Court Almighty ?

[Ice]

All of us understand that we have natural rights endowed upon us by our Creator. The Common Law is derived from those natural rights.

My comment on the case cited below is evident in the title of this thread. This Court believes itself to be "Almighty". With this decision it has placed itself above that of the Creator by declaring that it can "undo" what the Creator has done, that it can take from you what the Creator has bestowed upon you at the moment of your creation.

What do you think ?

Case cite:

State v Ramsdell, 109 RI 320, 285 A2d 399, holding that the common law right to resist an unlawful arrest was abolished by enactment of a statute which makes it unlawful to forcebly resist an illegal arrest if the arrestee has reasonable grounds to believe that he is being arrested by a peace officer. ( Emphasis mine - see italics ).

Ice

[Ice]

Note that the above states resist an "unlawful" arrest.

If ya check out AmJur you will find many cases that cite your right to resist an "unlawful" arrest with as much force as is necessary.

Ice

[scottinalaska]

now wait a second, Ice. If indeed I deem it an UNlawful arrest, is that giving the me the judicial power to decide the legality of the whole incarcerating situation? Afterall, short of violence, they do need my consent.

Seems pretty empowering, but as the rest of the passage says, the "court almighty" abolished that decision making power of the person about to get trounced.
Hmmm, the government is established by the people,
the govt establishes the court,
the court establishes itself over the people.
And we say, "I am sorry, where do I pay my fine, oh benevolent lord?"
Oh, and I am striking out on your reference Am Jur. Help?
scottinalaska
good to see you again, Ice.

[Ice]

scottinalaska,

Check the topic "Arrest" in AmJur for those case cites.

And it's good to have a bit more "online" time . . . still haven't got our system online but we're getting there.

Ice

ok, but remember where we are headed Ice. arrest is a commercial term, which statutes regulate. Kidnapping is the COMMON LAW violation that you can resist. they are using trickery with their words in that case cite. statute= pocket judgment against you, so, going back to England, they can arrest their property at any point.

[Ice]

kgod,

No sir. I'm not speaking of "kidnapping". I'm speaking of "Arrest". I'll add some of the case cites I have found.

Also, if any of the members think that the ALL CAP name on a summons or warrant is not valid -- think again. As long as the name is phonetically correct it is valid. Any summons or warrant can be corrected for spelling errors at a later date. They will not play the "name-game" here.

Ice

which is exactly why i use the power of attorney to distinguish between the strawman and the real man. again, im sticking to the commercial nature of the court even though i know what you are talking about. peeace