You are on page 1of 8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Magistrate Judge Brian A. Tsuchida

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff, v. RONALD L. BREKKE, et al, Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. CR10-328-JCC RESPONSE AND DEMAND TO QUASH OR DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND Affidavit of Ronald Brekke

RESPONSE AND DEMAND TO QUASH OR DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND Summary of Response. Plaintiff, United States of America, (having failed to prove on and for the record that they are not an unregistered foreign agent and bankrupt legal fiction lacking standing to bring any action) by and through the United States Attorneys (having failed to prove on and for the record that they possess verifiable documentation of duly constituted lawful delegation of authority to represent the United States of America) seeks to revoke Defendants pretrial release bond to impose unconstitutional restraint on the Defendant for allegedly violating the court order directing that Notary Public, Walter Etienne Esteva cease filing documents in this case and that Brekke refrain from filing documents with the Court that contain personally identifiable information. Dkt No 43. The issue is the intent of Brekke and Esteva to file documents in this
__________________________________________1____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

case. The paperwork sent to the court administration concerning the within case was never sent with a request to file the papers in this case file. Each set of paperwork sent by Esteva was quite explicitly directed in its communication and was never sent as a filing in this case. Plaintiffs attorneys have failed conduct themselves in compliance with their sworn oath of office and their code of ethics to not unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence or unlawfully alter, destroy or conceal any document(s) or other material having potential evidentiary Value. Plaintiffs attorneys have continued to conceal and falsify the character and intent of the

paperwork which was not authorized to be filed in this case. Defendant made lawful attempts to get at the truth of the matter at hand. If Brekke had intended for the paperwork to be filed in this case, he would have redacted the pertinent personal information. Defendant Brekke and the Notary Esteva did not send paperwork with personally identifiable numbers to this court with the intent that said paperwork be filed, and specifically directed that the paperwork that is referenced herein was the completion of a Notary presentment which were not to be filed in this action. This type of procedure is found under Notice of International Commercial Claim within Admiralty Administrative Remedy 28 U.S.C. 1333, 1337, and UCC 3-509. These are numerous types of remedies under the UCC which open more opportunities to proceed with administrative remedies. The Notary is a third party witness to the signature of Ronald Brekke and the administrative communication sent. There was no intent to file the said paperwork and the accompanying letter included instructions that the paperwork was not to be filed in this case. Additionally, there is no evidence or issues before this court that Esteva is a known tax defier as prosecution alleges.

CONCLUSION Defendant has made every appearance. Defendant presents no danger to the community. There is no evidence before this court that Defendant ever intentionally disobeyed any court order(s). The reasons cited for revoking Defendants bond are not relevant to the bond issue. Prosecutors conclusive statements have not been submitted in Affidavit form and have no basis in
__________________________________________2____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

fact or law and are not backed by any admissible evidence. Instead the prosecutors rely on hearsay inferences. Defendant is victimized by prosecutions ongoing overt acts to deny Defendant due process. If this Court grants prosecution attorneys motion, it will render Defendant unable to complete Defendants investigation into this ongoing conspiracy and render Defendant unable to build an adequate and proper defense. Defendant has only sought to honorably resolve this instant matter. Accordingly the court must deny the prosecution attorneys motion.

THE LAW By Fredric Bastiat (1801 to 1850) It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.

AFFIDAVIT OF RONALD L. BREKKE RE GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE BOND

I, Ronald Lee Brekke, hereinafter, Affiant appearing specially not generally, as one of the People, am competent to state to the matters included in this Affidavit, have personal knowledge of the facts based on personal experience and/or research, and declare that the statements made herein, are true, correct, certain and complete based on first-hand knowledge, or upon good faith and belief where specifically stated and not meant to mislead. I humbly seek Remedy.
1.

On or about May 28, 2011 Affiant embarked on an attempt to resolve this instant matter

privately and administratively and thereby directed Notary Public WALTER ETIENNE ESTEVA to present various documents and instruments to agents for Plaintiff, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Said presentments included the specific statement in BOLD coloring, PRIVATE, NOT FOR FILING yet despite this clear instruction, said documents and instruments were filed into the above named case. Additionally, Esteva was acting solely in the

__________________________________________3____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
1

capacity of a contract agent, third party witness.1 In said capacity, Estevas ONLY role was to seal the documents into the record under Notary seal and to receive any responses thereto or to confirm lack of response thereof;
2.

All such documents were part of Affiants prejudicial administrative process seeking proper

settlement of all matters in this case. It is Affiants understanding and belief based on both firsthand knowledge and research, that all District Courts of the United States are bound and required to seek administrative settlement in all matters prior to judicial proceedings. There appears to be no evidence to the contrary and Affiant hereby requests the court or prosecution supply such evidence if it may exist;
3.

At the arraignment on July 18, 2011, Magistrate Donohue admonished Defendant against

filing paperwork with personally identifying numbers or having documents filed by Esteva. On and for the record, Affiant humbly apologizes for any misunderstanding and hereby states that Affiant never intended to have such documents filed on the public record as evidenced by the statement on the letter of instruction in BOLD colored letters PRIVATE, NOT FOR PUBLIC FILING;
4.

Affiant respectively requested Magistrate Donahue instruct Affiant as to how to continue on

with the administrative process. Magistrate Donohue stated he could not instruct Affiant in that regard and said anything sent to the judge or the clerk would get filed regardless of any wording clearly denoting the documents were specifically PRIVATE, NOT FOR PUBLIC FILING;
5.

In August, Affiant completed the third step of the administrative process by having the

Notary Esteva send the documents to the prosecutor office and to the court administrator office The Certifying/Affirming Custodian Notary is an independent contractor and not a party to this claim. In fact the Certifying/Affirming Custodian 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/Affirming Custodian 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. law. Use of a Notary or references to US codes, rules, regulations, statutes and the like does not constitute a granting of jurisdiction, waiving of any rights or an acceptance of any benefits or privileges, real or imagined.

__________________________________________4____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

not to the clerk and no cc to the judge. These documents clearly contained the wording PRIVATE, NOT FOR PUBLIC FILING. Prosecutor has made the allegation that these documents made their way to the clerks office but did not state the documents had been filed. Affiant has seen no evidence that said documents have been filed into the case;
6.

Whoever filed Docket entries 60 and 62 into the case did not do so with Affiants instruction

or permission. There was never an intention to submit these documents into the case file;
7.

Affiant has made an earnest and honorable attempt to resolve this matter administratively. If

there is any error in how the presentments have been made and to whom, Affiant respectfully requests the court give the proper instruction lest the court become complicit with the prosecution and engage in a pattern of denial of due process, Conspiracy Against Rights, 18 USC 241 and Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law, 18 USC 242. (Exhibit A)
8.

Unless court directs otherwise, Affiant shall continue forward on the basis that sending the

private administrative documents to the court administrator and the prosecutors office is the proper manner in which to proceed towards administrative remedy in this instant matter.

I am not an expert in the law however, I do know right from wrong. If there is any human being damaged by any statements herein, if he will inform me by facts I will sincerely make every effort to amend my ways. I hereby and herein reserve the right to amend and make amendments to this document as necessary in order that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings justly determined. I reserve all my rights by explicit reservation. Your silence stands as consent to, and tacit approval of, the factual declarations herein being established as fact as a matter of law.

I declare under penalty of perjury under laws without the United States that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge, good faith and belief. Signed on this the _____ day of the _____ month in the year of our Lord two thousand eleven.

__________________________________________5____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

By:_______________________________ Ronald Lee Brekke, Beneficiary Administrator for all matters public and private All Rights and Remedies Reserved, Without Prejudice, Without Recourse
"I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract, commercial agreement or bankruptcy that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And furthermore, I do not and will not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement or bankruptcy."

JURAT

State of California

) ) ss.

Orange County

SUBSCRIBED AND AFFIRMED before me on this ________day of________________, 2011 by Ronald Lee Brekke who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the man who appeared before me __________________________________________, Notary Public, and whose name is subscribed on this Document / Instrument; witnessed by my signature and official stamp.

NS: _________________________________ Signature of Notary Public

LEGAL NOTICE The Certifying/Affirming Custodian Notary is an independent contractor and not a party to this claim. In fact the Certifying/Affirming Custodian 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/Affirming Custodian Notary also performs the functions of a quasi-Postal Inspector under the Homeland Security Act
__________________________________________6____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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. law. Use of a Notary or references to US codes, rules, regulations, statutes and the like does not constitute a granting of jurisdiction, waiving of any rights or an acceptance of any benefits or privileges, real or imagined.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document, RESPONSE TO DEMAND TO QUASH GOVERNMENT MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND and Affidavit of Ronald Brekke for Case No. CR10-328-JCC in the DISTRICT COURT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE was sent by mail, sufficient postage prepaid, to the following, whose names and addresses are listed below, on this the _____ day of the ______ month in the year of our Lord, two thousand eleven.

_____________________________ ELISEO REYES RESURRECCION


UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, C/O JENNY DURKAN, US ATTORNEY US DISTRICT COURT 700 STEWART STREET, SUITE 5220 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, RAY LAHOOD, SECRETARY 1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20590 Pursuant to: [46 USC 31321] Filing, recording, and discharge DOUGLAS H. SHULMAN, IRS COMMISSIONER INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE CRIMINAL DIVISION, BOX 192 COVINGTON, KENTUCKY 41012 ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., DBA US ATTORNEY GENERAL U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 950 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, NW WASHINGTON, DC 20530 J. RUSSELL GEORGE DBA INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION 1125 - 15TH STREET NW WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 20005

__________________________________________7____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

JERRY BROWN, DBA - GOVERNOR OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA C/O OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 1300 I ST. SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 CHRISTINE GREGOIRE, DBA - GOVERNOR OF STATE OF WASHINGTON C/O OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 1125 WASHINGTON ST. SE. PO BOX 40100 OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98504-0100

__________________________________________8____________________________________________ OPPOSITION AND DEMAND TO QUASH or DENY GOVERNMENTS MOTION TO REVOKE DEFENDANT BREKKES BOND