Is Federal Court Recorded?

[ntellect]

Hey everyone I need some info ASAP! I've been reading through the Civil Procedures of Federal Court and can't find anything about the court being recorded or not. Actually, I have a Federal "Hearing" Motion to Release Stay Hearing of my Ch 13 Bankruptcy case. I can't find any info stating whether or not a Federal Hearing is recorded.

If it isn't, is there any Motions that I can file and have the Hearing reset to be recorded? My Hearing is tomorrow, Thursday, February 10th at 1:30pm.

I'm appearing before the judge by "special appearance" as the secured-party creditor for "settlement and closure" only, based upon the docs I've already submitted to the trustee. I will not be arguing nor will I be testifying to anything, therefor I will not be swearing in but I need to know this will be recorded.

thanks
Ntell

[weishaupt1776]

I remember I was at my friends Tax Court case in the 11th district and I was recording with this inefficient, obvious system.

The IRS attorney approached the bench & the Special trial Judge told me to stop because it was "inappropriate". He didn't say it was prohibited, though. You need to give written notice before you do it. If not, you mos def need a third party witness in there recording & the both of ou transcribe it, put it in affidavit form w/default clause and send it in.

Be forewarned that before you step a foot into those courts that they are admiralty /maritime/ military law. I have uploaded a pdf called SPECIAL MARITIME EXPOSED and below is a quote from page 16:

The prosecuting attorney is representing a corporation, a fictitious plaintiff, and bringing a maritime claim on the presumption that a maritime contract exists between the STATE OF TEXAS and the defendant, or more correctly, the ignorant victim.

The ignorant victim does not know that this presumption even exists, does not know that the cause of action cannot be in the common law because a crime in law requires a corpus delecti, that is to say, thebody of the crime or an injured party, and a corporation cannot be the body of the crime or an injured partybecause it is artificial, a fiction. Trust the author on this, there is plenty of well-settled authority, but it will
not be cited here in the interests of brevity while covering the essentials.

Because of constant governmentindoctrination and the lasting effects of cognitive dissidence, the fact that the cause is of a maritime nature
is beyond the poor victim’s comprehension.

The ocean is a long way from Kansas, Dorothy!

So how could the accused victim of an alleged offense committed on the land end up in a maritime court and be bound to a presumed maritime contract?

The attorneys for the plaintiff are prosecuting the suit in maritime jurisdiction without evidence entered into the record of the contract binding the Petitioner to the maritime law. Without such contract the
trial court is wholly in want of subject matter jurisdiction and venue jurisdiction. The doctrine of “unclean hands” applies to the attorneys for the plaintiff.

p. 24: The subject matter is merely the facts of the case. Facts must be properly admitted into evidence according to the rules of court. If there are no facts in evidence, there is no subject matter. If there is no subject matter, there is no subject matter jurisdiction and the only action the court can take is to dismiss the claim.

p. 26: It is never too late to challenge subject matter jurisdiction. It ain’t
over until the defendant gives up. The courts have held and the rules reveal that:

Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived by parties, conferred by consent, or ignored by court. Bab**** & Wilson v. Parsons Corp., 430 F.2d 531 (1970).Subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived and courts may raise the issue sua sponte” FRCP, Rule 12(h).

Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is a defense that is never waived.” FRCP, Rule12(h)3.Subject matter jurisdiction can never be waived and can be raised at any time, even after trial. Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsu****a Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd., 494 F.Supp. 1161 (D.C.
Pa., 1980).

Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is not waivable and can even be raised on appeal after judgment on the merits. Monaco v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd., 514 F.Supp. 357 (D.C., Pa., 1981) Judgment of court lacking jurisdiction is void” Burnham v. Superior Court of California, County of Marin, 110 S.Ct. 2105 (1990).

I read somewhere that we are not fish and we do not live in the ocean, and this abortion of law that has come inland is what is screwing us all, big time. No wonder every loses all of the time in court, we do not know what game they have been playing.

Martha

[ntellect]

Well, I don't know where to start, so I'll sum it up as best as I can. I went to my Motion to Release Stay hearing for my ch 13 Bankruptcy case and I lost. I went in trying to remain in "Honor" knowing that the court would not be in "Honor." This was my first time in front of a Federal Judge since being schooled in the redemption process and I was as nervous as Michael Jackson at an all boy elementary school sleep over and was stumbling over my words. I did not do a good job. Also, I found out the hearing was recorded.

Upon my name being called as part of the row, I alerted the clerk that "I'm here on that matter" and she says "are you John Doe the debter", in which I replied "I'm the secured-party creditor, John Doe, spelled with upper and lower case letters here by special appearance for settlemen and closure of this matter." She asked if I was the debtor again and I replied the same way, in which she said "I'll take that as he is here and ready, for now."

After clearing the courtroom of other cases, I was left with only two other cases in the court. The clerk comes in, calls row, again, same response and at this point the lawyer for the mortgage company stats "I believe that is Mr. John Doe the debtor", in which I replied with my same statement. Well, the clerk says I'll be back and leaves the courtroom for at least 20-25 minutes. In the mean time, the lawyers get on the court room computers looking at my case and whispering amongst themselves. I heard somethings like "when did he file this" and they even commented and chukled to each other that my docs talk about "something about real money."

After all this the attorney comes over to me and asks if we can step outside the court and talk. I informed him "I'm only hear for settlement and closure on this matter and I did not know who he was and would not talk with him directly." A Few minutes went by and he came back and said, "I really would like to speak with you." So I went outside the court just to listen and he asked me "so what are you going to do with the property." I was a little puzzled by the question and just replied "I'm here to settle and close this matter" and walked back into the court.

The clerk finally comes back in and the judge comes in and of course I didn't stand like the other two slaves. She calls my case "Is John Doe the Debtor here in the courtroom today for case#XYZ." I didn't stand or acknowledge her. She possed the question again, I didn't stand then she proceeds to say "well if the debtor is not here I guess I'll just move to an order to release the stay" I then stood up and said "I'm the secured-party creditor, John Doe, spelled with upper and lower case letters here by special appearance for settlemen and closure of this matter." So we went through the cat and mouse game of who are you the debtor vs secured-party creditor a couple times before she finally says "Mr.John Doe, whomever you claim you are, I can't hear you from the back of the courtroom and I can't speak to you unless you come through the gate and approach the bench." (All this is being recorded by the transcriber, I actually saw him typing)

So I moved from the back of the courtroom to the entrance of the gate and did not enter instead I said "for the record, your Honor will my natural rights as a flesh and blood man be protected before entering the bar and approaching the bench." Well, this stunned her for a quick second, she came back with "I don't know what you are talking about and you need to approach the bench." I knew better so I restated the question, in which she then replied "I don't know what you are talking about, what Natural rights, you have rights as a US citizen can you explain what rights you are talking about" I replied "your honor I'm not hear to testify or explain anything, I'm only here for settlement and closure of this matter based upon the documents I have already submitted to the trustee." So now the judge goes into this whole spill about and I'm now paraphrasing, I don't know who put you up to this, I feel really bad for you, many people get tricked with this UCC stuff and it's a fantasy, not real, a dream but it doesn't work and your docs having a cute little stamp on them doesn't make or interprete law, I interprete and apply the law in this court under title 11, yada, yada, yada.

So I step in, still outside the bar and say, "for the record, I stand on the docs that I have submitted to the trustee for settlement and closure and I don't understand and I'm confused to why I'm here in this proceeding." She says " it doesn't matter if you're confused didn't you sign the debtor bankruptcy petition?", I paused for a second or two and said "the secured-party creditor signed the petition" [I believe this was the straw the broke my back] She then says "are you telling me the Debtor and your signature as the secured-party creditor are the same people" [I know it's not but I thought if I got into an argument with her, I was sunk] (paraphrasing) So she says your signature says you are the debtor and now you are claiming to be the secured-party creditor that's not going to work. She called the lawyer back up and gave them the order to lift the stay after asking why it has taken a year to get me out the house since being foreclosed back in 2/04. The lawyer basically lied and said he didn't really know and got the order. I believe the problem is that I didn't sign my petition as "agent" or "authorized representative."

Here's the other kicker. I was visibly shook up and I went out the court, got a drink of water, went to the restroom and splashed some water of my face and went to get on the elevator. The attorney for the mortgage company is now at the elevator and once again asked me "Mr.John Doe what are you going to do with the property." Once again I'm kind of taken back with the question but instead of getting into a dialogue with him I replied "I still don't know you and my mother told me not to speak to strangers." I got on the elevator and left the court.

Question is, if they now have an order to lift the stay, which means they will file for a writ of possession and evict me. Why would the attorney ask "what are you going to do with the property." I've been thinking and I'm wondering if me filing my property on my UCC1 has tied up the house and they may be able to get an order to put me out but might not be able to sell it.

Sorry for the length of this, I just needed to let everyone know what happened. As of this morning, strangely enough the order has not been filed as of yet. I called the bankruptcy court to confirm this.

I'm not giving up hope yet! I'm wondering if I can file an Appeal and use a Subpoena of Advarsary Proceeding?????

Ntellect

[Livefire]

Im wondering if you actually lost???? The attorney approached you twice, possibly an effort to get you to recontract. The judge may have lifted they stay...but does that mean your petition is denied and let the feeding frenzy begin, OR, is the matter settled and closed per your paperwork?? I'd get my hands on anything that was filed with the clerk yesterday!!!

[KITCHIE]

Free_Martha

I cannot find the Special Maritime Exposed file you uploaded. Could you plez help me out with that?

THanks
Kitchie

[ntellect]

Hey you can read my previous post under "I Lost" about my apparent loss at my Motion to Lift Stay Hearing last Thursday.

I really believe something very interesting is going on. Like I stated in my previous post, the attorney for the mortgage company on two seperate occasions asked me "what are you going to do with the house?" Once during prelims before the hearing and once after the judge "supposedly" granted them judgement by "announcing" to the "public", she would lift the stay.

Now remember, I never entered the bar giving them jurisdiction over me or contracting myself with them because the judge when I asked her did not answer the question of my natural rights as a flesh and blood man being protected. The judge asked me verbatim "are you still going to stand on your docs that you submitted?", I said yes and I made it very clear that I was the secured-party creditor there by special appearance only. All of this was done and said "outside" of the bar.

As to date, no order and for that matter, no other paper work has been entered or filed in my Ch 13 Bankruptcy Case. I've called the clerk of the bankruptcy court everyday since last Thursday. This is very strange to me????

Now, the same day of my Hearing, I received a letter from the trustee about making changes to my ch 13 plan so that it will be accepted at my Confirmation Hearing on Feb 24th. Not once did he mention my docs that he has in his position by way of certified mail for settlement and closure. I have already stamped the letter "accepted for value upon proof of claim" that this matter is not already settled and closed based upon documents already received by the trustee.

I do not plan on attending another attempted lynching in their little playground. I'm wondering is there anything else I can do to attack them instead of just waiting for them to find some loop hole, make one or get me to come in to the Confirmation Hearing and make a mistake.

Peace and Blessings
Ntellect

[iamfreeru2]

Ntellect,

I agree with Livefire. You may have NOT lost anything, athough it seems that way. You will just have to wait and see. Remember that they have to make the order to remove the stay in the public and then after the dog and pony show is over they settle and close based on your exemption in the private. After hearing what you did and thinking more on it you may be just fine. I may be wrong and you will probably find out shortly. You are still on the property and according to the clerk of court no order has been issued. Keep us all informed.

[iamfreeru2]

Ntellect,

Seems you are a celebrity of sorts at Quatloos. Those guys over there are quite funny. I enjoy laughing at there posts.

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by free_martha

Be forewarned that before you step a foot into those courts that they are admiralty /maritime/ military law. I have uploaded a pdf called SPECIAL MARITIME EXPOSED and below is a quote from page 16:

The prosecuting attorney is representing a corporation, a fictitious plaintiff, and bringing a maritime claim on the presumption that a maritime contract exists between the STATE OF TEXAS and the defendant, or more correctly, the ignorant victim.

The ignorant victim does not know that this presumption even exists, does not know that the cause of action cannot be in the common law because a crime in law requires a corpus delecti, that is to say, thebody of the crime or an injured party, and a corporation cannot be the body of the crime or an injured partybecause it is artificial, a fiction. Trust the author on this, there is plenty of well-settled authority, but it will
not be cited here in the interests of brevity while covering the essentials.

Because of constant governmentindoctrination and the lasting effects of cognitive dissidence, the fact that the cause is of a maritime nature
is beyond the poor victim’s comprehension.

The ocean is a long way from Kansas, Dorothy!

So how could the accused victim of an alleged offense committed on the land end up in a maritime court and be bound to a presumed maritime contract?

The attorneys for the plaintiff are prosecuting the suit in maritime jurisdiction without evidence entered into the record of the contract binding the Petitioner to the maritime law. Without such contract the
trial court is wholly in want of subject matter jurisdiction and venue jurisdiction. The doctrine of “unclean hands” applies to the attorneys for the plaintiff.

p. 24: The subject matter is merely the facts of the case. Facts must be properly admitted into evidence according to the rules of court. If there are no facts in evidence, there is no subject matter. If there is no subject matter, there is no subject matter jurisdiction and the only action the court can take is to dismiss the claim.

p. 26: It is never too late to challenge subject matter jurisdiction. It ain’t
over until the defendant gives up. The courts have held and the rules reveal that:

Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived by parties, conferred by consent, or ignored by court. Bab**** & Wilson v. Parsons Corp., 430 F.2d 531 (1970).Subject matter jurisdiction may not be waived and courts may raise the issue sua sponte” FRCP, Rule 12(h).

Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is a defense that is never waived.” FRCP, Rule12(h)3.Subject matter jurisdiction can never be waived and can be raised at any time, even after trial. Zenith Radio Corp. v. Matsu****a Elec. Indus. Co., Ltd., 494 F.Supp. 1161 (D.C.
Pa., 1980).

Lack of subject matter jurisdiction is not waivable and can even be raised on appeal after judgment on the merits. Monaco v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd., 514 F.Supp. 357 (D.C., Pa., 1981) Judgment of court lacking jurisdiction is void” Burnham v. Superior Court of California, County of Marin, 110 S.Ct. 2105 (1990).

I read somewhere that we are not fish and we do not live in the ocean, and this abortion of law that has come inland is what is screwing us all, big time. No wonder every loses all of the time in court, we do not know what game they have been playing.

Martha

This is what Vanton and I have been saying for awhile now as well as others. The UCC is part of it and the UNCITRAL Convention that was signed onto in 1988 as well. It is all about Admiralty/Commercial Law. You are correct in that most do not know the game or the rules. It is called Statutory, but really means Admiralty. Those that think the Constitution is still used in the courts are lost at "C."