Cestui Que Vie Act 1666

1666 CHAPTER 11 18 and 19 Cha 2

An Act for Redresse of Inconveniencies by want of Proofe of the Deceases of Persons

beyond the Seas or absenting themselves, upon whose Lives Estates doe depend.

X1Recital that Cestui que vies have gone beyond Sea, and that Reversioners cannot find out
whether they are alive or dead.

Whereas diverse Lords of Mannours and others have granted Estates by Lease for one or
more life or lives, or else for yeares determinable upon one or more life or lives And it hath
often happened that such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene
granted have gone beyond the Seas or soe absented themselves for many yeares that the
Lessors and Reversioners cannot finde out whether such person or persons be alive or dead
by reason whereof such Lessors and Reversioners have beene held out of possession of their
Tenements for many yeares after all the lives upon which such Estates depend are dead in
regard that the Lessors and Reversioners when they have brought Actions for the recovery
of their Tenements have beene putt upon it to prove the death of their Tennants when it is
almost impossible for them to discover the same, For remedy of which mischeife soe
frequently happening to such Lessors or Reversioners.
Annotations: Help about Annotation

Editorial Information

X1Abbreviations or contractions in the original form of this Act have been expanded into
modern lettering in the text set out above and below.

Modifications etc. (not altering text)

C1Short title “The Cestui que Vie Act 1666” given by Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c.
62), Sch. 2

C2Preamble omitted in part under authority of Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), Sch.
1

C3Certain words of enactment repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1888 (c. 3) and
remainder omitted under authority of Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), s. 3
[I.] Cestui que vie remaining beyond Sea for Seven Years together and no Proof of their
Lives, Judge in Action to direct a Verdict as though Cestui que vie were dead.

If such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene or shall be granted
as aforesaid shall remaine beyond the Seas or elsewhere absent themselves in this Realme
by the space of seaven yeares together and noe sufficient and evident proofe be made of the
lives of such person or persons respectively in any Action commenced for recovery of such
Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners in every such case the person or persons upon
whose life or lives such Estate depended shall be accounted as naturally dead, And in every
Action brought for the recovery of the said Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners their
Heires or Assignes, the Judges before whom such Action shall be brought shall direct the
Jury to give their Verdict as if the person soe remaining beyond the Seas or otherwise
absenting himselfe were dead.
II. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F1
Annotations: Help about Annotation

Amendments (Textual)

F1S. II repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1948 (c. 62), Sch. 1
III. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F2
Annotations: Help about Annotation

Amendments (Textual)

F2S. III repealed by Statute Law Revision Act 1863 (c. 125)
IV If the supposed dead Man prove to be alive, then the Title is revested. Action for mean
Profits with Interest.

[X2Provided alwayes That if any person or [X3person or] persons shall be evicted out of
any Lands or Tenements by vertue of this Act, and afterwards if such person or persons
upon whose life or lives such Estate or Estates depend shall returne againe from beyond the
Seas, or shall on proofe in any Action to be brought for recovery of the same [X3to] be
made appeare to be liveing; or to have beene liveing at the time of the Eviction That then
and from thenceforth the Tennant or Lessee who was outed of the same his or their
Executors Administrators or Assignes shall or may reenter repossesse have hold and enjoy
the said Lands or Tenements in his or their former Estate for and dureing the Life or Lives
or soe long terme as the said person or persons upon whose Life or Lives the said Estate or
Estates depend shall be liveing, and alsoe shall upon Action or Actions to be brought by him
or them against the Lessors Reversioners or Tennants in possession or other persons
respectively which since the time of the said Eviction received the Proffitts of the said Lands
or Tenements recover for damages the full Proffitts of the said Lands or Tenements
respectively with lawfull Interest for and from the time that he or they were outed of the said
Lands or Tenements, and kepte or held out of the same by the said Lessors Reversioners
Tennants or other persons who after the said Eviction received the Proffitts of the said Lands
or Tenements or any of them respectively as well in the case when the said person or
persons upon whose Life or Lives such Estate or Estates did depend are or shall be dead at
the time of bringing of the said Action or Actions as if the said person or persons where then
liveing.]
Annotations: Help about Annotation

Editorial Information

X2annexed to the Original Act in a separate Schedule

X3Variant reading of the text noted in The Statutes of the Realm as follows: O. omits [O.
refers to a collection in the library of Trinity College, Cambridge]
Cestui Que Vie Act 1666.
Cestui Que Vie Act 1666

Cestui Que Vie

London 1666, during the black plague and great fires of London, Parliament enacted an act
behind closed doors, called Cestui Que Vie Act 1666.
The act being debated was to subrogate the rights of men and women, meaning all men and
women were declared dead, lost at sea/beyond the sea. (back then operating in Admiralty
law, the law of the sea, so lost at sea).

The state (London) took custody of everybody and their property into a trust. The state
became the trustee/husband holding all titles to the people and property, until a living man
comes back to reclaim those titles, he can also claim damages.

When CAPITAL letters are used anywhere in a name this always refers to a legal
entity/fiction, Company or Corporation no exceptions. e.g. John DOE or Doe: JANE

1) CEST TUI QUE TRUST: (pronounced setakay) common term in New Zealand and
Australia

2) STRAWMAN: common term in United States of America or Canada

These are the legal entity/fiction created and owned by the Government whom created it. It
is like owning a share in the Stock Market, you may own a share… but it is still a share of
the Stock.

Legally, we are considered to be a fiction, a concept or idea expressed as a name, a symbol.

That legal person has no consciousness; it is a juristic person, ENS LEGIS, a name/word
written on a piece of paper. This traces back to 1666, London is an IndependentCityState,
just like Vatican is an IndependentCityState, just like WashingtonDC is an Independent City
State.

The Crown is an unincorporated association. Why unincorporated? It’s private. The temple
bar is in London, every lawyer called to the “bar” swears allegiance to the temple bar. You
can’t get called without swearing this allegiance.

Our only way out is to reclaim your dead entity (strawman) that the Crown created, become
the executor and then collapse the called Cestui Que Vie trust and forgive yourself of your
debts and then remove yourself from the admiralty law that holds you in custody.

When London burned, the subrogation of men’s and women’s rights occurred. The
responsible act passed… CQV act 1666 meant all men and women of UK were declared
dead and lost beyond the seas. The state took everybody and everybody’s property into trust.
The state takes control until a living man or woman comes back and claims their titles by
proving they are alive and claims for damages can be made.
This is why you always need representation when involved in legal matters, because you’re
dead.

The legal fiction is a construct on paper, an estate in trust. When you get a bill or summons
from court it is always in capital letters, similar to tomb stones in grave yards. Capital letters
signify death. They are writing to the dead legal fiction. A legal fiction was created when
someone informed the government that there was a new vessel in town, based upon your
birth.

Birth Certificates are issued to us by the Doc. just as ships are given berth Certificates at the
Dock. It’s about commerce. We come from our mothers waters. Your mother has a birth
canal just like a ship. The ship moves by the sea current just as we are able to move by the
currency.

All this information relates to how the general public are still legally tied through Maritime
Admiralty Law. Through this ancient legal construct we can be easily controlled and duped.
Learning about your legal fiction helps you to unlock yourself. Otherwise you are just an
empty vessel floating on the sea of commerce. Parents are tricked into registering the birth
of their babies.

In about 1837 the Births, Deaths and Marriages act was formed in UK and the post of
registrar general was established. His job was to collect all the data from the churches which
held the records of birth.

Regis – from Queen or Crown. All people are seen to be in custody of,” The Crown”. This
allows people to function in commerce and to accept the benefits provided by state. We have
to understand who we are as men and women and how we can relate in the system. The City
of London is a centre for markets, where merchants work. Then there is Mercantile Law. It
comes from Admiralty Law. Look at the symbols in your City Courts that relate to
Admiralty.

So where you have commerce and money, you also have “justice” and “injury”. You need to
understand the bankruptcy before you can understand the judiciary. We have accepted the
claim to accept the summons, yet ONLY the dead can be summoned. There is an obligation
to accept any liability which has been created.

We are operating in Admiralty. A not guilty plea, or ANY plea admits jurisdiction. The
strawman, aka legal fiction is always guilty. Barristers and solicitors make a living out of
creating controversy. By creating a controversy you become liable for the case.

Honour and dishonour. To remain in honour you have to accept a claim and settle
(discharge) it. Then you add conditions, ie. “I accept on proof of claim and proof of loss”.
This gives the liability back to them. The legal fiction is always guilty. Only in the High
Court, can the real man or woman appear. Games are played on courts, hence the name
‘court’. It is a game with actors (acting on acts). It has to be treated as a game and just
business. Court room dramas are misinformation.
In the public, we are operating in bankruptcy and you receive benefits. It takes a lot of time,
effort and study to understand and use these tools. You have to be prepared to go fully
through the process, get the right tool out of your toolbox at the right time.

People need to learn how to act as a creation of God rather than a creation of Man.

Evidence of Life Evidence of Person Entitled to payment Form 206

True Love Ministry

1634 Minnesota Ave, Columbus,OH 43211

(614) 447-3426

------------------------------------------

Rights Suspension and Corruption

Cestui Que Vie Trust
Canon 2036 (link)

A Cestui Que VieTrust, also known later as a “Fide Commissary Trust” and later again as a
“Foreign Situs trust” and also known as a form of “Secret Trust”is a fictional concept being
a Temporary Testamentary Trust, first created during the reign of Henry VIII of England
through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540 and updated by Charles II through the Cestui Que
Vie Act of 1666 wherein an Estate may be effected for the Benefit of one or more Persons
presumed lost or abandoned at “sea” and therefore assumed/presumed “dead” after seven (7)
years. Additional presumptions by which such a Trust may be formed were added in later
statutes to include bankrupts, minors, incompetents, mortgages and private companies.

Canon 2037 (link)

The original purpose and function of a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust was to form a

temporary Estate for the benefit of another because some event, state of affairs or condition
prevented them from claiming their status as living, competent and present before a
competent authority. Therefore, any claims, history, statutes or arguments that deviate
in terms of the origin and function of a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust as pronounced by these
canons is false and automatically null and void. A Cestui Que (Vie) Trust may only exist for
seventy (70) years being the traditional accepted “life” expectancy of the estate.

Canon 2038 (link)

A Beneficiary under Estate may be either a Beneficiary or a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust. When

a Beneficiary loses directbenefit of any Property of the higher Estate placed in Cestui Que
(Vie) Trust on their behalf, they do not “own” the Cestui Que (Vie) Trust and are only
the beneficiary of what the Trustees of the Cestui Que (Vie) Trust choose to provide them.
Canon 2039 (link)

As all Cestui Que (Vie) Trusts are created on one or more presumptions based on its original
purpose and function, such a Trust cannot be created if none of these presumptions can be
proven to exist.

Canon 2040 (link)

The Trust Corpus created by a Cestui Que (Vie) is also known as the Estate from two Latin
words e+statuo literallymeaning “by virtue of decree, statute or judgment”. However, as
the Estate is held in a Temporary not permanentTrust, the
(Corporate) Person as Beneficiary is entitled only to equitable title and the use of
the Property, rather than legal title and therefore ownership of the Property. Only
the Corporation, also known as Body Corporate, Estate andTrust Corpus of a Cestui Que
(Vie) Trust possesses valid legal personality.

Canon 2041 (link)

The Property of any Estate created through a Temporary (Testamentary) Trust may be

regarded as under “Cestui Que Use” by the Corporate Person, even if another name or
description is used to define the type of trust or use. Therefore “Cestui Que Use is not
a Person but a Right and therefore a form of “property“.

Canon 2042 (link)

In 1534, prior to the 1st Cestui Que Vie Act (1540), Henry VIII declared the first Cestui Que
Vie type estate with the Act of Supremecy which created the Crown Estate. In 1604, seventy
(70) years later, James I of England modified the estate as the Crown Union (Union of
Crowns). By the 18th Century, the Crown was viewed as a company. However by the start
of the 19th Century around 1814 onwards upon the bankruptcy of the company (1814/15) , it
became the fully private Crown Corporation controlled by European private banker families.

Canon 2043 (link)

Since 1581, there has been a second series of Cestui Que Vie Estates concerning
the property of “persons” and rights which migrated to the United States for administration
including:

(i) In 1651 the Act for the Settlement of Ireland 1651-52 which introduced the concept of
“settlements”, enemies of the state and restrictions of movement in states of “emeregency”;
and

(ii) In 1861 the Emergency Powers Act 1861; and

(iii) In 1931 the Emergency Relief and Construction Act 1931-32; and

(iv) in 2001 the Patriot Act 2001.

Canon 2044 (link)

Since 1591, there has been a third series of Cestui Que Vie Estates concerning
the property of “soul” and ecclesiastical rights which migrated to the United States for
administration including:

(i) In 1661 the Act of Settlement 1661-62; and

(ii) In 1871 the District of Columbia Act 1871; and

(iii) In 1941 the Lend Lease Act 1941.

Canon 2045 (link)

By 1815 and the bankruptcy of the Crown and Bank of England by the Rothschilds, for the

1st time, the Cestui Que Vie Trusts of the United Kingdom became assets placed in private
banks effectively becoming “private trusts” or “Fide Commissary Trusts” administered by
commissioners (guardians). From 1835 and the Wills Act, these private trusts have been also
considered “Secret Trusts” whose existence does not need to be divulged.

Canon 2046 (link)

From 1917/18 with the enactment of the Sedition Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act
in the United States and through the United Kingdom, the citizens of the Commonwealth
and the United States became effectively “enemies of the state” and “aliens” which in turn
converted the “Fide Commissary” private secret trusts to “Foreign Situs” (Private
International) Trusts.

Canon 2047 (link)

In 1931, the Roman Cult, also known as the Vatican created the Bank for International
Settlements for the control of claimed property of associated private central banks around
the world. Upon the deliberate bankruptcy of most countries, private central banks were
installed as administrators and the global Cestui Que Vie/Foreign Situs Trustsystem was
implemented from 1933 onwards.

Canon 2048 (link)

Since 1933, when a child is borne in a State(Estate) under inferior Roman law, three (3)
Cestui Que (Vie) Trusts are created upon certain presumptions, specifically designed to deny
the child forever any rights of Real Property, any Rights as a Free Person and any Rights to
be known as man and woman rather than a creature or animal, by claiming and possessing
their Soul or Spirit.

Canon 2049 (link)

Since 1933, upon a new child being borne, the Executors or Administrators of the

higher Estate willingly and knowingly convey the beneficial entitlements of
the child as Beneficiary into the 1st Cestui Que(Vie) Trust in the formof a Registry Number
by registering the Name, thereby also creating the Corporate Person and denying
the childany rights as an owner of Real Property.

Canon 2050 (link)

Since 1933, when a child is borne, the Executors or Administrators of the

higher Estate knowingly and willinglyclaim the baby as chattel to the Estate. The slave
baby contract is then created by honoring the ancient tradition of either having the ink
impression of the feet of the baby onto the live birth record, or a drop of its blood as well as
tricking the parents to signing the baby away through the deceitful legal meanings on the
live birth record. This live birth record as a promissory note is converted into a
slave bond sold to the private reserve bank of the estate and then conveyed into a 2nd and
separate Cestui Que (Vie) Trust per child owned by the bank. Upon the promissory note
reaching maturity and the bank being unable to “seize” the slave child, a maritime lien is
lawfully issued to “salvage” the lost property and itself monetized as currency issued in
series against the Cestui Que (Vie) Trust.

Canon 2051 (link)

Each Cestui Que Vie Trust created since 1933 represents one of the 3 Crowns representing
the 3 claims ofproperty of the Roman Cult, being Real Property, Personal Property and
Ecclesiastical Property and the denial of any rights to men and women, other than those
chosen as loyal members of the society and as Executors and Administrators.

Canon 2052 (link)

The Three (3) Cestui Que Vie Trusts are the specific denial of rights of Real
Property, Personal Property and Ecclesiastical Property for most men and women,
corresponds exactly to the three forms of law available to the Galla of the Bar Association
Courts. The first form of law is corporate commercial law is effective because of the 1st
Cestui Que Vie Trust. The second form of law is maritime and trust law is effective because
of the 2nd Cestui Que Vie Trust. The 3rd form of law is Talmudic and Roman Cult law is
effective because of the 3rd Cestui Que Vie Trustof Baptism.

Canon 2053 (link)

The Birth Certificate issued under Roman Law represents the modern equivalent to

the Settlement Certificates of the 17th century and signifies the holder as a pauper and
effectively a Roman Slave. The Birth Certificate has no direct relationship to the private
secret trusts controlled by the private banking network, nor can it be used to force the
administration of a state or nation to divulge the existence of these secret trusts.

Canon 2054 (link)

As the Cestui Que Vie Trusts are created as private secret trusts on multiple presumptions
including the ongoingbankruptcy of certain national estates, they remain the claimed
private property of the Roman Cult banks and therefore cannot be directly claimed or used.

Canon 2055 (link)
While the private secret trusts of the private central banks cannot be directly addressed, they
are still formed on certain presumptions of law including claimed ownership of the name,
the body, the mind and soul of infants, men and women. Each and every man and woman
has the absolute right to rebuke and reject such false presumptions as a holder of their own
title.

Canon 2056 (link)

Given the private secret trusts of the private central banks are created on false presumptions,
when a man or woman makes clear their Live Borne Record and claim over their own
name, body, mind and soul, any such trustbased on such false presumptions ceases to have
any property.

Canon 2057 (link)

Any Administrator or Executor that refuses to immediately dissolve a Cestui Que

(Vie) Trust, upon a Person establishing their status and competency, is guilty of fraud and
fundamental breach of their fiduciary duties requiring their immediate removal and
punishment.

Word:
person
Pronounciation:

Century:
13th
DA Name:
person
Era:
C.E.
Origin:
Original
Type:
Official
Source Language:

Latin
Source Language Words:
From 13th Century Latin persona = “the (fictional) legal character representing an individual
HUMAN BEING or CORPORATION by CONSENT ".
Source Text:

Definition:
Person is a key rule of Law describing a fundamental legal fiction --that is any individual or
formal organization subject to the Curia (courts) or lesser courts. Providing consent is given
without duress, legally an individual, a corporation and even a nation may be considered a
PERSON and therefore subject to the principles of common law and commercial (maritime)
law of the Vatican/Roman Cult. Legally, the name assigned to a Person must always be in
CAPITALS to distinguish a "person" from a free man or free society.

Word: trust
Pronounciation: /tɹʌst/
Century: 14th
DA Name: trust
Era: C.E.
Origin: Original
Type: Official
Source Language: Latin
Source Language From 14th Century Latin trusti = "a blood pact, oath or alliance". The
Words: word "rus" in Latin meaning "country, village, land" and also meaning
"blood" in certain slavic languages. 
Source Text:
Definition: The claim of the word "trust" being from as early as the 12th Century
from Old Norse origins is deliberately misleading. In its strictest sense,
a trust is a fictional religious and legal concept --therefore a Trust does
not exist unless some formal oath, pact and agreement exists in good
faith. 

Word: fiduciary
Pronounciation:
Century:
DA Name:
Era: C.E.
Origin: Original
Type: Official
Source Language: Latin
Source Language
Words:
Source Text:
Definition: includes a personal representative, guardian, conservator, and
trustee appointed in accordance with this Instrument

--------------------------------------

Source: http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=228123

We need to wake up.

The society we live in is nothing but a filthy pyramid scheme of mind control.
Pope Boniface VIII in 1302 during the Inquisition, an “express trust” was created with a
Papal Bull called “Unnam Sanctum”.

It created this and it created the Roman Empire from Roman Cult Sorcery.

It has 3 different “Cestui Que Vie” trusts-

1. Romanus Pontifex
2. Aeterni Regis
3. Convocation

All law is Ecclesiastical Law. This law allows “Constructive Trusts” to be created.

These trusts demand you retire before 75, because that is outside the law of the trust to
claim.

In a courtroom you have an Administrator, Trustee, Executor and a Beneficiary.

A person taken in to court is the Beneficiary. Your Birth Certificate is nothing more than the
title of the Trust, the Judge in a court, who is basically an Administrator, asks for the
person’s name, if you give your name, the one on your birth certificate, then you are
allowing the Judge (Administrator), to swap roles with you as the beneficiary.

A constructive trust is defined as – “Constructive trusts in English law are a form of trust
created by the courts primarily where the defendant has dealt with property in an
"unconscionable manner", but also in other circumstances; the property will be held in
"constructive trust" for the harmed party, obliging the defendant to look after it.”

Once they have the name, you have given the fiction of the Cestui Que Vie Trust, life. It is
nothing but modern slavery; it allows the Stock shares, which are generated by your birth
certificate, to be taken from you.

The Government has to supply evidence to a Monetary Fund that proves there is a demand
for money, your Birth Certificate is proof of that. If you have “dealt with property in an
unconscionable manner”, then the Judge, or the state, has the power if you identify with the
name on the trust, to take this property off you. The Judge receives a commission, the public
purse is relieved of an expense, but you still exist as demand, so whether or not you are able
to contribute, if you are part of the trust, you are not permitted to be a beneficiary.

The Clerk is the Trustee, the Prosecutor is the Executor. The Prosecutor has the liability,
they create the summons to a hearing. Once you admit to being the beneficiary to the trust,
then the Executor becomes the beneficiary and you become the Executor and you execute
your own sentence. If you don’t identify with the trust, then the Executor has to pay, as they
have bought the proceedings to claim.

The Ecclesiastical factor means that a courtroom is about the “Sacrament of Penance.” This
means that you are a “Sinner”, you have been a source of funding for the Stock Exchange
and the system has now capitalized on your felony, your predisposition as a sinner, so you
are no longer permitted to handle the property of the state in an unconscionable manner, the
Ecclesiastical Trust in the court represents Church Law, the Judge, Clerk and Prosecutor and
even your own Lawyer or Solicitor, are representatives of the Church, they are in business
with God, Priests. If you sin, they are saying that they can offer forgiveness by getting you
to confess and identify with the trust and that you will be “forgiven” by God, if you give
them the money that your existence and name permits the banks and the Governments to
make money “out of thin air”.

It is an Administration of credits from the Kingdom of Heaven. This “Administration” is

“Penance”.

It only works with confession; it runs like the Church and is a glorified confession booth.

You basically through your identifying with the trust, the accuser, the person accused and
the witness and the Priests give the Judgement and the sentence and has the power to forgive
sins.

They manage the indulgencies, which are sins committed after forgiveness.

They have monetized sinning, which has got to be a problem in our disastrous economy.
Instead of using your money in this corrupt trust to solve problems with technology and
make resources of the Earth every human’s inheritance, they instead create legal fictions like
this.

A warrant is only in place to indemnify the Queen from being sued if they lose, a warrant
also allows a “Writ”, which is basically a “Rite”, which is a religious term for a spell, to be
sealed and indemnify the Monarchy. The basic truth is that it is illegal to send people to jail;
it is only this inhumane legislation of reinterpreted madness that permits fraud.

A Writ is also an indulgence, but because of all this reinterpreting, no one picks up on the
madness of it all, the piracy.

Prosecutor can be broken down in Latin to mean –“Representing one’s own flesh, or a
person who is claiming to be you, making a false accusation”.

If the Prosecutor can’t get you to swap roles, then they have to pay the liability and they
receive no commission from your trust account. You are nothing more than a bank account.

The way out of this is just as insane as the trust.

Instead of having a birth certificate, you can have an Ecclesiastical Birth Certificate called a
Live Born Record. This is an independent system that doesn’t identify with the trust. It
means that you have documented proof you are divine and so you can’t sin!

By this fact, if you have a birth certificate, then your soul is owned by the state and
ultimately, the Vatican!

You can also say this in court, you don’t have to go to prison, no one does, it is all illegal.
When the name of the trust is called for instance the “John Doe” trust, you can say, “Are
you saying that the trust we are now administering is called the John Doe trust, your
Honour?”

The very mention of this knowledge will put the fear of God into the Judge.

Don’t ever identify with the trust.

“We can now establish that the trust is the name of a trust ‘Not a live man’, what is your
next question your Honour?”

Judge – “What is your name?”

You must be very careful not to identify with the name of the trust because doing so makes
us the trustee. What does this tell you about the Judge? If we know that the Judge is the
trustee, then we know that the Judge is the name, but only for this particular constructive
trust.

As you will notice the Judge will become frustrated with the refusal to admit being the
name, that they will issue a warrant and as soon as the man leaves they arrest him, how
idiotic is that?

They must feel foolish for admitting that John Doe is not in the Court, so I’m issuing a
warrant for his arrest and as soon as the man they just admitted is not there to be arrested
because he is there.

They must get us to admit to being the name or they pay and we must not accept their
coercion or we pay because the Judge is the Trustee, a precarious position.

The best thing to say in that case is “John Doe, is indeed in the court, your Honour.” Point to
the Judge.
“It is you, as trustee, you are John Doe, today, aren’t you?”

Why not? We are men and women, we are not persons. We have Dominium.

During their frustration over not admitting to being a trust name, the trustee and/or the
executor of the trust, we ought to ask who they are.

“Before we go any further, I need who you are.” Address the Clerk of the court.
“The trustee for the Cestui Que Vie trust owned by (STATE/COUNTY/PROVINCE), are
you the Cestui Que Vie trustee who has appointed this Judge, as a trustee for the Cestui Que
Vie trust owned by (STATE/COUNTY/PROVINCE)?”

“Are you the Cestui Que Vie trustee who has appointed this Judge as Administrator and
trustee of the constructive trust case (case number(s))?”

“Did you also appoint the prosecutor as executor of this constructive trust?” Then point to
the Judge.
“So you are the trustee,”, then point to prosecutor, “you are the executor, are you not? And I
am the beneficiary.”

“So now we know who’s who, I as the beneficiary, I authorise you, to handle the
accounting, and dissolve this constructive trust.”

This is the power we have, dissolve this confession; I’m not into sin, I’m Divine.

You are a spirit, they view you as a dead soul, lost at sea, minor, and incompetent and award
of the state.

“I now claim my body, so I am collapsing the Cestui Que Vie trust, which you have
charged, as there is no value in it. You have committed fraud against all laws likely we will
not get to hear that before the Judge will order. Case Dismissed!”

Or even more likely – the prosecutor will say clutching his cheque book
“We’ve withdrawn the charges.”

There are 100,000s of people doing this.

When you go to court, magistrates, you are under UCC law, this means you can only be
fined.

When the Judge has a recess he can change it to Canon Law or Maritime Admiralty Law,
this can sentence you to prison.

Admiralty Law is in play as you are then seen as lost at sea, you are officially stock on a port
and they now have the power to store you in a warehouse (prison).

If the Judge orders the Bailiffs to throw you out of court, then you can say “Don’t do that,
you are dishonouring a court official.”, because the documents have been handed to the
bailiff.

If the Judge goes to leave the court for recess, then you must acknowledge – “The Judge has
jumped ship, for the record, he has abandonded ship and I as Sovereignty in this court take
control! Case closed! With Prejudice!”

If the Judge says they are going to have a recess, you can decline it, as it is an offer. “Your
Honour, I don’t consent.”

If it is adjourned, then it stays in the same court, so just follow the above.

Always relay that “I seek leave for an Interlocketary appeal, on a matter of law.”

If you say this, the Judge will be reluctant to go to appeal because he will be losing out on
commission.

Go to Santos Bonacci “Your Soul Is Owned By The Vatican” on Youtube, this is all there
with resources.
---------------------------------------------

https://exodus200.wordpress.com/sovereign-de-jure-taken-into-custody-by-police/

EXODUS - Movement of the People

CLAIM YOUR SOVEREIGN RIGHT – THE PROCESS

Most important thing to learn as a Sovereign [de jure] is

“DON’T GO INTO THEIR COURT”.
This is only a playground for infants, administered by the government.
Now that you no longer live under their Government system, you are no longer a part of
their Government system.

If you ‘the Sovereign [de jure] is taken against you will into the judicial court system of the
infants, you must do the following;

1. Put the NZ United Flag 1835 around your shoulders [like a cape]
2. Contact your family and advise them to contact the Sovereign [de jure] Original
Land Court immediately
3. You must not answer to your deceased birth certificate name
4. You must only answer to Christian 000/000 [your live birth registration number]
5. You must remind them you are the PERSONS [birth certificate] Personal
Representative. The PERSON is dead. The birth certificate is deposited with the
Registrar General.
6. You must have all your documents on you at all times
7. You must not sign any documents
8. You must not consent to giving your DNA
9. You must not consent to them taking your photo
10. You must not consent to them taking your fingerprints
11. Demand a phone call to the Sovereign [de jure] Original Land Court
12. If they take you against your will [without representation] into the dock, you must
say the following to the presiding judge:

 “Sir, being an ‘Original Sovereign [de jure] Free to walk this Land” , I am suppose’d
to have a Native assessor up there by (beside) you to make sure that Me and all
Original Sovereign [de jure] people get a fair deal. If you’re going to sit there by
yourself, then that’s not fair, that’s a total injustice. As your Lord and Sovereign [de
jure], Her Majesty Queen-Elizabeth-the-Second, under whom You swore Your
judicial oath, which is as follows;
 Quote “I,……….., swear that I will well and truly serve Her Majesty Queen-
Elizabeth-the-Second, Her heirs and successors, according to law, in the office of;
and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of New Zealand
without fear or favour, affection or ill will. So help me God”, unquote.
  This book here, the Te Ture Whenua Maori Maori Land Act 1993 states, that this
Act shall bind the Crown and so, if you, ‘Your Honour’ deny me the use of this book
and the laws within it and say to me, NO I do not accept that, then you are saying to
your Sovereign [the Queen] that you are over stepping her……. then you are in
breach of your judicial oath and you are not exercising the law that binds the Crown,
you are misbehaving by not upholding the laws of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
her heirs and successors according to law, and therefore, you are acting with
misconduct as a judge. By the power vested in Me under Section 12 of Te Ture
Whenua Maori, Maori Land Act 1993, I will personally see to it that ‘your position
as judge, be removed from you, so help you God.
 The penalty under the Crimes Act of your own Government for treason is death, and
by/for any member of the judiciary it is imprisonment for life so help you God, and
when you get there to prison that is – you will meet the people who you yourself put
in there.
 Under the Native Circuit Courts Act 1858, number 5, under section 32 of that Act.
Such provisions come under Section 32 of the Te Ture Whenua Maori, Maori Land
Act 1993. (“TTWMMLA”). Section 33 TTWM, ML Act 1993.

If you the Sovereign [de jure] is taken against you will into the judicial court system of the
infants, the following will be activated by the Sovereign [de jure] Original Land Court on
your behalf;

1. A Private Letter Rogatory and Private Courtesy Notice will be faxed to the Judge
presiding in that court informing him/her to cease, desist and release our Sovereign
[de jure] immediately.
2. A copy of the Private Letter Rogatory and Private Courtesy Notice will be faxed
immediately to the Governor General of your country.
3. The Sovereign [de jure] Original Land Court will phone the court registrar
immediately to enforce the demands and instructions of the Letter Rogatory and
Courtesy Notice.
4. If they do not release you, the Chief Justice or Chief High Court Judge will contact
the Royal Navy to come and protect the Sovereign [de jure] that stands under the
International and Crown Protected NZ United Tribes Flag 1835.
5. A Public Notice of Demand to Dismiss will hand delivered by a Principal
Representative of the Sovereign [de jure] held in custody. to the Court Registrar.
6. In a previous case, the matter was discussed in the Private and the Sovereign [de
jure] released in the Public. This is an administrative process that was undertaken
behind closed doors and thereafter a mention made in the court by the Judge in the
Public.

*If you are prone to being a target for the Police, carry a copy of the Te Ture Whenua Maori
Maori Land Act 1993 on you. Te Ture Whenua Maori Maori Land Act 1993

*Start learning this Act. This is a part of becoming a Sovereign [de jure]. Know what your
walking with.

 
FURTHER INFORMATION

The Sovereignty of the Native Assessors Court

With regard to recent comments by Acting Attorney General Margaret Wilson in respect to
legality for Maori to have Court and Native Assessors, this declaration was made by
Hohepa Mapiria on the 14th day of  December 2004 in reply to the claims made by
Attorney General about the validity of the Native Assessors Court in Whangarei at the time.
It was to be released to the public and reads as follows:

For one who claims that they have no written constitution are those who claim that they
are in fact, lawless. For everything un-constituted is illegal and thereto, the acting
government of New Zealand, having no written constitution is unlawful. And the laws
made by that Parliament are illegal.

Unlike Maori to quote the words of Lord Normanby Standing Orders of 1839, “Whose title
to the soil and to the Sovereignty of New Zealand is undisputable and has been solemnly
recognised by the British Government” And, “……..the admission of their rights ………..is
binding on the British Crown”.

Indeed it was predicted in the Treaty that there would be need to protect a numerous and
inoffensive peoples from Her Majesty’s bad or doubtful character whom, having fled Her
Majesty’s penal settlements and, deserting their ships had, for the purposes of trade, have
resorted to the shores of New Zealand. And so, in consequence of crime and outrage that
such persons did inflict upon the Kingdom of Maori And so as to avert the continuance of
such evil consequences of such lawless state; as by expressed by Lord Normanby with
considerations to the findings of the Westminster Parliament House of Commons inquiry of
1836 – 1839 that; Maori must not be permitted to enter into any contracts in which they
might be the ignorant and unintentional author’s of injuries to themselves”, the Crown of
England entered into a Treaty of Protection with the People Maori.

Accordingly, in regards to protection and representation, Her Majesty took up the role of
Maori Trustee, over the lands of all the People Maori. The Preamble of the Treaty of
Waitangi 1840 [Maori Version], to be very clear continued Article Four of the The
Declaration of Independence 1835 – Niu Tireni NZ, witnesses by Resident James Busby in
1835, the first Constitutional Act of State of Aotearoa.

Article one of the said Treaty gave to the Queen Trusteeship of All lands forever and right
of occupation for the Queen to establish Her Government in New Zealand, Articles Two &
Three, the protection of Rangatiratanga for the exchange of Kawanatanga, made amendment
to the First aforesaid Act of State granting to the Crown the first right of pre-emption (first
right of purchase and the first right of refusal), with relation to the extinguishment of the
Aboriginal/Native Title.

And so, together, the Declaration of Independence 1835 and Te Tiriti O Waitangi 1840 are
the written Articles of the Constitution of Aotearoa. Nothing to do with the New Zealand
Company Parliament residing at Wellington, nothing at all.
With respect to the Westminster Parliament Imperial Statute, the 1852 New Zealand
Government Act granted opportunity for representative Government, to Her Majesty’s
subjects, residing in New Zealand. That being so, the fact of the matter is; no inquiry was
made so as to obtain consent from the Internal Sovereign Holding Legislative Authority
Pursuant to Articles Two and Three of Te Tiriti O Waitangi Over, Our Chieftainship. Our
Lands, Our Forests, Our Fisheries, Our Estates and All other Treasures. The Declaration of
Independence 1835 clearly states that the Hereditary Chiefs and Heads of Tribes, quote:
“will not permit any legislative authority separate from themselves ….. to exist.. except by
persons “Appointed by them” and, acting under the Authority of Laws regularly enacted by
the in Congress Assembled”.

Whereupon, in a manner of extreme rudeness the Settlers and Immmigrants Parliament

residing at Wellington failed to obtain consent from Maori in relation to the 1852 New
Zealand Government Act nor did it consult with Her Majesty’s subjects with regard to an
agreed Constitution having the general assent of the persons so affected.

And furthermore it would not be Tikanga to transgress from the Precepts laid down by Our
Tupuna’s embodied in the Declaration of Independence 1835 and Te Tiriti o Waitangi 1840
And, evident by Protectorate Statute 71 of the so said 1852 Imperial Act which reads:

“And whereas it may be expedient that the Laws, Customs and Usages of the Aboriginal
(Maori) Inhabitants of New Zealand, so far as they are not repugnant to the general
principles of humanity, should for the present be maintained for the Government of
themselves, in all their relations to and dealings with each other, and that particular
districts should be set apart within which such Laws, Customs and Usages should be so
observed”.

Therefore with regard to the legitimacy of the Native Assessors Court, the New Zealand
Company Parliament Ministry of Justice has overlooked the Law of England. The Earl of
Halsbury Volume 9 states: “ Courts are created by the authority of the King as the Fountain
of Justice”. Annexed Hereto and marked with the letter “A” , a copy of English Laws with
relation to Creation of Courts”.

This Legislative Authority, “..is exercised either by Statute, Charter or Letters Patent…”.
evident by Statute 71 of the New Zealand Constitution Act, Annexed hereto and marked
with the letter “B”, and further continued in Protectorate Imperial Legislation of 1858 and
1894 Annexed hereto and marked with the letters “C”, “D” and “E”, respectively:

“C”, the Native Circuit Courts Act No.5, 1858. Section 33(1) Institution of Native Circuit
Courts  & 33(2) the creation of Court styled “The Native Circuit Court” And: 36, Section
32(5) “…to be styled “The Assessors Court” and, such Assessors shall hold Assessors
Courts..” And:
“D”, the Native District Regulations Act No.4: 1858 Section 4, :….Summary proceedings
before Justices of the Peace”, And:
“E”, the Native Land Court Act Part I & Part II, 1894, Land Jurisdiction and Administration
that forms the basis of present day Maori Incorporations.

Also, with regard to Te Tiriti o Waitangi Articles II & III and The Declaration of
Independence Articles II & III, Maori Parliament with the general assent of the persons
affected thereby, makes the appointment of Judges and Assessors. These are Our Credentials
of Legitimacy enacted into Imperial Statute.

Ministry of the New Zealand Company of Parliament residing in office at Wellington, Your
Parliamentary Credentials and Letters Patent issued under the prorogative of Maori are
required by the Legal Sovereign’s in Right

Thereupon, having carefully checked Our records, no Evidence has been found that Maori
ever gave to the Company Parliament, grant to operate Court. Therefore in accordance with
the aforesaid and, Pursuant to Inherent Right of Order, We most certainly Shall have
Tikanga, with regard to Kaitiakitanga of Rangatiratanga for the exchange of Kawanatanga,
in the affairs of the Maori Nation of Aotearoa.

Accordingly your attention is drawn to Te Ture Whenua Maori/Maori Land Act 1993 &
Amendments 1994, Section 2(3) “In the event in any conflict of meaning between the Maori
version and the English version of the Preamble, the Maori version Shall prevail”.

Furthermore, the Court is not a venue for executive dictate, in reference to comments by
spokesperson for the New Zealand Company Parliament Ministry of Justice that asserts
Maori Sovereignty has no legal foundation, with intent to circumvent argument and
influence Judiciary, with regards to matters between Maori and English Crown.

Determinations were made by the Privy Council on 1900-1901 & 1919 with regard to the
unextinguished Aboriginal Title of Customary lands as Proves:

Nihara Tamaki Vs Baker and Willis Vs Attorney General, which stated, “The Title of Maori
Tribes to their Traditional Lands was recognised both by Statute and the Common Law” and
that, “…the Crown lacked prerogative power in relation to the Tribal/Native or Aboriginal
Title to Lands”.

And, with regard to the numerous Statutes which by referring to the “Native Title” plainly
assumed “the existence of Tenure of Land under Custom and Usage”, which is either known
to Lawyers or discoverable by them by evidence. Lord Watson was unwilling to accept that
“the issue of a Crown Grant amounted to the extinction of the Tribal (Native) Title. Being
that the British Crown had  of soil Pursuant to Article II and the exclusive right of pre-
emption under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, Lord Phillamore did say, in the case Hineiti Rirerire
Arani Vs Public Trustee in 1919 that: “Maori Laws, Customs and Usages enjoyed legal
Status in European Colonial Courts, in the absence of any Statute enacted by the People
Maori, to say otherwise.

Whereupon, it is not for Company Dictate to say, the Crown or the Privy Council has been
sent on their way. The Privy Council said: we will have none of that, as it reprimanded the
willingness of the New Zealand Court of Appeal to accept that the Settlers and Immigrants
Government and Maori Land Court Administration of the Native Aboriginal Title was a non
justifiable Regal Discretion and further added that, “it was rather late in the day for the
Colonial Bench in New Zealand to deny the Tribal/Native Title legal status”.

It is for Maori, to so say, being with the assent of the persons affected thereby.
The New Zealand Court of Appeal eventually concluded, in June 2003 with relation to
foreshore and seabed decision, that the Native Title remains Unextinguished Over All the
Land. The same decision Lord Mc Naughten, Lord Watson and Lord Phillamore did deliver,
thereby establishing precedent that is binding on all Courts in New Zealand and on
Parliament of New Zealand. That being the case today, the Native Aboriginal Title still
remains Unextinguished, And, in such case, Parliament at Wellington cannot Legislate,
without such extinguishment, on the Native Title however, where Native Title is
unextinguished, Maori Government can legislate Proper Constitutional Laws.

ALL TITLES FOR THE LAND ARE ALL PRETEND AS STATED IN THE
FORESHORE AND SEABED DECISION 2003 PGH [140 xx 2] ABSOLUTELY
DEEMED NULL AND VOID

That found so, by the High Court of Appeal in 2003 with relation to foreshore & seabed
Legislation it means, we the Maori People are in Government for that is what Te Ture
Whenua Maori/Maori Land Act 1993, the Preamble, sections 2, 5 &12 depicts.

And with regard to that, to be effective, the Laws must bind the Crown, And So, Section 2
of Te Ture Whenua Maori/Maori Land Act 1993 & Amendments 1994 could be seen as
Mandatory Cession of Crown to, or Statutory Acknowledgement of, the Rights of
Rangatiratanga of Maori. Annexed hereto and marked with the letter “F” copy of Te Ture
Whenua Maori/Maori Land Act 1993, the Preamble, Sections 2, 5 & 12.

For embedded in the Preamble to that Act is found: “Whereas the Treaty of Waitangi
established the special relationship between the Maori People and the Crown….” The
Partnership and Spirit of Exchange, Kawanatanga for the Protection of Rangatiratanga, the
Agreement.

And with respect to position of Judiciary, this Act Shall bind the Crown. It is the role of
Justices, Privy Council Lord Mc Naughten did say, “for the Court to determine what is a
Breach of Trust”, not refer to the Company Parliament.

Acting Attorney General Margaret Wilson and Justice Hugh Williams are quite wrong in
comment. While some say Te Ture is a Land Act, if one looks to the Preamble, “…and
whereas it is desirable to recognise that Land is a Taonga Tuku Iho, of special significance
to Maori People…” And, “whereas it is desirable to maintain a Court of Rangatiratanga”
And Sections Two and Three speak of Maori Governance and the way in which the Native
Title may be extinguished by the exclusive right of pre-emption of the British Crown, to
purchase before all others or, the first right of refusal.

That means, under Articles Two and Three, there is a Constitution Governing Aotearoa
(NZ). It gives Maori the Constitutional Protected Right to Legislate, “the Chiefs of all the
subtribes of the Maori People the unqualified exercise of their Chieftainship over all their
Lands, their villages and over all their treasures”. Thereby Maori have Constitutional
Protected Right, not Parliament at Wellington, nor its subjects. It is Us that make the law.

Indeed, it is truth, there is one law for All and that is, The Declaration of Independence
1835, Te Tiriti O Waitangi 1840 and any other laws made by Maori Incorporations under
Part XIII of Te Ture Whenua Maori/Maori Land Act 1993-95, Pursuant to sections 250, 253,
268(3)/94 and 284(2)(u) 93, the Written Constitution of Aotearoa, Maori & Crown Law.

And So, in accordance with the Preamble and Section 2 of the Te Ture Whenua, so as to
facilitate the recognition of those embedded principles, for the benefit of the Owners, it is
not unlawful to call into Session, in a manner that Shall be Tikanga, the Native Assessors
Court.

Gentlemen and Ladies of the New Zealand Company’s Judiciary, it is little wonder you wear
black robes, you have been burnt by the red robes of the Privy Council, Her Majesty’s
Justice and Maori Justice And, have turned to charcoal by the black robes you wear.

It is without doubt that the Ministry of New Zealand Company of Parliament residing in
office at Wellington, is in fact the misrepresentation. Evident by the aforesaid Ministry
making apology, 100 years subsequent to the ‘Act’ thereby making admission it killed,
Paramount Chief Mokomoko. Whereupon guilty as charged And it is not for the killer to
grant pardon to the victim. It is for the Tribe, Hapu and Whanau of Chief Mokomoko, if
appropriate, to grant pardon to murderers and thieves that had such malign intention. A pack
of landless pirates pretending to be civilised, the worstest criminals of them all. As a matter
of de jure, fraud.

And So, with regard to recent comment from the Acting Attorney General’s Office, Nga
Tikanga Maori Law Society having done the investigation. It is time to call upon the Crown
to exercise its Feudal and Fiducial Titles, so as to avert those evil consequences, for King
William did make promise, “that He will not fail to avail Himself of every opportunity of
showing His Goodwill”, Contra Proferentum rule.

Therefore some consideration is recommended with relation to capacity of the Prorogative

Power of Maori constituted within the meaning of Te Ture Whenua Maori/Maori Land Act
1993 and all amendments and Te Tiriti O Waitangi and the Declaration of Independence and
any other enactments or the general law And, thereby the only Lawful Entity in New
Zealand of which, threats to investigate are unseemly and, with respect to allegations of con
and illegality, slander against the Sovereign Landlords of Aotearoa, Section 12.

A matter to which the Attorney Generals Office, claiming mandate as the Crown, Shall have
regard. Sections 2, 5, and 12 of Te Ture and the Preamble to that Act is that.
The Office of Attorney General Shall Obey, in a proper manner of conduct.

Dated this 14th Day of December in the year of the Lord 2004

Respectfully,

Hohepa Mapiria
Chief Native Assessor,
God save the Queen
Nga Tikanga Maori Law Society Inc. O Aotearoa (NZ)

Learn what words mean ‘Black Laws Dictionary’

-------------------------------------------

EXECUTORSHIP -BREAK THE CHAINS!, Dissolving The Cestui Que Vie Trust &
Removing The STRAWMAN

May 20, 2013 at 6:38am

Source: https://www.facebook.com/notes/king-machette-vanhelsing/executorship-break-the-
chains-dissolving-the-cestui-que-vie-trust-removing-the-s/643930442288694

Note: USE THIS DOCUMENT TO UNPLUG FROM THE SYSTEM, DECLARE THAT
YOU ARE LIVING & TO RECLAIM YOUR ESTATE. Read carefully, change the name
and address to your own and in some cases change who the document is addressed to if
applicable. If female, change the word "executor" to "executrix" as an executor is a male.
Also, this document is a 'starter-kit' that will initially serve as your protection from police,
your right to travel, a LEGAL state ID, and much more! However we have a ROYALTY
KIT and a DIVINITY KIT. ALL THREE KITS ARE FREE!
                                                                  PICTURE HERE

Governor’s/Grantor’s Assertion of Rights

DECLARATION OF EXECUTORSHIP.
Legal Notice and Warning, as this is
on and for the public record
Established by a court of record
(UCC 1-103, 308, 415 by reference…)
(reference to secured rights and public-laws listed below as well as common law)
(Declaration to expire as of March 13, 2061 unless renewed by grantor verbally)

FILE AS EVIDENCE UNDER NEW YORK RULES OF THE COURT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT/AFFIDAVIT

State of New York

County of XXXXXXX

APPEARING PERSONALLY BEFORE ME the undersigned Notary, on this          day of

May, 2013 ,John Doe ,Ex Rel, known to me by verification, a credible living, self-aware
MAN, who duly attest acknowledges and or affirms, on his affirmation and
acknowledgement, deposes and declares:

I, The Governor/Grantor, John Doe, a living breathing self-aware Man, not deceased,not lost
at sea, am the Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole
Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate associated with the Legal-Name,
State (Foreign or otherwise) and or corporation (hereinafter referred to as “Grantor”), of the
Legal Person , State (Foreign or otherwise) and or corporation of the Legal Person known
by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE/ JOHN X DOE (or any variation thereof). The
presumption of law is that The Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary /
Sole Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-Name, State (Foreign
or otherwise) and or corporation associated in any manner or form with the Legal Person
known by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE/ JOHN X DOE(or any variation thereof),
This declaration RECLAIMS WHAT IS RIGHTFUL AND DUE TO THE GRANTOR, AS
WELL AS overcomes/extinguishes any presumption of the Grantor has been, is, or was
absent, having absentee status, abandonment of any kind and or nature, or has been, is, or
was deceased.

I John Doe, the Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole

Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any associated Trust,Estate, Legal-Name, (Foreign
or otherwise) and or corporation do hereby forthwith established this court of record,
documenting, assuming, acknowledging this warranty/grant/Deed[s] as a lawful right. And
under acceptance The Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole
Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-Name, State (Foreign or
otherwise) and or corporation associated in any manner or form with the Legal Person
known by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE (or any variation thereof), and
acknowledge the aforementioned, the aforegoing, and the attached.

Further there is no law that allows any Human (self-aware or not) to exercise authority over
another Human (self-aware or not), and as I, The Grantor make the ultimate Presumption “I
the Grantor avow that I The Grantor am a self-aware . That I am The Executor / Director /
Sole Beneficiary / Sole Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-
Name, State (Foreign or otherwise) and or corporation associated in any manner or form
with the Legal Person known by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE (or any variation
thereof),. That I, The Grantor will never submit to any jurisdiction at any time or in any
situation. That my human-rights are never to be trampled and for each instance as well as
offence against my secured rights, a penalty and fee assessment of $20,000.00 will be due at
the time of such offense[s]. Because I, The Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole
Beneficiary / Sole Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-Name,
State (Foreign or otherwise) and or corporation associated in any manner or form with the
Legal Person known by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE (or any variation thereof), I,
The Grantor also declare and affirm total acceptance of the Secured United States
Constitutional Rights of the Legal-Person and all protections associated with such rights,
and assess the same penalty and fee of $20,000.00 for the violation of such right (each
instance and or incident).

I The Grantor further avow as well as affirm that all Public servants are just that, Public
servants, trustees.

The Grantor maintains heretofore, henceforth, hereafter and forever that The
Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole Shareholder/Chief
Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-Name, State (Foreign or otherwise) and or
corporation associated in any manner or form with the Legal Person known by, referred to
or rendered as JOHN DOE (or any variation thereof), welcomes any claims to the contrary,
and all and any unsubstantiated claim[s] will be assessed a one million dollar fee for each
and every instance and or occurrence.

The Grantor presumes that corporations and courts operate under presumption of law.

The Grantor presumes that statutory law and or its authority do not apply to The Grantor.

The Grantor presumes that the rules of any non common law tribunal do not apply to The
Grantor.

The Grantor presumes that The Grantor is not bound by any so-called order of any non
common law tribunal.

The Grantor is not a public servant and any claim to the contrary must be proven by payroll
records to include The Grantor’s alleged public servant title and sworn under the penalty of
perjury and under full commercial liability.
The Grantor claims common law jurisdiction at every moment and all time[s].

The Grantor waives all compelled benefits of every type and kind.

The Grantor does not waive any rights of the legal person/Legal-Name and or of JOHN
DOE (or any variation thereof) or of The Grantor.

The Grantor does not surrender any common or human rights in any proceeding or in any
manner or time.

The Grantor does not nor will ever waive time.

The Grantor does not and will not ever plead to courts of contracts.

The Grantor presumes that The Grantor is not bound by any so-called order/ruling/decision
of any non-common law tribunal, body, Fiduciary, trustee, and or servants.

The Grantor presumes that any and all public employee/state employee/federal employee
and or servant, officers of any corporation/court can only maintain the role of public servant,
Public Trustee/fiduciary

The Grantor presumes that ministerial clerks/servants, being public trustees/fiduciary, have
no authority over The Grantor or any other self-aware human being.

The Grantor presumes that all Statutes, ACT’S of congress, Codes and United States Codes
are in violation of The Grantor common and human rights and not applicable to The
Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole Shareholder/Chief
Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-Name, State (Foreign or otherwise) and or
corporation associated in any manner or form with the Legal Person known by, referred to
or rendered as JOHN DOE (or any variation thereof), and welcomes any claims to the
contrary, and if any unsubstantiated claims are false, there will be assessment of Forty
thousand dollars for each instance and every occurrence under The Grantor’s fee schedule.

The Grantor does not waive any rights, and reserves all secured rights, common and human
rights and forever asserts The Grantor Rights whatever they may be and that of the legal
person JOHN DOE(or any variation thereof).

The Grantor does not surrender any common /human rights in any proceeding, discussion, in
any venue, or under any circumstances at any time or in any manner.

The Grantor will not and or ever plead to courts of contracts voluntarily, or otherwise.

Anyone refuting any of the aforementioned and or the following issues must do so on the
public record, in writing, by way of sworn affidavit under penalties of an assessment of
$100,000.00 for each issue and occurrence of perjury/false and misleading information, and
or unproven misleading statements/assertions. No other refuting documents will be
accepted. Failure to respond within 21 days will be agreement and estoppel.
The aforementioned is true and correct, attested to and submitted by The Governor/Grantor/
Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer, of any
Trust, Estate, Legal-Name, State (Foreign or otherwise) and or corporation of the Legal
Person known by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE (or any variation thereof) on this
____ day of May, 2013.

LEGAL NOTICE for your benefit and compliance

Both Common and Federal law provides that it is a crime to violate the Rights of a self-
aware human being under the color-of-law. You can be arrested and most-likely charged for
this crime and can also be held personally liable for violation of secured rights.

Federal Law, Section 7 of Public Law 93-579 provides that: “It shall be unlawful for any
Federal, State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right, benefit, or
privilege provided by law because of such individual's refusal to disclose his social security
account number.” Federal courts have ruled the Privacy Act applies equally to the private
sector.

Warning, you are in violation of Federal Law and persisting with your demand may lead to
your arrest and/or civil damages! The law provides that you can and will be held personally
responsible and liable, as well as your company or agency.

There is no law requiring an individual to obtain or use a social security number. Any
requirement and/or demand that I, The Grantor provide a social security number a violation
of one or more of the following laws:

4 CFR 83.9; 5 USC Sec. 552a; 7 CFR 1.123; 7 USC Sec. 2204g; 14 CFR 1212.604; 17 CFR
249.501a; 19 CFR 118.11; 19 CFR 122.25; 19 CFR 24.5; 24 CFR 5.212; 28 CFR 16.53; 28
CFR 513.31; 28 CFR 700.25; 29 CFR 70a.10; 29 CFR 71.12; 31 CFR 1.32; 31 CFR
501.806; 32 CFR 270.19; 32 CFR 310.20; 32 CFR 311.5; 32 CFR 316.6; 32 CFR 317.20; 32
CFR 323.5; 32 CFR 505.2; 32 CFR 701.108; 32 CFR 806b.9; 38 CFR 1.575; 38 CFR 3.216;
38 USC Sec. 5101; 39 CFR 266.4; 45 CFR Part 801; 47 CFR 0.554; 49 CFR 10.29.

Public Law 93-579, Sect. 7, 88 Stat. 1909 (Dec. 31, 1974)

(a) “(1) It shall be unlawful for any Federal, State, or local government agency to deny to
any
individual any right, benefit (like, a passport !) or privilege (like, citizenship, or rights of a
Human Being) provided by law because of such ‘individual's refusal to disclose his legal-
person’s social security number’”... (Emphases and reference added).

63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees

* *63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247* “As expressed otherwise, the
powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised
on behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer.
[1] Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever
branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are
trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed
by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of
their trusts.
[2] That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose
behalf he or she serves.
[3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public.
[4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than
those of a private individual.
[5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official who
tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights
is against public policy. Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit-and this is one
of the meanings that fraud bears [483 U.S. 372] in the statute.
See United States v. Dial, 757 F.2d 163, 168 (7th Cir1985) the deliberate concealment of
material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation. A public official is a fiduciary
toward the public, including, the judge, in reference to litigants who appear before him and
he deliberately concealed material information from them, he was guilty of fraud. McNally v
United States 483 U.S.350 (1987)

1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting … prohibiting … the right of the people …to petition
the government for a redress of grievances.

7th amendment:
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right
of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined
in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

9th amendment:
The numeration in the Constitution, of rights, shall not be denied or disparage others
retained by the people.

10th amendment:
The powers not delegated by the Constitution are reserved to the people.

11th amendment:
The Judicial power shall not extend to any lawsuit or equity, or Citizens or Subjects of any
Foreign State.

Further there is no law that allows any Human (self-aware or not) to exercise authority over
another Human (self-aware or not), and as I The Grantor make the ultimate Presumption “I
The Grantor avows that I The Grantor am a self-aware .

You are put on notice to cease and desist with your demands and or presumptions that are
contrary to the established facts outlined by the proof contained herein and to seek personal
legal counsel if you do not understand or have a comprehension of actual law.

Certification of Acknowledgment

I John Doe, attest and affirm that the aforementioned is true and correct, attested to and
submitted by The Governor/Grantor, John Doe, a living breathing self-aware Man, not
deceased, WHO IS ALSO The Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole
Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-Name, State (Foreign or
otherwise) and or corporation associated in any manner or form with the Legal Person
known by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE(or any variation thereof), and that this is
my indefeasible title to my land and or property, and that I am the Lawful owner of the
aforementioned estate; and it’s real property and interest . I further acknowledge that this is
my freewill act and Deed to execute my acknowledgement of my acceptance of the trust/real
property/estate as well as lawful ownership of the real-property/Estate/Corporation/Trust, be
it said, be it documented done in/on/and for the record, in this court of record on this ______
day of May, 2013 executed this, the aforegoing INSTRUMENT and acknowledged before
me and executed the same as his FREE-WILL, ACT AND DEED .

_____________________________________________________
John Doe/Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director
/Sole Beneficiary / Sole Shareholder /Chief Executive Officer

In care of:
John Doe
000-00 000st
XXXXX, New York
Near (00000)

STATE OF NEW YORK

COUNTY OF QUEENS
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of May,2013 by
John Doe,The Governor/Grantor/ Executor / Director / Sole Beneficiary / Sole
Shareholder/Chief Executive Officer of any Trust, Estate, Legal-Name, State (Foreign or
otherwise) and or corporation associated in any manner or form with the Legal Person
known by, referred to or rendered as JOHN DOE (or any variation thereof), who is
personally known to me.

___________________________________
Notary Public,State of New York
My commission expires:
LEGAL NOTICE for your benefit and compliance

The Certifying Notary is an independent contractor and not a party to this claim. In fact the
Certifying Notary is a Federal Witness Pursuant to TITLE 18, PART I, CHAPTER 73, SEC.
1512. Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant. The Certifying Notary also
performs the functions of a quasi-Postal Inspector under the Homeland Security Act by
being compelled to report any violations of the U.S. Postal regulations as an Officer of the
Executive Department. Intimidating a Notary Public under Color of Law is a violation of
Title 18, U.S. Code, Section 242, titled “Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law,” which
primarily governs police misconduct investigations. This Statute makes it a crime for any
person acting under the Color of Law to willfully deprive any individual residing in the
United States and/or United States of America those rights
protected by the Constitution and U.S. Laws.

=================================================================
=======
IMPORTANT!!!! AT THIS POINT YOU ARE TO FILE A UCC-1 FORM AND
RECLAIM YOUR ESTATE THROUGH THE US TREASURY COMPUTERS ! Here is
the form: http://www.sos.state.tx.us/ucc/forms/UCC1.pdf

These are the areas that you will be needing to change to reflect your information or your
strawmans information, and then making sure that they are black when you print them out.
Other times in might be assets or other information that needs to be filled in like a car, boat,
home, birth certificate, SSN# application etc.
So here is a quick run down of the steps with some do’s and don’ts put in.
UCC-1 Sovereignty Steps and Instructions

Sovereignty Introduction History and Background Steps and Instructions Document

Templates Birth Certificate Redemption
The Common Law The Courts Admiralty/Maritime Law Statutory Legislation The Uniform
Commercial Code Legal Language
Creating Income Daily Affairs Home and Land Traveling Sovereign Dos and Don'ts
Step #1 Towards Becoming Sovereign
File A UCC-1 Financing Statement and it's Associated Documents.

Here is a simple introduction to comprehending the process and reasons for filing one's
UCC-1 (Uniform Commercial Code) Financing Statement or 'Security Interest' and and an
explanation and set of easy to follow correct steps of The UCC-1 Filing Process, The use of
the agreements that go along with UCC-1, and the Copyright Notice. This is all for the
purpose of  regaining control of your agent in commerce, the STRAWMAN!

Filing a UCC1 Financing Statement is the filing of a legal document into the public as
evidence of you regaining control over your Agent in commerce, your strawman. It had been
abandoned on the sea (see) of admiralty where it was salvaged by Government and big corps
to use for their own gain and benefit.
• By filing the document you are noticing the ‘state’, the public, that you are regaining
rightful control over the strawman- birth certificate name for your benefit and not the states
and that you are now no longer delinquent.

• By filing you also show that you are the secured party and Principal Creditor to the
strawman – vessel – trust – cestue Qui Trust as the Trust was set up to benefit the living
spirit within the body of a man and NOT for the benefit of anyone else, government,
corporations or your strawman.

• You – the living man, are the beneficiary of the Trust, the Trust being made up of a
number of parties including you, your vessel, the state and Commonwealth Governments.

• The strawman is YOUR debtor. Because the living man is NOT to own anything, we have
use and possession, as ‘good stewards’ it is the job of your vessel – agent in commerce,
acting as a Trustee to the Trust, and whatever assets are being accumulated by the Trust is
controlled by the Trustee – your strawman, for YOU as the beneficiary. YOU are therefore
the ‘Holder in Due Course’ (HIDC) of the real estate assets held in Trust because the Titles
are held in the name of your agent in commerce but the Deed is in YOUR possession and
that makes YOU HIDC.

Upon filing a UCC1, you also produce several accompanying documents that are all
PRIVATE documents and NOT to be issued into the public. All these documents ae
referenced on your UCC1 filing by a code number so there is evidence of there existence,
BUT they are to remain PRIVATE.

1. The first is the Security Agreement which is a private document evidencing a contract
between you and your dead at law legal fiction strawman – crown security interest name. It
is an agreement that evidences that you have a mutually agreed with the agent in commerce
that the vessel – agent in commerce owes you $1B, yep, one billion dollars. It lists a whole
range of securities and their values which YOU have the principal lien position over, the
whole of the estate and is a principal mechanism of protection against outside predators in
the world, particularly on the high seas of admiralty law where there are abundant pirates
called Governments and big corporations. Because YOU are the Principal Creditor, any
other claimant against your vessel – agent in commerce, can only be a secondary creditor
and can only get at your estate WHEN YOUR vessel – agent in commerce has been paid the
$1Billion which you receive as beneficiary, then the predator may have access to the estate
of the Trust. It is our most effective defense to protect real estate and other property from
predators on the high seas.

2. Hold Harmless and Indemnity Agreement. To my knowledge this private agreement

between you and your agent in commerce is effected to ensure that you indemnify the public
against any damage you, as the living, make against any member of the public as they
operate only under limited liability insurance and therefore are at risk to damage by your day
to day activities. It is simply insurance to protect members of the public from any accidental
or delinquent actions from us as private people.

3. Private Agreement - is a private agreement evidencing a contract between you and your
dead at law legal fiction strawman – crown security interest name. It is an agreement that
evidences that there is an agreement a set of tasks and objectives between the parties. For
example, it shows the strawman has agreed to accept all deposits for and on your behalf into
his bank account(just look at your credit card or statement to identify whose account it is)
because you cannot touch that filthy lucre. You in return, have agreed to fill out his tax
return (he cannot because he is a piece of paper and is dead!) and sign it John Henry Doe
FOR JOHN HENRY DOE.

Filing A UCC1 Financing Statement

Note: It is important to first create the documents below before you create your UCC1
Financing Statement
a) Security Agreement/Common Law Copyright Notice
b) Hold Harmless And Indemnity Agreement
c) Private Agreement
d) Security Agreement
e) Schedule-A for The Security Agreement
f) Declaration Of Sovereignty

NOTE: Bar the Security Agreement/Common Law Copyright Notice you do not have to
show/provide
a) Hold Harmless And Indemnity Agreement
b) Private Agreement and
c) Security Agreement
to any 3rd party whatsoever. These documents are for your private usage/filing. There is no
law that forces you to have to disclose the contents of these documents or even provide a
copy for any 3rd party. Just keep them in a safe place and do not show them to anyone
unless you really want to. However, you will need to show the Security
Agreement/Common Law Copyright Notice to 3rd parties from time to time as evidence that
you have copyrighted your name.

Also, don't forget when creating/writing your documents to 3rd parties to use your
trademark (TM) at the end of your name. There is no registration required for the TM. Joe
BlowTM or Joe Blow©TM

Before You Register Your UCC1 Financing Statement You Must Have Completed A
1. Security Agreement/Common Law Copyright Notice With Number (CN),
2. Hold Harmless And Indemnity Agreement With Number (HHIA),
3. Private Agreement With Number (PA)
4. Security Agreement With Number (SA).
5. Schedule-A For Security Agreement (SA-A)
6.Declaration Of Sovereignty

The Number For Your Security Agreement/Common Law Copyright Notice Is Derived
From The Date You Turned 18 (eighteen) And From The Initials Of Your Full Name e.g.
JOHN ALEXANDER SMITH born 23rd May 1968 = JAS-230586-CN.

The Number For Your Hold Harmless And Indemnity Agreement Is Derived From The Date
You Turned 18 (eighteen) And From The Initials Of Your Full Name e.g. John Alexander
Smith born 23rd May 1968 = JAS-230586-HHIA.

The Number For Your Private Agreement Is Derived From The Date You Turned 18
(eighteen) And From The Initials Of Your Full Name e.g. John Alexander Smith born 23rd
May 1968 = JAS-230586-PA.

The Number For Your Security Agreement Is Derived From The Date You Turned 18
(eighteen) And From The Initials Of Your Full Name e.g. John Alexander Smith born 23rd
May 1968 = JAS-230586-SA.

You may now file your UCC-1’s

=================================================================
==================
Note: This Is The Most Powerful Script To Use In Court. It COUNTERS The UNUM
SANCTUM And You VERBALLY Break The Spell....For Advanced Members Only. DO
NOT USE THIS IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE DOING!!!

BREAKING THE SPELL & THE TRUST IN COURT....AND WINNING!

Advanced Spell Breaker Script

When the name of the trust is called for instance the “John Doe” trust, you can say, “Are
you saying that the trust we are now administering is called the John Doe trust, your
Honour?”

The very mention of this knowledge will put the fear of God into the Judge.

Don’t ever identify with the trust.

“We can now establish that the trust is the name of a trust ‘Not a live man’, what is your
next question your Honour?”

Judge – “What is your name?”

You must be very careful not to identify with the name of the trust because doing so makes
us the trustee. What does this tell you about the Judge? If we know that the Judge is the
trustee, then we know that the Judge is the name, but only for this particular constructive
trust.

As you will notice the Judge will become frustrated with the refusal to admit being the
name, that they will issue a warrant and as soon as the man leaves they arrest him, how
idiotic is that?

They must feel foolish for admitting that John Doe is not in the Court, so I’m issuing a
warrant for his arrest and as soon as the man they just admitted is not there to be arrested
because he is there.
They must get us to admit to being the name or they pay and we must not accept their
coercion or we pay because the Judge is the Trustee, a precarious position.

The best thing to say in that case is “John Doe, is indeed in the court, your Honour.” Point to
the Judge.
“It is you, as trustee, you are John Doe, today, aren’t you?”

Why not? We are men and women, we are not persons. We have Dominium.

During their frustration over not admitting to being a trust name, the trustee and/or the
executor of the trust, we ought to ask who they are.

“Before we go any further, I need who you are.” Address the Clerk of the court.
“The trustee for the Cestui Que Vie trust owned by (STATE/COUNTY/PROVINCE), are
you the Cestui Que Vie trustee who has appointed this Judge, as a trustee for the Cestui Que
Vie trust owned by (STATE/COUNTY/PROVINCE)?”

“Are you the Cestui Que Vie trustee who has appointed this Judge as Administrator and
trustee of the constructive trust case (case number(s))?”

“Did you also appoint the prosecutor as executor of this constructive trust?” Then point to
the Judge.

“So you are the trustee,”, then point to prosecutor, “you are the executor, are you not? And I
am the beneficiary.”

“So now we know who’s who, I as the beneficiary, I authorise you, to handle the
accounting, and dissolve this constructive trust.”

This is the power we have, dissolve this confession; I’m not into sin, I’m Divine.

You are a spirit, they view you as a dead soul, lost at sea, minor, and incompetent and award
of the state.

“I now claim my body, so I am collapsing the Cestui Que Vie trust, which you have
charged, as there is no value in it. You have committed fraud against all laws likely we will
not get to hear that before the Judge will order. Case Dismissed!”

Or even more likely – the prosecutor will say clutching his cheque book
“We’ve withdrawn the charges.”

There are 100,000s of people doing this.

When you go to court, magistrates, you are under UCC law, this means you can only be
fined.

When the Judge has a recess he can change it to Canon Law or Maritime Admiralty Law,
this can sentence you to prison.
Admiralty Law is in play as you are then seen as lost at sea, you are officially stock on a port
and they now have the power to store you in a warehouse (prison).

If the Judge orders the Bailiffs to throw you out of court, then you can say “Don’t do that,
you are dishonouring a court official.”, because the documents have been handed to the
bailiff.

If the Judge goes to leave the court for recess, then you must acknowledge – “The Judge has
jumped ship, for the record, he has abandonded ship and I as Sovereignty in this court take
control! Case closed! With Prejudice!”

If the Judge says they are going to have a recess, you can decline it, as it is an offer. “Your
Honour, I don’t consent.”

If it is adjourned, then it stays in the same court, so just follow the above.

Always relay that “I seek leave for an Interlocketary appeal, on a matter of law.”

If you say this, the Judge will be reluctant to go to appeal because he will be losing out on
commission.
=================================================================
=================================================================
=========================
Intermediate Spell Breaker Script

1. Your honor I am a living being. The flesh lives and the blood flows. I ask humbly for a
remedy
(the judge not actually being a judge and NOT desiring to provide you remedy will take a
break and go into his chambers. When he returns he will have changed roles and will now be
the captain of the maritime ship.)

2. Your honor I am a living being. The flesh lives and the blood flows. I ask humbly for cure
and maintenance. (He will now repeat the break form earlier not wanting to give you cure or
remedy on his ship. Once he returns he will now have taken on the role of high priest of the
temple .)

3. Your honor I wish to establish that I am a living being. The flesh lives and the blood
flows. I have DOMINION and NOTHING stands between myself and the divine.

=================================================================
=================================================================
=========================

Note: Use This To SHUT THEM DOWN! Get It Notarized & Authenticated. You Can Also
Use This As A Spell Breaker Script In Court

NOTICE TO COURT AND ALL COURT OFFICERS

Since the Constitution cannot conflict with itself, the limited powers delegated to
government by the Constitution can never supersede the powers of and Rights guaranteed in
the Constitution to The American People.  “Authority” is an extremely important word and
concept.  Government and the courts without Constitutional authority can conduct nothing
lawful, and government has no authority to disparage your Rights.  Keep “authority” in
mind as you review the following statements and questions.      

CHALLENGES TO THE COURT BEFORE PROCEEDINGS CAN START

1.         A.        Your Honor and the prosecutor have taken oaths of office to support and
uphold the Constitution of the united States of America and that of this state.  Is that correct?

 
            B.         Pursuant to your oaths, you are required to abide by those oaths, in the
performance of your official duties, including those before this Honorable Court.  Is that
correct?
 

2.         I, Jeffrey Louis Gonzales, hereby notify this Honorable Court that I am a living,
breathing, natural-born American Citizen, with, and claiming, all Rights guaranteed to me in
the federal and state Constitutions, and with my name properly spelled in upper and lower
case letters, not as it appears on the court documents.  

Is there any objection to what I just stated?

 3. This court abides by all the powers of and Rights guaranteed to American Citizens in the
federal and state Constitutions, including due process of law.  Is that correct?

 4.         I am presumed innocent of all aspects of the alleged charges, presumptions and
assumptions in, by and of this court, unless proven guilty by a well-informed jury of my
peers, beyond a reasonable doubt, based solely on verified evidence and proof.  Is that
correct?   

 5.         A.        “Proof” consists of verified and demonstrated evidence, and not opinion,
especially opinion unsupported by fact, law and evidence.  Is that correct?

      B.         “Beyond a reasonable doubt” consists solely of decisions and verdicts from a
well-informed jury of my peers based entirely on proof that absolutely and conclusively
confirms guilt, without any reservations or questions, whatsoever, from the jury.  Is that
correct?

 
6.         Opinion from any witness or prosecuting attorney unsupported and unverified by
fact, law and proven evidence is simply opinion, and opinion, as previously established, is
not proof or factual evidence.  Is that correct?

 
7.         A.        Since I am guaranteed a fair and impartial trial, how is that possible when
you, the presiding judge, the prosecuting attorney and all the witnesses against me work for
and are paid by the state that is the plaintiff in this case, and my opponent?  In this situation,
it is impossible for me to have a fair trial.  Is that correct?

 B.         Further, any data used against me is obtained from sources who, are also paid by the
state, the same plaintiff against me.  At minimum, conflict of interest takes place.

 8.   Since I am presumed innocent of the charges and all aspects, presumptions and
assumptions of those charges and this court, I have challenged the jurisdiction of this court,
which this court has not proven, on the public record.  Therefore, since I am presumed
innocent of all aspects of the charges and presumptions of the court, and since jurisdiction
has not been proven, jurisdiction is simply a presumption of this court, of which I am
presumed innocent.  Furthermore, no official Oath of Office can be located anywhere, nor
has one been put on the public record. Therefore, I move for dismissal of all charges and/or
warrants for lack of jurisdiction.  Pursuant to the foregoing, and to numerous federal and
Supreme Court rulings, this case must be dismissed and any warrant recalled, with full
prejudice, and I hereby move for dismissal of all charges and this case, with full prejudice.

 
Failure to respond to this formal written notice, dated January 23, 2007, within 30 days in
written format with Proof of Service to the undersigned, constitutes and validates your fraud
and failure to honor your Oath of Office.  Furthermore, all said charges, judgments, warrants
and/or claims against John Doe, is null and void, without force or effect or lawful power. 
Any further harassment of John Doe by this court or any of its officers will be construed as
intentional harm, with malice and the conscious intent of inflicting both physical and mental
harm to the defendant-in-error in this matter.  Copies of this document along with the
attached documents will be sent to the Office of Judicial Administrations, Washington DC
in the event that justice is not reached.

Respectfully submitted,

                                                                          All Rights Reserved  

                                                                          ________________________________

                                                                          John Doe, American Citizen

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

                I certify that on this ____ day of January 2007, a true and exact copy of the
aforesaid Motion was sent, first class postage prepaid, by U.S. mail, to Justin W. Wayment,
ESQ. and Honorable, Kenneth H. Adams, 51 East 400 North, PO Box 1808, Cedar City,
Utah 84721.
 

All Rights Reserved

_________________________________

John Doe, American Citizen

RECORDING REQUESTED BY,              

AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:     

NAME                                 

STREET/BOX                           

CITY                                 

STATE                                 (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE

ONLY)

=================================================================
=================================================
Note: Use This To SHUT THEM DOWN! Get It Notarized & Authenticated

IN THE COURT OF
 
 THE STATE OF _________                                   CASE #_________________

JUDGE _________________

FICTITIOUS FOREIGN STATE  Vs      Non corporate entity   

_________________                                                         
 
 
                                                                    ADMINISTRATIVE NOTICE; IN THE
NATURE
                                                                          OF WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS
                                                & A DEMAND FOR DISMISSAL OR  STATE THE
PROPER JURISDICTION        

                    

ADMIMISTRATIVE NOTICE; IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF ERROR CORAM

NOBIS & A DEMAND FOR DISMISSAL OR STATE THE PROPER JURISDICTION
 
    Now comes____________________ a non corporate entity with an  ADMINISTRATIVE
NOTICE ; IN THE NATURE OF WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS & A DEMAND
FOR DISMISSAL OR STATE THE PROPER JURISDICTION. Pursuant to FRCP Rule 4
(j)   
    This Court is defined under FRCP Rule 4 (j) as a FOREIGN STATE as defined under 28
USC 1602 -1611 FOREIGN SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY ACT (FSIA) is being
jurisdictionally challenged and full disclosure of the true jurisdiction of this Court is now
being demanded.
    Any failure to disclose the true jurisdiction is a violation of 15 Statutes at Large, Chapter
249 (section 1), enacted July 27 1868
 
Chap. CCXLIX. ---An Act concerning the Rights of American Citizens in foreign States
 
    Whereas the rights of expatriation is a nature and inherent  right of all people,
indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty,  and the pursuit of happiness; 
and whereas in the recognition of this principle this government has freely received
emigrants from all nations, and invested them with the right of citizenship; and whereas  it is
claimed that such American citizens,  with their descendants,  are subjects of foreign states, 
owing allegiance to the government thereof;  and whereas it is necessary to the maintenance
of public peace that this claim of foreign  allegiance should be promptly   and   finally
disavowed;  Thereof.
 
    Be it enacted  by the Senator and the House of Representatives of the United States of
American in Congress assembled, That  any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or
decision, of any  officers of is government which denies.,  restricts ,  impairs or questions the
rights of expatriation , is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this
government.

    As an America Citizen I hold the inherent right of the 11th amendment. The judicial
power shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or
prosecuted by a Foreign State.  If this FOREIGN STATE is misusing the name of this
America Citizen by placing it in all caps or misusing the last name or using the term
“person” as a CORPORATION all complaints and suit against such CORPORATION fall
under the FSIA and the DEPT OF STATE OFFICES in Washington DC. DC now has to be
notify pursuant to 22 CFR 93.1 -93.2. A copy of the FSIA has to be filed with the complaint
to the defendant’s chief executive officer of that CORPORATION. 
    MUNICIPAL, COUNTY, OR STATE COURT lacks jurisdiction to hear any case under
the FOREIGN STATE definitions. This jurisdiction lies with the UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT under the FSIA Statutes pursuant to 28 USC 1330.
     Because the Defendant is a non corporate entity and is not registered with any
Secretary of State as a CORPORATION the Prosecution has FAILED to state a claim to
which relief can be granted under 12(b) (6). Therefore this matter must be dismissed for lack
of political, personam, and subject matter jurisdiction, Venue and under the 11th
amendment.
Definitions
Corpus Juris Secundum "The Body of Law" or Legal encyclopedia, Volume 7, Section 4: as
quoted:
"Attorney & client: An Attorney's "first" duty is to the Courts (1st) and the public (2nd) and 
not to the client (3rd), and wherever the duties to an attorney's  client "conflict" with those
interests that he/she owes his allegiance to, as an officer of the court in the administration of
justice, the former must yield to the latter". The Biggest problem today is that People do not
know their own rights & blindly entrust their rights to someone else.
BLACK‘S LAW DICTIONARY FIFTH EDITION

Foreign Court
The courts of a foreign state or nation. In the United States, this term is frequently applied to
the courts of one of the states when their judgment or records are introduced in the courts of
another.

Foreign jurisdiction
Any jurisdiction foreign to that of the forum; e.g. a sister state or another country. Also the
exercise by a state or nation jurisdiction beyond its own territory. Long - arm
Service of process is a form of such foreign or extraterritorial jurisdiction

Foreign laws
The laws of a foreign country, or of a sister state. In conflict of law, the legal principle of
jurisprudence which are part of the law of a sister state or nation. Foreign laws are additions
to our own laws, and in that respect are called “jus receptum”

Foreign corporation
A corporation doing business in one state though chartered or incorporated in another state
is a foreign corporation as to the first state, and, as such, is required to consent to certain
conditions and restriction in order to do business in such first state. Under federal tax laws, a
foreign corporation is one which is not organized under the law of one of the states or
territories of the United States. I.R.C. § 7701 (a) (5). Service of process on foreign
corporation is governed by the Fed. R. Civ. P. 4  See also Corporation

TITLE 26 - INTERNAL REVENUE CODE, Subtitle F - Procedure and Administration

,CHAPTER 79 – DEFINITIONS Sec. 7701. Definitions  (5) Foreign The term "foreign"
when applied to a corporation or partnership means a corporation or partnership which is not
domestic."

Foreign service of process

Service of process for the acquisition of jurisdiction by a court in the United States upon a
person in a foreign country is prescribed by Fed R. Civ. P. 4 (i) and 28 U.S.C.A. § 1608.
Service of process on foreign corporation is governed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d) (3)

Foreign states
Nations which are outside the United States. Term may also refer to another state; i.e. a
sister state.

Foreign immunity
With respect to jurisdiction immunity of foreign nation, see 28 U.S.C.A 1602 et seq.

Profiteering
Taking advantage of unusual or exceptional circumstance to make excessive profit; e.g.
selling of scarce or essential goods at inflated price during time of emergency or war.

Person
In general usage, a human being (i.e. nature person) thought by statute term may include a
firm, labor organizations, partnerships, associations, corporations, ,legal representative,
trustees, trustees in bankruptcy ,or receivers. National Labor Relations act, §2(1).
A corporation is a” person” within meaning of equal protection and due process provisions
of United States Constitution.

Writ of error coram nobis

A common-law writ, the purpose of which is to correct a judgment in the same court in
which it was rendered, on the ground of error of fact, for which it was statutes provides no
other remedy, which fact did not appear of record, or was unknown to the court when
judgment was pronounced, and which ,if known would have prevented the judgment, and
which was unknown, and could of reasonable diligence in time to have been otherwise
presented  to the court, unless he was prevented from so presenting them by duress, fear, or
other sufficient cause.

    At common law in England, it issued from the Court of Kings Bench to a judgment of that
court. Its principal aim is to afford the court in which an action was tried and opportunity to
correct it own record with reference to a vital fact not known when the judgment was
rendered. It is also said that at common law
 it lay to correct purely ministerial errors of the officers of the court.

                                                                                   _______________________[LS]

PROOF OF SERVICE
Now comes _______________ with a ADMINISTRATIVE  NOTICE; IN THE NATURE
OF WRIT OF ERROR CORAM NOBIS & A DEMAND FOR DISMISSAL OR STATE
THE PROPER JURISDICTION. To be placed before the Clerk of Court
of_______________________________________________ and this day of
__________________ and month of____________________in the year of our Lord 2008
AD
 
                                                                                           __________________[LS]

CC

=================================================================
=================================================================
=========================
Note: Use This To SHUT DOWN The Attorney. You DO NOT NEED Them! Here is How
You REVOKE A Court Ordered Attorney. Get It Notarized And Authenticated

REVOCATION OF POWER OF ATTORNEY

Furthermore, I hereby revoke, rescind, and make void ab initio, all powers of attorney, in
fact or otherwise, implied in law or otherwise, signed either by me or anyone else, as it
pertains to the Social Security number assigned to me, _______________________ as it
pertains to my birth certificate, marriage or business license, or any other licenses or
certificates issued by any and all government or quasi-governmental entities, due to the use
of various elements of fraud by said agencies to attempt to deprive me of my Sovereignty
and/or property.

I hereby waive, cancel, repudiate, and refuse to knowingly accept any alleged "benefit" or
gratuity associated with any of the aforementioned licenses, numbers, or certificates. I do
hereby revoke and rescind all powers of attorney, in fact or otherwise, signed by me or
otherwise, implied in law or otherwise, with or without my consent or knowledge, as it
pertains to any and all property, real or personal, corporeal or incorporeal, obtained in the
past, present, or future. I am the sole and absolute legal owner and possess allodial title to
any and all such property.

Take Notice that I also revoke, cancel, and make void ab initio all powers of attorney, in
fact, in presumption, or otherwise, signed either by me or anyone else, claiming to act on my
behalf, with or without my consent, as such power of attorney pertains to me or any property
owned by me, by, but not limited to, any and all quasi/colorable, public, governmental
entities or corporations on the grounds of constructive fraud, concealment, and
nondisclosure of pertinent facts.

I affirm that all of the foregoing is true and correct. I affirm that I am of lawful age and am
competent to make this Affidavit. I hereby affix my own signature to all of the affirmations
in this entire document with explicit reservation of all my unalienable rights and my specific
common law right not to be bound by any contract or obligation which I have not entered
into knowingly, willingly, voluntarily, and without misrepresentation, duress, or coercion.

The use of notary below is for identification only, and such use does NOT grant any
jurisdiction to anyone.

 FURTHER AFFIANT SAITH NOT.

Subscribed and sworn, without prejudice, and with all rights reserved,
(PRINT NAME BELOW)

_________________________________________________________________,
Principal, by Special Appearance, in Propria Persona, proceeding Sui Juris.

My Hand and Mark as Subscriber                      (SIGN NAME BELOW)

Date:_____________ Common Law Seal:__________________________________

On this ______day of____________, 19____, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public
in and for _______________________(state), personally appeared the above-signed, known
to me to be the one whose name is signed on this instrument, and has acknowledged to me
that s/he has executed the same.

Signed:_________________________________________

Printed Name:____________________________________

Date:___________________________________________

My Commission Expires:____________________________

 
Notice is under the jurisdiction of the American Flag of Peace of the united States of
America.  I, «FirstName» «MiddleName», «LastName», am at Peace with my government. 
No flag of war shall be allowed affect upon my lawful name or character.  I, «FirstName»
«MiddleName», «LastName», have entered no contract to waive any of my rights or assent
to transact any right transfer away from my natural born American National Character (or
same as adopted by oath).
 
«FirstName» «MiddleName», «LastName»

Non-Bankrupt

c/o United States Post Office

«JudicialDist» Judicial District,

The State of «State»

Non Domestic Mail

«AffiantAddress»

«City», «State»

USA    «PostalCode»

 
A SECURITY - 15 USC

--------------------------------

THIS IS A U.S.S.E.C. TRACER FLAG,

NOT A POINT OF LAW*

*See attached EXPLANATION SHEET

 

 
=================================================================
=======
 

                                                                                                                                         
EXPLANATION SHEET

TO BE ATTACHED TO EVERY COMMERCIAL INSTRUMENT OR FILING

TO BE ATTACHED TO EVERY COMMERCIAL INSTRUMENT

CONTAINING THE PHRASE "A SECURITY - 15 USC"

 

This "EXPLANATION SHEET" is to be attached to all Commercial Affidavits, including

Affidavits of Obligation (Commercial Liens), which are non-judicial consensual processes
which arise out of breach of special performance, e.g. for public officials' breach of oath of
office, a violation of the Constitution for the United States of America (1787).

The Notice is included for the purposes of Full Disclosure (UCC), and as a warning for
Commercial grace.  The reference to Title 15 on a Commercial Affidavit is to indicate that
the Affidavit could become a U.S.S.E.C. Federal Security with tracking number.

A SECURITY - 15 USC

-------------------------------

THIS IS A U.S.S.E.C. TRACER FLAG,

NOT A POINT OF LAW*

*One definition of "A SECURITY" is "any evidence of debt".

The Lien Claimant does NOT rely on Title 15 USC as a basis for the "Commercial  Lien." 
All commercial processes, by using or relying on notes or paper in Commerce (e.g.  Federal
Reserve Notes), must bear some sort of Federal tracking, a County  Recorder's number, or a
serial number, which process must be accessible for inspection at the nearest relevant
County Recorder's Office or be widely advertised.  When a Lien  matures in three (3)
months by default of the Lien Debtor through the Lien Debtor's failure to rebut the affidavit
of obligation point-for-point categorically, it becomes an accounts receivable in the ordinary
sense of a collectible debt upon which assignments, collateralization, and other Commercial
transactions can be based, hence it becomes a Security subject to observation, tracking, and
regulation by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (hereinafter
U.S.S.E.C.).

 
The notation "A Security - 15 USC" Is a flag in Commerce telling the U.S.S.E.C. that a 
speculation account is being established to enforce the lien.  The U.S.S.E.C. can then 
monitor the process.  As long as the process is truthful, open, and above board (full
disclosure), the U.S.S.E.C. has no jurisdiction over it, for even the U.S.S.E.C. has no
jurisdiction over the truth of testimony, depositions, affidavits, and affidavits of obligation
(Commercial Liens), and an unrebutted affidavit stands as the truth in Commerce.

 
Legal Authority:  Universal moral/existential truths/principles, expressed in Judaic  (Mosaic)
Orthodox Hebrew/Jewish Commercial Code, corollary to Exodus (chiefly Exodus 
20:15,16).  This is the best known Commercial process in America.  Its prime user is the 
Internal Revenue Service. The IRS uses all three tracking codes. The federal code is the 
taxpayer's IRS document file number.  The next stronger code is the County Recorder's
number.  The strongest, most important, most universal code is the taxpayer's identification
number (TIN), also known as the Social Security Number (SSN).

 
The IRS collection process is legitimate.  The IRS assessment process, however, is a
Commercial  fraud.   IRS collection is not supported by any Commercial Affidavits,
Commercial Liens, or by any contracts, agreements, or True Bill in Commerce establishing
the basis on which  any debt can be collected.

 
An affidavit is someone's solemn expression of truth.  The foundation of the law,
Commerce, and the whole legal system consists of telling the truth ("I swear to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. . .") either by testimony, deposition, and/or by
affidavit.

 
Every honorable judge requires those who appear before him to be sworn to tell the  truth,
and is compelled by the high principles of his profession to protect truth and do nothing to
tamper with that truth, either directly or indirectly, in person or by proxy, or by
subordination of an affiant or other party.

 
A judge cannot interfere with, tamper with, or in any way modify testimony without
disintegrating the truth-seeking process in his sacred profession and destroying the fabric of
his own occupation.  To do so abrogates the 1st Amendment, which was established to
protect truth.  Doing so is committing professional suicide, as well as inviting countless civil
and criminal repercussions.

 
Any judge who tampers with testimony, deposition, or affidavit, is a threat to the 
Commercial Peace and Dignity of the County, State, and United States of America,  thereby
violating the laws of all those political subdivisions and acting in the nature of a foreign,
enemy Agent (a Mixed War), justifiably subject to penalties of treason.

 
Whoever acts against Commercial Affidavits without executing the necessary  Commercial
Paperwork under affidavit is subject to being charged criminally.  Said  charges include
fraud, which is gaining at the expense of the loss of another using trickery  or deception, and
expand to include all violations that issue from said fraud.
 
Commercial processes are fundamentally non-judicial and pre-judicial. No judge, court, law,
or government can invalidate these Commercial processes, i.e. an affidavit or a lien or
complaint based thereon, because no third party can invalidate someone's affidavit of truth. 
To act against such an affidavit is to create a situation and/or enhance the condition of a
Mixed War.  No one can rebut an affiant except a party (e.g. a lien debtor)  who alone, by
his own affidavit, must speak for himself or herself if challenged.  Only someone himself or
herself knows his or her truth and has the right and responsibility to assert it.

 
A Mixed War condition exists where "authorities" have violated their oaths of office, 
violated the fundamental law they swore to uphold and protect, violated the codes,  statutes,
and regulations that govern them and in so doing disregard the peace and safety of the
community by their acts, operating as Agents for undisclosed Foreign Principals or 
Governments against those whom they swore to protect.  Such acts of Treason constitute  a
secret war against the people.

 
When an Affidavit is flagged in Commerce it becomes a Federal Document because it  could
become translated into a Security (for example by being attached in support of a
Commercial Lien), and not accepting and/or filing a Commercial Affidavit becomes a 
Federal offense.