How to go after the bonds of officials. www.lighthouselaw.

club
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIIWnUSKOU Holding Public Servants Accountable
- And Collecting! At 5: to 10:

Interview with Rocky Hudson on commercial liens, by Mark Emery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdWaYT0dH5c&nohtml5=False COMMERCIAL
LIENS, TRESPASS, TORT & DISTRESS

It is a commercial issue. The official is causing the insurance company to lose money.
Three strikes and the official will never work for government again.
15 U.S. Code § 1 - Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in
restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign
nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or
engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be
deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine
not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000,
or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the
discretion of the court.

15 U.S. Code § 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or

conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or
commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed
guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not
exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or
by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the
discretion of the court.

Follow the law. Use their law against them. Title 15 USC 1 and 2. Section 1 says it is
trade and commerce. Any corporation that violates the trade and commerce and puts you in a
situation where you have to do this . . . that’s illegal. And if it is a corporation doing this, you can
file a violation against them for up to $100,000,000 per actor involved in it, and however many
charges apply.
Q: So one actor who has violated you, and you have 8 causes of action against that actor,
that would be $800,000,000 against the bond of that actor.
A: Correct, 800 million. Now when you look at 15 USC 2, that is monopolizing in trade.
They force you to use – you can’t pay for anything without using FRNs. That’s monopolizing.
So, if they have it to where you can only use one item to pay a debt, they just broke the law.
Right there is $100 million dollars per event. That is for a corporation. So you have one actor,
one state actor that just got hit on 15 USC 1, now he has to pay 800 million dollars, and you
throw 15 USC 2 in there, there is another 800 million dollars, and when it is all said and done, he
winds up with 1.6 billion dollars he is negligent for. The insurance company is not going to pay
that kind of money. They can’t, but you can shut them down because of it.
Q: And they will certainly come forward with some kind of a negotiated settlement,
perhaps?
A: That’s right. In the federal codes, these actors say they are immune from prosecution.
Well, according to federal law –.
Q: You are talking about prosecution. That’s one thing. The people who have learned
the commercial lien process to lien their assets, for example, with the Montana Freemen started
doing in the 1990s, and were very successful at, I might add, they have now made that illegal, so
you get yourself in a jam trying to do that, so this is the only option available.
A: Here are two laws I was wanting to show you. Title 15 USC 1122. It clearly states
no immunity to state actors.

15 U.S. Code § 1122 - Liability of United States and States, and instrumentalities
and officials thereof
(a) Waiver of sovereign immunity by the United States
The United States, all agencies and instrumentalities thereof, and all individuals,
firms, corporations, other persons acting for the United States and with the
authorization and consent of the United States, shall not be immune from suit in
Federal or State court by any person, including any governmental or
nongovernmental entity, for any violation under this chapter.
(b) Waiver of sovereign immunity by States
Any State, instrumentality of a State or any officer or employee of a State or
instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity, shall not be
immune, under the eleventh amendment of the Constitution of the United States
or under any other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from suit in Federal court by
any person, including any governmental or nongovernmental entity for any
violation under this chapter.
(c) Remedies
In a suit described in subsection (a) or (b) for a violation described therein,
remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for the
violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a violation in
a suit against any person other than the United States or any agency or
instrumentality thereof, or any individual, firm, corporation, or other
person acting for the United States and with authorization and consent of
the United States, or a State, instrumentality of a State, or officer or employee of
a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity. Such
remedies include injunctive relief under section 1116 of this title, actual damages,
profits, costs and attorney’s fees under section 1117 of this title, destruction of
infringing articles under section 1118 of this title, the remedies provided for
under sections 1114, 1119, 1120, 1124 and 1125 of this title, and for any other
remedies provided under this chapter.

[Think bankers who refuse to discharge a debt.]

42 U.S. Code § 12202 - State immunity

A State shall not be immune under the eleventh amendment to the Constitution
of the United States from an action in?[1] Federal or State court of competent
jurisdiction for a violation of this chapter. In any action against a State for a
violation of the requirements of this chapter, remedies (including remedies both
at law and in equity) are available for such a violation to the same extent as such
remedies are available for such a violation in an action against any public or
private entity other than a State.

The above says a state shall not be immune.

Q: Okay, we are getting contradicting messages here. Title 42 would apply to civil
rights. But then by the same token we know the state actors claim sovereign immunity, and the
courts will act accordingly. How do we resolve that conflict?
A: You have to quote them in federal court because if you try to take these people on in
state court, state judges pick and choose what federal laws or state laws and codes they are going
to honor. In federal court, there is no picking and choosing. A federal court has to follow federal
law. It is state vs. federal. I don’t play well with others, so I go to federal court.
Q: Tell us a little about your case. What was the cause of action? What are you doing?
Tell us about the process and what you have accomplished so far.
A: I didn’t know which direction to go, but I knew there were some laws that would help
me get compensated or get them to start obeying their own law, and the way it started, February
19, 2015, I got arrested for driving – I think the reason the cop said he pulled me over was
because the tag had expired. I said I don’t have to have tags or a driver license. He started
laughing and said, “Oh, yeah you do. That’s Colorado law.” I said, “Colorado has to follow
federal law, and federal law says I don’t have to have it.”
He said, “Show me your driver license.” I said, “I don’t have one.” He runs my name
and finds out there is a warrant for my arrest. He says, “Well, it doesn’t matter now, there is a
warrant for your arrest, and have to take you to jail.” I said, “Show me a warrant.” He said,
“We’ll show you a warrant when we get you to the sheriff’s office.”
So they put the cuffs on me, put me in their car, took me to the sheriff’s office. I
demanded to see the warrant. They said “We’ll show you a warrant when we are good and ready,
and not until them.”
Q: So you are being illegally detained in the meantime.
A: That’s correct. I demanded to be taken in front of the judge right then and there, and I
was told pretty much the same thing. Cop said “You will see a judge when he or she is ready, and
not until then.” Federal and state law says you have to be brought before a magistrate within 48
hours. [I think it says immediately.] Well, they picked me up on Thursday February 19, about
1:30 p.m. I did not see the first judge until Monday morning at 8:00 a.m., and I brought this to
their attention, and they said, “We don’t have to do what you say, and we don’t have to follow
that. This is the court, and we do what we want to.” I started to laugh at them.
Judge said, “Did you find something funny?” I said, “Yeah, and you’ll find out before
too long just why I am laughing.” They charged me with FTA on a traffic violation. That’s what
I was arrested for. Then they took me to another court, and as I was being booked into that court,
I had my fourth of seven heart attacks. So it took the ambulance about five minutes to get there.
They hooked me up to a machine and sure enough, “You are having a heart attack.” Got me to
the hospital and started working on me, and the nurse practitioner came in and verified I had a
heart attack. The deputy sitting there babysitting heard everything that was said. Twenty minutes
later the doctor himself came in, and sees the deputy sitting there and sees me handcuffed, and all
of a sudden I didn’t have a heart attack. He said I had an anxiety attack. We need to beef up your
medication. Then he asked the deputy how long I would be in custody. Deputy said, “He hasn’t
even been booked yet. We have to get him booked and in front of a judge.”
This took place in the wee hours of the morning, 2/25/15. The doctor says they would
release me about 1:00 p.m. He just needs to follow up with us. So the deputy looks at me after
the doctors leave, and he says, “The reason the doctor just said that is because it is sheriff’s policy
that nobody can have a heart attack while in custody of the sheriff’s department.”
Q: Oh, my, think of the liability and the bonds.
A: Correct. Well, me and this deputy kind of hit it off pretty good. We are both ex-
military. Both of us served in the army. He made sure I got whatever medical attention I needed.
Not all of them are evil.
I went through three commercial liens, dumped the garbage and kept what was following
the law. I filed mine in federal court 10/19/15.
Q: Was that the first thing you did, file it in federal court? As I understand it, to do a
commercial lien, you create an affidavit, right?
A: You create an affidavit, yes. My was considered an “Obligation of Commercial
Lien.”
Q: Did you present it first to the offenders to give them an opportunity to rebut the lien?
A: Not one bit.
Q: So you took the affidavit and went straight to federal court?
A: Went straight to federal court with it. In federal court, the filing fee is from $400 to
$550. In federal court, your filing fee covers the cost for the federal court to contact everybody in
your complaint. Now it is their job to notify everybody as to what is going on. If you do it, you
have to send these papers out to everybody and let them know they’ve been noticed. That gives
them 30 days to do this, and if they don’t respond, then you have to send out another document
giving them notice. When they get that stuff, they say to themselves, “He doesn’t know what he
is talking about,” and they fill it in the trash. You get a document from a federal court, you have
to take notice. Well, I found out in the state of Colorado, they don’t even take notice of that.
I won my case 1/19/16. I won it by default, but now the magistrate judge that was
overseeing this case, he is an attorney and has a law firm in Grand Junction, Colorado, and he is
too big a buddy with the sheriff department, and he even got the county DA appointed to federal
prosecutor in Grand Junction, so that lets you know they are in bed together. In light of this, this
magistrate judge wrote umteen dozen laws. He turned around and dismissed my case.
It says in my paperwork, using maxims of law, that once this lien was filed, there are
only two ways it can be dismissed, either by a jury or by myself. He wasn’t a jury, and he
wasn’t me, so he didn’t have the right to dismiss it. Then he told me he was refusing to allow me
to appeal his decision. I wrote up a writ of error, submitted the paperwork to the appeals court,
and they had me fill out more paperwork for their court, so I did, explained exactly what took
place, and I got a letter from the appellate court saying they would be contacting me to show up
in their court. The letter went on to say that each defendant would have to show up. Counsel
could not speak for any of us, we all would have to speak for ourselves. The letter said if I did
not show up, I would lose the case, and if the defendants don’t show up, they would lose the case.
Q: How many defendants are there?
A: Four counties and four sheriff departments, and four DAs, the courts in the four
counties, and the police dept. in one county, and the Colorado Bar Assoc., Colorado Sec. of State,
Colorado State Attorney General, the State of Colorado, which brings in all the legislature, so the
courtroom better be able to hold about 2000 people. My way of thinking is this, the letter said
whomever doesn’t show up, loses the case, so if 10 people show up for the defendants, that isn’t
everybody, so they automatically lose. I’m going by the verbiage in the letter. How are these
four counties going to do without their sheriff departments, their judges, their DAs, etc.?
Q: So, it is highly probable the defendants will not show up, so you will win again in the
federal appeals court by default. It seems you will have a federal order you can take to the bond
company and start talking about collection, correct?
A: It is a little better than that. According to the federal court, the fast track has to be
responded to, and answered within 21 days, once they get it. A fast track – like in my situation
with seven heart attacks – because of my health conditions, they will clear the calendar. If I had a
heart attack during the case, they would have to come to my hospital room to hold court. So fast
track is based on circumstances beyond anyone’s control. They have yet to respond to my fast
track. The judge failed to respond to my fast track request, so by him violating the law on my
commercial lien. [I imagine the judge gets added to the lien?]
Now we are at 48 billion, and with the magistrate judge decided to dismiss the case, he
talked to the federal prosecutor, and both of them talked to the local FBI agent, plus they all
talked to the sheriff’s department where I live. I wasn’t invited to that party. That brings up
conspiracy. Under the federal law for conspiracy, now the claim doubles again, so now, at this
point we are sitting at 96 billion.
 This is to let you know I do have a case. The first of January I received a phone call from
a law firm claiming to represent all of the defendants in the commercial lien. They wanted me to
settle out of court for 25 million dollars, so I told them I would see them in court, and hung up.
Q: So by doing that, they acknowledge liability, now the only question is the amount.
A: That is correct.
Q: That’s what the IRS gets you to do, same thing.
A: So, I know I have a case. I know I am going to make laws change throughout the
state of Colorado. The monetary value, I don’t have a clue about.
Q: We know the floor is 25 million.
A: That is correct because that is what they have already offered.
Q: So at this point things are still pending final resolution. I think that gives us a good
overview of what is going on. To summarize, you have determined the procedure for taking a
commercial lien affidavit, bringing it into federal court. Yours is a classic case where they
dismissed it and said you could not appeal, yet you know your rights, and you proceeded anyway.
That is a great example for people. Don’t listen to what these people say you can or cannot do. If
you know your rights, it is up to you to enforce them. If you didn’t take the initiative to move on
to the appeal, then you don’t have those rights, unless you enforce them yourself. So you are in a
position right now where the affidavit has not been rebutted, it stands as the prima facie case.
The defendants will most certainly, just due to logistics, probably not appear when a date is set, so
at this point it looks like you have them in a corner, and just waiting for final resolution. There is
no way out for them. Nothing they can do other than acquiesce to the prima facie case which you
have established, and I think from here it is a matter of collection.
A: Their offer to settle for 25 million showed guilt on their part from the beginning. By
not answering any of my questions, to this day they have not answered, and they were simple
questions. One of the questions: Did you show me a warrant when I was arrested, yes or no?
That is easy enough to answer. Whenever a warrant is shown, you have to sign your name on
the warrant showing you did receive it. They don’t have anything to back it up.
Q: Officialdom is so used to dealing with an ignorant public, that is not prepared to
defendant their rights, so they just run roughshod and do whatever they want to do, and in the
process of doing so, they have eliminated all lawful process, so it is easy pickings when you start
doing things like you are doing.
A: Federal law says if you demand to see a judge/magistrate when you are arrested,
and you are not brought before him within 48 hours, all charges have to be dismissed. This
has been proven in Tennessee and Virginia repeatedly.
If you break into somebody’s house, or you are a thief, you are in there to steal whatever
you can get, and the cops arrest you. The minute you are arrested, or even while they are putting
on the cuffs, you start telling them “I want to see a judge right now.” First, does the DA’s office
have their ducks in a row with all their paperwork at that point? No. But if you demand to be
brought before the judge, and the judge knows the law, you go in there, and the DA will say they
need a few days to get everything together. “ell, do you have that now?” “No, your honor, we
don’t. We are still putting it all together.” Then the judge must dismiss it.
Q: Right, let him go, get it together and try it again.
A: Can’t do it again, that’s double jeopardy.
Q: Well, double jeopardy is being tried twice for a crime, doesn’t it?
A: You were arrested. The minute you are arrested, they are supposed to have their stuff
together to take you to court right now. You are being held, and you have the right to be in front
of the judge right now. It doesn’t matter if they don’t have their case together. [They should wait
to arrest until they do have their case together.] These are laws people don’t know.
Q: I had that happen one time. I was doing some court watching one time, and they
wanted to arrest me for being a political trouble maker. They were trying to arrest me in the
courtroom, and I said, “So where is your warrant?” After some fumbling around, she pulls out a
two-sentence computer printout. I showed it to one of the deputies and asked if this was a
warrant. He didn’t say anything, he just grinned. Anyway the judge got really upset at them for
doing this in the courtroom. They rarely have what they need, so you need to stand up for your
rights and know what they are.
Q: Rockey, I think we have a good picture of what is possible. There are so many
different causes of action, and it is endless how our rights have been abused. With that in mind,
you have shown us there is a way to hold public officials accountable. We can go after their
bond, not the individual or the office, per se, which is a direct threat, and they perceive that as an
attack and they will fight viciously against you if that is the way you go. Keep things in
commerce, go after the bond, and that makes it a little more palatable for the system to allow for a
true process to proceed.
A: If we could get 2000 filing an affidavit of commercial lien in the federal court system,
this will shut down the judicial system.
Q: And, it will clean house, as so many public officials are swept out of office because
they are getting three or more dings on their bonds. So this is one way for us to clean house.
That leaves me to the conclusion, which is that you are holding yourself out to work with the Law
Club and set up a system where people who have been offended, damaged, abused in any way,
and those ways may be seemingly quite small – they don’t necessarily need to be arrested – but
for any offenses and damages this process is available. We are going to make a system available
for people to take advantage of which they can plug in, use your guidance and expertise, work
with the documentation and research you have developed to date, and start holding public
officials accountable using this method. I have to tell you, I am really excited to be able to
contribute to this with the Law Club. We are looking forward to seeing some justice done. Thank
you.
A: People who are listening to this recording, if you are wondering if there is anything
you can use as a case, if you have a birth certificate, a driver license, social security card, you
have a federal case. I’ve got three people right now who are filing in their birth state, the state
they are living in, because of those items. It works for violations of natural rights.
Q: I think by virtue of having a social security card, a driver license, you have been
denied your God-given rights by virtue of fraud and deception and lack of disclosure, entering
into those adhesion contracts without full knowledge, and that is a violation right there.
A: That is correct, and there is no statute of limitations on fraud. Throckmorton v. US.

[I believe he would have an easier time if he sent the commercial lien to every party involved,
with a notice of fault and then a notice of default. Once that is done, and it is not rebutted, it
matures in 90 days, becoming an accounts receivable. The next step is to take the whole process
into a court for “judicial review.” I doubt you need to wait the 90 days. All you are asking the
court is “Did I do the process correctly? If it is correct, execute my contract and give me the
order. If it is not correct, tell me how I must correct it.” If you follow the rules of the
commercial lien, you have a 7-point affidavit, you give notice and opportunity to cure, then you
have done it correctly. Study the commercial lien process.]

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_5
(A) A person making an arrest within the United States must take the defendant without
unnecessary delay before a magistrate judge, or before a state or local judicial officer as Rule 5(c)
provides, unless a statute provides otherwise.
(B) A person making an arrest outside the United States must take the defendant without
unnecessary delay before a magistrate judge, unless a statute provides otherwise.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_4

Rule 4. Arrest Warrant or Summons on a Complaint

(a) Issuance. If the complaint or one or more affidavits filed with the complaint establish
probable cause to believe that an offense has been committed and that the defendant
committed it, the judge must issue an arrest warrant to an officer authorized to execute it.
At the request of an attorney for the government, the judge must issue a summons,
instead of a warrant, to a person authorized to serve it. A judge may issue more than one
warrant or summons on the same complaint. If an individual defendant fails to appear in
response to a summons, a judge may, and upon request of an attorney for the government
must, issue a warrant. If an organizational defendant fails to appear in response to a
summons, a judge may take any action authorized by United States law.
(b) Form.
(1) Warrant. A warrant must:
(A) contain the defendant's name or, if it is unknown, a name or description by which the
defendant can be identified with reasonable certainty;
(B) describe the offense charged in the complaint;
(C) command that the defendant be arrested and brought without unnecessary delay
before a magistrate judge or, if none is reasonably available, before a state or local
judicial officer; and
(D) be signed by a judge.
(2) Summons. A summons must be in the same form as a warrant except that it must
require the defendant to appear before a magistrate judge at a stated time and place.
(c) Execution or Service, and Return.
(1) By Whom. Only a marshal or other authorized officer may execute a warrant. Any
person authorized to serve a summons in a federal civil action may serve a summons.
(2) Location. A warrant may be executed, or a summons served, within the jurisdiction of
the United States or anywhere else a federal statute authorizes an arrest. A summons to an
organization under Rule 4(c)(3)(D) may also be served at a place not within a judicial
district of the United States.
(3) Manner.
(A) A warrant is executed by arresting the defendant. Upon arrest, an officer possessing
the original or a duplicate original warrant must show it to the defendant. If the officer
does not possess the warrant, the officer must inform the defendant of the warrant's
existence and of the offense charged and, at the defendant's request, must show the
original or a duplicate original warrant to the defendant as soon as possible.
(B) A summons is served on an individual defendant:
(i) by delivering a copy to the defendant personally; or
(ii) by leaving a copy at the defendant's residence or usual place of abode with a person
of suitable age and discretion residing at that location and by mailing a copy to the
defendant's last known address.
(C) A summons is served on an organization in a judicial district of the United States by
delivering a copy to an officer, to a managing or general agent, or to another agent
appointed or legally authorized to receive service of process. If the agent is one
authorized by statute and the statute so requires, a copy must also be mailed to the
organization.
(D) A summons is served on an organization not within a judicial district of the United
States:
(i) by delivering a copy, in a manner authorized by the foreign jurisdiction’s law, to an
officer, to a managing or general agent, or to an agent appointed or legally authorized to
receive service of process; or
(ii) by any other means that gives notice, including one that is:
(a) stipulated by the parties;
(b) undertaken by a foreign authority in response to a letter rogatory, a letter of request, or
a request submitted under an applicable international agreement; or
(c) permitted by an applicable international agreement.
(4) Return
(A) After executing a warrant, the officer must return it to the judge before whom the
defendant is brought in accordance with Rule 5. The officer may do so by reliable
electronic means. At the request of an attorney for the government, an unexecuted
warrant must be brought back to and canceled by a magistrate judge or, if none is
reasonably available, by a state or local judicial officer.
(B) The person to whom a summons was delivered for service must return it on or before
the return day.
(C) At the request of an attorney for the government, a judge may deliver an unexecuted
warrant, an unserved summons, or a copy of the warrant or summons to the marshal or
other authorized person for execution or service.
(d) Warrant by Telephone or Other Reliable Electronic Means. In accordance with Rule
4.1, a magistrate judge may issue a warrant or summons based on information
communicated by telephone or other reliable electronic means.