statute before it has subject matter jurisdiction, without such jurisdiction of the licensee, all acts of the agency, by its employees, agents, hearing officers, are null and void."  

Doolan v. Carr, 125 US 618; City v. Pearson, 181 Cal. 640.

"When acting to enforce a statute and its subsequent amendments to the present date, the judge of the municipal court is acting as an administrative officer and not in a judicial capacity; courts in administering or enforcing statutes do not act judicially, but merely ministerially".
Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 583.


"A judge ceases to sit as a judicial officer because the governing principle of administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their evidence, testimony, record, arguments, and rationale for that of the agency. Additionally, courts are prohibited from substituting their judgment for that of the agency. Courts in administrative issues are prohibited from even listening to or hearing arguments, presentation, or rational."

ASIS v. US, 568 F2d 284.

"Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities."  Burns v. Sup. Ct., SF, 140 Cal. 1.


"The elementary doctrine that the constitutionality of a legislative act is open to attack only by persons whose rights are affected thereby, applies to statute relating to administrative agencies, the validity of which may not be called into question in the absence of a showing of substantial harm, actual or impending, to a legally protected interest directly resulting from the enforcement of the statute."

Board of Trade v. Olson, 262 US 1; 29 ALR 2d 105.

"Their courts"

By: ZJ Free

"Their courts"

In commercial courts, there are no Living souls, only LEGAL PERSONS, and LEGAL PERSONS have no Constitutionally Protected Rights. All within the realm of 'their courts' is FICTION, so don't expect anything to make sense. The only intent is to fool the Living soul into contributing his assets in furtherance of the FICTION and the FRAUD.

To the players within, it is just an entertaining game...!!

"This is why I can beat tickets in any state"

It should go without saying to subscribe to the video's I'm posting on Youtube. These guys are not one hit wonders if I'm posting them. Go check out their other stuff.