The Difference Between the Common Man and the Legal Person
http://www.blissful-wisdom.com/the-difference-between-the-common-man-and-the-legal-person.html
http://www.blissful-wisdom.com/the-difference-between-the-common-man-and-the-legal-person.html
Imagine that there is you, the common man or woman under God....Imagine that you are not under man's laws. Imagine that you are not a 'legal title or name', just a man or a woman under God.
Next, imagine that men who wished to exploit the common man created a 'legal entity' or 'legal person' with a name almost similar to your own. The common man is separate and distinct from the 'legal person', which is a legal 'fiction' created to tax, control, and exploit the common man. Imagine that this 'legal fiction' began with the creation of a legal title at your birth. Imagine that this legal title of birth was written in all capital letters. For example: JOHN LEWIS DOE Imagine that the all capital 'legal person' was since referred to only as JOHN LEWIS DOE, on 'legal papers' such as; birth certificate, title of birth, driver's license, health care card, social insurance card, bank card, mortgage document, property tax notice, and passport. Imagine that this 'legal entity' is only a legal 'fiction' and has nothing to do with you as a common man or woman. Imagine that both are entirely separate. The common man is not the 'legal person/legal entity' referred to in the birth certificate title and other 'legal papers'.
Keep all that in mind as you view the following video documentaries which attempt to explain the present condition of exploitation facing human beings on this planet today.
The Nut is Cracked, by Judge Anna Von Reitz
http://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2014/08/01/the-real-criminals/
The Real Criminals
1. Look up the Public Laws governing Citizen’s Arrest in your state. Get ready to use them.
2. Now, let’s pretend we set up a system of “naming conventions” such that the following rules apply:
john –quincy: adams = a living American endowed with all his natural rights
John Quincy Adams = a foreign situs trust used in commercial shipping
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS = a foreign estate trust
John Q. Adams = a public transmitting utility company
John q. Adams = a public foundation
JOHN Q. Adams = a cooperative
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS = a boat or ship used in public commerce
JOHN QUINCY Adams = a commonwealth trust
J. QUINCY Adams = a slave owned by Exxon Corporation
J.Q. Adams = a foreign pauper forbidden to own land
Adams, John Q. = a taxpayer
ADAMS, JOHN Q. = a soldier
adams, john q. = a slave
There are dozens of different potential meanings that can be arbitrarily assigned to anyone’s name and used to “represent” radically different entities. In a verbal conversation we can talk all day long about someone or something named “John Quincy Adams” and which john quincy adams or what kind of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS will never be known, except from the context of the conversation — but on paper the use of such a system instantly defines what or whom is being talked about — if you know the system.
This is what the lawyers, bankers, and politicians have used to enslave you. It is a crime known as “personage”. By arbitrarily creating an Estate trust named after you and claiming to own this thing they created, they have falsely claimed to own you and your assets and to literally buy and sell “you” on stock exchanges, ship “you” out of ports, and tax “you” for doing things you’ve never done. After all, there is no law against enslaving an ESTATE trust, is there? Or arresting a slave? Or charging a tax on importing revenue to Puerto Rico?
Hand in hand with personage comes “barratry” — the crime of knowingly bringing false claims into court. So what happens every day all across America, when charges are brought against the ESTATES of “dead men” who are standing right in front of the judge and jury? Barratry — a crime that is appropriately named after the “Bar Association”.
3. Look at the front page of any law suit that has been filed in America for the past seventy years and there you will have proof in your hand of both personage and barratry being committed against the individual people falsely named as “DEFENDANTS”. They are being deliberately confused with foreign estate trusts merely named after them and they are suffering the crimes of both personage and barratry.
4. Spread this explanation of the situation throughout the world. Take it to the provost marshals and the highest ranking police officers, to the sheriffs, and the deputies and the traffic cops, to the mayors, to the politicians responsible, to the bankers who have seized your bank accounts under the same false pretenses.
5. Go in large groups, peaceably, but with grim determination. Take your video cameras and tape recorders and stand ready to use Citizen’s Arrest against any public official who does not agree to assist you in shutting down the “court” system and arresting the “District Attorneys” and “judges” and others who have participated in this grotesque fraud. Demand that the bankers agree to correct their records and honor your ownership of your private property which has been deposited in their banks in good faith.
6. If any public official presented with this information refuses to help you, arrest them and hold them to face charges before a Citizen’s Grand Jury composed of twelve honest men who own land in your county. If the Sheriff of your County refuses to do his duty when confronted with this information, arrest him, and elect a new Sheriff pro tem to serve in the office until proper elections can be held.
The Proof
"I decided to take a look at my friends Birth Certificate, and low and behold I found a little message at the bottom of this pretty piece of paper. It says “ Canadian Bank Note“. I even took a picture, did a little bit of editing to hide friends info( that is not actually his anyways), and to show you this very interesting piece of information" ... continued: http://losethename.com/the-proof/
Cops Arrest Social Worker For Attempting Kidnapping in School Meeting
"It appears that a legal name has more power than most people have ever imagined, in that having identification seems to be just part of our every day lives. This reporter has been busy over the last week researching this culmination of an ongoing matter that began about 2 months ago when a young girl of seven refused to answer to her name for the morning roll call register in class."
http://kateofgaia.wordpress.com/
Freeman-on-the-Land
(part one of eight parts)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D--5iFc2Ng0
Next, imagine that men who wished to exploit the common man created a 'legal entity' or 'legal person' with a name almost similar to your own. The common man is separate and distinct from the 'legal person', which is a legal 'fiction' created to tax, control, and exploit the common man. Imagine that this 'legal fiction' began with the creation of a legal title at your birth. Imagine that this legal title of birth was written in all capital letters. For example: JOHN LEWIS DOE Imagine that the all capital 'legal person' was since referred to only as JOHN LEWIS DOE, on 'legal papers' such as; birth certificate, title of birth, driver's license, health care card, social insurance card, bank card, mortgage document, property tax notice, and passport. Imagine that this 'legal entity' is only a legal 'fiction' and has nothing to do with you as a common man or woman. Imagine that both are entirely separate. The common man is not the 'legal person/legal entity' referred to in the birth certificate title and other 'legal papers'.
Keep all that in mind as you view the following video documentaries which attempt to explain the present condition of exploitation facing human beings on this planet today.
The Nut is Cracked, by Judge Anna Von Reitz
http://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2014/08/01/the-real-criminals/
The Real Criminals
1. Look up the Public Laws governing Citizen’s Arrest in your state. Get ready to use them.
2. Now, let’s pretend we set up a system of “naming conventions” such that the following rules apply:
john –quincy: adams = a living American endowed with all his natural rights
John Quincy Adams = a foreign situs trust used in commercial shipping
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS = a foreign estate trust
John Q. Adams = a public transmitting utility company
John q. Adams = a public foundation
JOHN Q. Adams = a cooperative
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS = a boat or ship used in public commerce
JOHN QUINCY Adams = a commonwealth trust
J. QUINCY Adams = a slave owned by Exxon Corporation
J.Q. Adams = a foreign pauper forbidden to own land
Adams, John Q. = a taxpayer
ADAMS, JOHN Q. = a soldier
adams, john q. = a slave
There are dozens of different potential meanings that can be arbitrarily assigned to anyone’s name and used to “represent” radically different entities. In a verbal conversation we can talk all day long about someone or something named “John Quincy Adams” and which john quincy adams or what kind of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS will never be known, except from the context of the conversation — but on paper the use of such a system instantly defines what or whom is being talked about — if you know the system.
This is what the lawyers, bankers, and politicians have used to enslave you. It is a crime known as “personage”. By arbitrarily creating an Estate trust named after you and claiming to own this thing they created, they have falsely claimed to own you and your assets and to literally buy and sell “you” on stock exchanges, ship “you” out of ports, and tax “you” for doing things you’ve never done. After all, there is no law against enslaving an ESTATE trust, is there? Or arresting a slave? Or charging a tax on importing revenue to Puerto Rico?
Hand in hand with personage comes “barratry” — the crime of knowingly bringing false claims into court. So what happens every day all across America, when charges are brought against the ESTATES of “dead men” who are standing right in front of the judge and jury? Barratry — a crime that is appropriately named after the “Bar Association”.
3. Look at the front page of any law suit that has been filed in America for the past seventy years and there you will have proof in your hand of both personage and barratry being committed against the individual people falsely named as “DEFENDANTS”. They are being deliberately confused with foreign estate trusts merely named after them and they are suffering the crimes of both personage and barratry.
4. Spread this explanation of the situation throughout the world. Take it to the provost marshals and the highest ranking police officers, to the sheriffs, and the deputies and the traffic cops, to the mayors, to the politicians responsible, to the bankers who have seized your bank accounts under the same false pretenses.
5. Go in large groups, peaceably, but with grim determination. Take your video cameras and tape recorders and stand ready to use Citizen’s Arrest against any public official who does not agree to assist you in shutting down the “court” system and arresting the “District Attorneys” and “judges” and others who have participated in this grotesque fraud. Demand that the bankers agree to correct their records and honor your ownership of your private property which has been deposited in their banks in good faith.
6. If any public official presented with this information refuses to help you, arrest them and hold them to face charges before a Citizen’s Grand Jury composed of twelve honest men who own land in your county. If the Sheriff of your County refuses to do his duty when confronted with this information, arrest him, and elect a new Sheriff pro tem to serve in the office until proper elections can be held.
The Proof
"I decided to take a look at my friends Birth Certificate, and low and behold I found a little message at the bottom of this pretty piece of paper. It says “ Canadian Bank Note“. I even took a picture, did a little bit of editing to hide friends info( that is not actually his anyways), and to show you this very interesting piece of information" ... continued: http://losethename.com/the-proof/
Cops Arrest Social Worker For Attempting Kidnapping in School Meeting
"It appears that a legal name has more power than most people have ever imagined, in that having identification seems to be just part of our every day lives. This reporter has been busy over the last week researching this culmination of an ongoing matter that began about 2 months ago when a young girl of seven refused to answer to her name for the morning roll call register in class."
http://kateofgaia.wordpress.com/
Freeman-on-the-Land
(part one of eight parts)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D--5iFc2Ng0
http://freedompool.org/
Freedom is natural. It is our birthright; in fact, it is who we truly are.
We are free right now and we can demonstrate our freedom from this point on, simply by controlling our contracting; always staying in honor.
Sovereigns make use of questions and negative averments, rather than positive statements that may then need to be proved. Sovereigns turn every argument that we may be inclined to make into a conditional acceptance.
In this way, we control our property, starting with our bodies and our minds, which is what freedom & sovereignty is all about. http://freedompool.org/
The Natural & Common Law Right of Self Defense
"Common as the event may be, it is a serious thing to arrest a
citizen, and it is a more serious thing to search his person; and
he who accomplishes it, must do so in conformity to the law of the
land. There are two reasons for this; one to avoid bloodshed, and
the other to preserve the liberty of the citizen. Obedience to the
law is the bond of society, and the officers set to enforce the
law are not exempt from its mandates." Town of Blacksburg v. Bean
104 S.C. 146. 88 S.E. 441 (1916): Allen v. State, 197 N.W. 808, 810-11
(Wis 1924)
"Where officers do not conform to the 'law of the land' they have
no authority and the right to resist them exists. A Public Officer,
as with a citizen, who unlawfully threatens life or liberty, is
susceptible to be injured or killed; for by such acts 'they draw
their own blood upon themselves' As stated in some cases, 'where
a peace officer has no right to make an arrest without warrant he
is a trespasser and acts at his own peril." 6A CJS., "Arrest"
Section 16 page 30; A sheriff who "acts without process," or
"under a process void on its face, in doing such act, he is not to
be considered an officer but a personal trespasser." Roberts v. Dean,
187 So. 571, 575 (Fla. 1939)
"A person has a lawful right to resist an arrest by an unlawful
authority, i.e., an officer without a valid warrant." Franklin,118 Ga. 860, 45 S.E. 698 (1903)
"What of the resistance to the arrest? The authorities are in
agreement that since the right of personal property is one of the
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, any unlawful
interference with it may be resisted and every person has a right
to resist an unlawful arrest. * * * and, in preventing such illegal
restraint of his liberty, he may use such force as may be necessary."
City of Columbus v. Holmes, 152 N.W. 2d, 301, 306 (Ohio App. 1058)
"It is the law of self defense and self preservation that is
applicable. "One has and "unalienable" right to protect his life,
liberty or property from unlawful attack or harm." "* * * it is not
an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer,
even though he may have submitted to such custody without resistance."
Adarns v. State, 121 Ga 163, 48 S.E. 910 (1904)
"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted
to be restrained of his liberty has the same right, and only the same
right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any
other assault and battery." State v. Robinson, 145 Me. 77, 72 Atl, 2nd.260, 262 (1950)
"A citizen illegally arrested "cannot initiate the use of force" and
neither do "words alone justify an assault." However, "when the officer
initiates the assault by physical contact, which is usually the case,
and there is an unlawful arrest, the citizen has the right to protect
his liberty to the extent of killing the officer." See Green v.
Kennedy, 48 N.Y. Rep. 653, 654 (1871) and/or Hicks v. Matthews, 266
S.W. 2nd. 846, 849 (Tex. 1954)
"What rights then has a citizen in resisting an unlawful arrest? An
arrest without warrant is a trespass, an unlawful assault upon the
person, and how far one thus unlawfully assaulted may go in resistance
is to be determined as in other cases of assault. Life and liberty are
regarded as standing substantially on one foundation; life being
useless without liberty, and the authorities are uninformed that where
one is about to be unlawfully deprived of his liberty he may resist
the aggressions of the officer, to the extent of taking the life of
the assailant, if that be necessity to preserve his own life, or
prevent infliction upon him of some great bodily harm." State v. Gum,
68 W. Va. 105, 69 S.E. 463, 464 (1910)
"It is the law that a person illegally arrested by an officer may
resist that arrest, even to the extent of the taking of life if his
own life or any great bodily harm is threatened. State v. Rousseau,
40 Wash. 2nd, 92, 241 P. 2nd. 447, 449 (1952); Porter v. State, 124
Ga. 297, 52 S.E. 283, 287 (1905); see also State v. Mobley, 240 N.C.
476, 83 S.E. 2nd 100, 102 (1954); Wilkinson v. State, 143 Miss. 324,
108 So. 711, 712-13 (1926); American Jurisprudence, 2nd Ed., "Arrest",
Section 94, pp. 778-780; Thomas v. State, 91 Ga. 204, 18 S.E. 305
(1892); Presley v. State, 75 Fla. 434, 78 So. 532, 534 (1918);
Burkhard v. State, 83 Tex. Crim. 228, 202 S.W. 513; Mullins v. State,
196 Ga. 569, 27 S.E. 2nd. 91 (1943); Ownes v. State, 58 Tex. Crim.
261, 125 S.W. 405 (1910); Caperton v. Commonwealth, 189 Ky. 652, 655,
225 S.W. 481, 481 (1920)
"The United States Supreme Court, and every other court in the past
deciding upon the matter, has recognized that "at common Law", a
person had the right to "resist the illegal attempt to arrest him."
John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529, 534-35 (1899)
“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting
officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This
premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the
case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the
officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally
accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with
very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right
to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What
may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter
in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been
committed.”
--
“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without
affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction,
and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the
arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will
be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111.
491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v.
Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau,
241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.
--
“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right
to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by
force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense,
his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80;
Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.
--
“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an
arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by
the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private
individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State,
26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State,
43 Tex. 93, 903.
--
“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to
be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in
defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and
battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
--
“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case,
the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer
and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v.
Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
--
“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as
he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus
it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an
officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without
resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).
--
“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In
his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which
the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various
branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be
no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the
Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded,
‘If there be any remedy at all ... it is a remedy never provided for by
human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in
extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous
injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford
University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the
case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.
As for grounds for arrest: “The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable,
and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of
the peace. Nor does such an act of itself, lead to a breach of the
peace.” (Wharton’s Criminal and Civil Procedure, 12th Ed., Vol.2: Judy
v. Lashley, 5 W. Va. 628, 41 S.E. 197)
--
Added Reference material:
Freedom is natural. It is our birthright; in fact, it is who we truly are.
We are free right now and we can demonstrate our freedom from this point on, simply by controlling our contracting; always staying in honor.
Sovereigns make use of questions and negative averments, rather than positive statements that may then need to be proved. Sovereigns turn every argument that we may be inclined to make into a conditional acceptance.
In this way, we control our property, starting with our bodies and our minds, which is what freedom & sovereignty is all about. http://freedompool.org/
The Natural & Common Law Right of Self Defense
"Common as the event may be, it is a serious thing to arrest a
citizen, and it is a more serious thing to search his person; and
he who accomplishes it, must do so in conformity to the law of the
land. There are two reasons for this; one to avoid bloodshed, and
the other to preserve the liberty of the citizen. Obedience to the
law is the bond of society, and the officers set to enforce the
law are not exempt from its mandates." Town of Blacksburg v. Bean
104 S.C. 146. 88 S.E. 441 (1916): Allen v. State, 197 N.W. 808, 810-11
(Wis 1924)
"Where officers do not conform to the 'law of the land' they have
no authority and the right to resist them exists. A Public Officer,
as with a citizen, who unlawfully threatens life or liberty, is
susceptible to be injured or killed; for by such acts 'they draw
their own blood upon themselves' As stated in some cases, 'where
a peace officer has no right to make an arrest without warrant he
is a trespasser and acts at his own peril." 6A CJS., "Arrest"
Section 16 page 30; A sheriff who "acts without process," or
"under a process void on its face, in doing such act, he is not to
be considered an officer but a personal trespasser." Roberts v. Dean,
187 So. 571, 575 (Fla. 1939)
"A person has a lawful right to resist an arrest by an unlawful
authority, i.e., an officer without a valid warrant." Franklin,118 Ga. 860, 45 S.E. 698 (1903)
"What of the resistance to the arrest? The authorities are in
agreement that since the right of personal property is one of the
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, any unlawful
interference with it may be resisted and every person has a right
to resist an unlawful arrest. * * * and, in preventing such illegal
restraint of his liberty, he may use such force as may be necessary."
City of Columbus v. Holmes, 152 N.W. 2d, 301, 306 (Ohio App. 1058)
"It is the law of self defense and self preservation that is
applicable. "One has and "unalienable" right to protect his life,
liberty or property from unlawful attack or harm." "* * * it is not
an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an officer,
even though he may have submitted to such custody without resistance."
Adarns v. State, 121 Ga 163, 48 S.E. 910 (1904)
"An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted
to be restrained of his liberty has the same right, and only the same
right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any
other assault and battery." State v. Robinson, 145 Me. 77, 72 Atl, 2nd.260, 262 (1950)
"A citizen illegally arrested "cannot initiate the use of force" and
neither do "words alone justify an assault." However, "when the officer
initiates the assault by physical contact, which is usually the case,
and there is an unlawful arrest, the citizen has the right to protect
his liberty to the extent of killing the officer." See Green v.
Kennedy, 48 N.Y. Rep. 653, 654 (1871) and/or Hicks v. Matthews, 266
S.W. 2nd. 846, 849 (Tex. 1954)
"What rights then has a citizen in resisting an unlawful arrest? An
arrest without warrant is a trespass, an unlawful assault upon the
person, and how far one thus unlawfully assaulted may go in resistance
is to be determined as in other cases of assault. Life and liberty are
regarded as standing substantially on one foundation; life being
useless without liberty, and the authorities are uninformed that where
one is about to be unlawfully deprived of his liberty he may resist
the aggressions of the officer, to the extent of taking the life of
the assailant, if that be necessity to preserve his own life, or
prevent infliction upon him of some great bodily harm." State v. Gum,
68 W. Va. 105, 69 S.E. 463, 464 (1910)
"It is the law that a person illegally arrested by an officer may
resist that arrest, even to the extent of the taking of life if his
own life or any great bodily harm is threatened. State v. Rousseau,
40 Wash. 2nd, 92, 241 P. 2nd. 447, 449 (1952); Porter v. State, 124
Ga. 297, 52 S.E. 283, 287 (1905); see also State v. Mobley, 240 N.C.
476, 83 S.E. 2nd 100, 102 (1954); Wilkinson v. State, 143 Miss. 324,
108 So. 711, 712-13 (1926); American Jurisprudence, 2nd Ed., "Arrest",
Section 94, pp. 778-780; Thomas v. State, 91 Ga. 204, 18 S.E. 305
(1892); Presley v. State, 75 Fla. 434, 78 So. 532, 534 (1918);
Burkhard v. State, 83 Tex. Crim. 228, 202 S.W. 513; Mullins v. State,
196 Ga. 569, 27 S.E. 2nd. 91 (1943); Ownes v. State, 58 Tex. Crim.
261, 125 S.W. 405 (1910); Caperton v. Commonwealth, 189 Ky. 652, 655,
225 S.W. 481, 481 (1920)
"The United States Supreme Court, and every other court in the past
deciding upon the matter, has recognized that "at common Law", a
person had the right to "resist the illegal attempt to arrest him."
John Bad Elk v. United States, 177 U.S. 529, 534-35 (1899)
“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting
officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This
premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the
case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the
officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally
accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with
very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right
to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What
may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter
in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been
committed.”
--
“An arrest made with a defective warrant, or one issued without
affidavit, or one that fails to allege a crime is within jurisdiction,
and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away. lf the
arresting officer is killed by one who is so resisting, the killing will
be no more than an involuntary manslaughter.” Housh v. People, 75 111.
491; reaffirmed and quoted in State v. Leach, 7 Conn. 452; State v.
Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State, 43 Ohio 349; State v Rousseau,
241 P. 2d 447; State v. Spaulding, 34 Minn. 3621.
--
“When a person, being without fault, is in a place where he has a right
to be, is violently assaulted, he may, without retreating, repel by
force, and if, in the reasonable exercise of his right of self defense,
his assailant is killed, he is justified.” Runyan v. State, 57 Ind. 80;
Miller v. State, 74 Ind. 1.
--
“These principles apply as well to an officer attempting to make an
arrest, who abuses his authority and transcends the bounds thereof by
the use of unnecessary force and violence, as they do to a private
individual who unlawfully uses such force and violence.” Jones v. State,
26 Tex. App. I; Beaverts v. State, 4 Tex. App. 1 75; Skidmore v. State,
43 Tex. 93, 903.
--
“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to
be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in
defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and
battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).
--
“Each person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest. In such a case,
the person attempting the arrest stands in the position of a wrongdoer
and may be resisted by the use of force, as in self- defense.” (State v.
Mobley, 240 N.C. 476, 83 S.E. 2d 100).
--
“One may come to the aid of another being unlawfully arrested, just as
he may where one is being assaulted, molested, raped or kidnapped. Thus
it is not an offense to liberate one from the unlawful custody of an
officer, even though he may have submitted to such custody, without
resistance.” (Adams v. State, 121 Ga. 16, 48 S.E. 910).
--
“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In
his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which
the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various
branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be
no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the
Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded,
‘If there be any remedy at all ... it is a remedy never provided for by
human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in
extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous
injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford
University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the
case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.
As for grounds for arrest: “The carrying of arms in a quiet, peaceable,
and orderly manner, concealed on or about the person, is not a breach of
the peace. Nor does such an act of itself, lead to a breach of the
peace.” (Wharton’s Criminal and Civil Procedure, 12th Ed., Vol.2: Judy
v. Lashley, 5 W. Va. 628, 41 S.E. 197)
--
Added Reference material:
The Truth About Your Birth Certificate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeuOEPETUX0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeuOEPETUX0
Phone Call to IRS: how to pay bills with just my signature
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02sJAePKuT8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02sJAePKuT8
Deryl Zeleny Exposes the MASSIVE Corruption of Governments & Banks
Next, a 27 year veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces explains massive corruption of Governments and the Banking industry not only in Canada, but across the globe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JohPhG9oXlY
Next, a 27 year veteran of the Canadian Armed Forces explains massive corruption of Governments and the Banking industry not only in Canada, but across the globe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JohPhG9oXlY
Following is a recent report as of May 9th, 2013.
Retired Captain Deryl Zeleny was unlawfully held in custody for four days as Canadian foreclosure machine unsuccessfully attempted to silence him.
http://kauilapele.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/deryl-zeleny-one-man-campaign-update-of-5-7-13-interview-with-chri9s-hale-mp3s/
In this new interview with Captain Deryl Zeleny, Royal Canadian Air Force (retired), we cover the latest series of events in Deryl’s campaign to reveal to the world the corrupt nature of the Canadian banking/court/police/ mortgage-foreclosure machine. This interview first summarizes Deryl’s story to date and picks up the story from when a removals team, including a representative from a company purported to be the manager of properties, foreclosed on by the Bank of Canada.
Deryl had returned to his property to protect it and his possessions, as he had discovered that deliberate theft of heavy equipment by agents acting for the bank as is his right in Canada had occurred. When he asked the property managers to leave on the basis they were trespassing on his property for unlawful purposes, the police were called and arrested Deryl.
That began a 3 night, four day battle of nerves as the Crown Solicitors tried to impose unlawful sanctions to stifle Deryl’s ability to communicate this incident to his wide audience which includes the military. The initial charge of trespass which should have resulted in a ticket and a brief visit to the police station, magically became a criminal charge of forcible entry at the request of the Bank of Canada.
In order to be bailed out the Crown stipulated that a surety (guarantor) had agree to supervise Deryl and that he not be allowed to publish, use the internet, telephone or communicate with his “followers”. (You mean the one people?) He spent three nights in three different facilities as they feared “crowds” might gather. Deryl rejected all attempts to gag his communications as part of the bail terms and when his surety pointed out to the last solicitor that they were attempting to politically censor Deryl, the Crown capitulated and removed the communications bans. He was released from Quinte Detention Centre, Ontario on Friday 3rd May 2013. The details are in the interview.
http://kauilapele.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/deryl-zeleny-one-man-campaign-update-of-5-7-13-interview-with-chri9s-hale-mp3s/
Retired Captain Deryl Zeleny was unlawfully held in custody for four days as Canadian foreclosure machine unsuccessfully attempted to silence him.
http://kauilapele.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/deryl-zeleny-one-man-campaign-update-of-5-7-13-interview-with-chri9s-hale-mp3s/
In this new interview with Captain Deryl Zeleny, Royal Canadian Air Force (retired), we cover the latest series of events in Deryl’s campaign to reveal to the world the corrupt nature of the Canadian banking/court/police/ mortgage-foreclosure machine. This interview first summarizes Deryl’s story to date and picks up the story from when a removals team, including a representative from a company purported to be the manager of properties, foreclosed on by the Bank of Canada.
Deryl had returned to his property to protect it and his possessions, as he had discovered that deliberate theft of heavy equipment by agents acting for the bank as is his right in Canada had occurred. When he asked the property managers to leave on the basis they were trespassing on his property for unlawful purposes, the police were called and arrested Deryl.
That began a 3 night, four day battle of nerves as the Crown Solicitors tried to impose unlawful sanctions to stifle Deryl’s ability to communicate this incident to his wide audience which includes the military. The initial charge of trespass which should have resulted in a ticket and a brief visit to the police station, magically became a criminal charge of forcible entry at the request of the Bank of Canada.
In order to be bailed out the Crown stipulated that a surety (guarantor) had agree to supervise Deryl and that he not be allowed to publish, use the internet, telephone or communicate with his “followers”. (You mean the one people?) He spent three nights in three different facilities as they feared “crowds” might gather. Deryl rejected all attempts to gag his communications as part of the bail terms and when his surety pointed out to the last solicitor that they were attempting to politically censor Deryl, the Crown capitulated and removed the communications bans. He was released from Quinte Detention Centre, Ontario on Friday 3rd May 2013. The details are in the interview.
http://kauilapele.wordpress.com/2013/05/09/deryl-zeleny-one-man-campaign-update-of-5-7-13-interview-with-chri9s-hale-mp3s/
MEMORANDUM OF LAW: THE MONEY ISSUE
http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/MONEYbrief.html
http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/MONEYbrief.html
Appear without entering a plea on a citation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMLyE6CWN8k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMLyE6CWN8k
Frequently Unanswered Questions of the "Australian Government" - Documentary
This documentary gives clear evidence and explanation that the "Australian Government" is nothing but a 'corporation' registered in Washington, DC. That 'legal entity' or corporation has no jurisdiction over the "Commonwealth of Australia".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=umVj5XQYAi8
There is nothing federal about the Federal Reserve.
It is a privately-owned institution, for profit by member bankers. It is not likely there are any gold 'reserves' in the Federal Reserve.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKmqAX0Fqw0
It is a privately-owned institution, for profit by member bankers. It is not likely there are any gold 'reserves' in the Federal Reserve.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKmqAX0Fqw0
References:
The relationship of International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and Bank for International Settlements
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_globalbanking02.htm
American Laws Most Americans Should Know
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/esp_sociopol_nwo71.htm
