CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL Retreats!!!

[mrg]

Originally Posted by freebeme

Please do share record documents of your litigation.

And yours?

[ezrhythm]

On the thread that I linked to he also states;

"...WORKS three times I have been pulled over while traveling and after explaining my Rights to the officer and their liabilities for trespassing on my Rights, they always took off, bailed out so to speak, scrammed out of there, not wanting anything to do with me. the officer never admits anything they JUST GO AWAY. at least so far anyway!!!"

And he has said in another post, "No plates or registration..."


The traveling vs. driving issue isn't what leads to his citationless outcomes. It is the lack of probable cause and jurisdiction he secures by;
Not having his automobile attached to the State in a trust. (plates/registration)
Asserting to the officer how and what rights of his the officer is violating.

In this case the citizen has the authoritive right to order the officer to stand down/allow one self to move on.

Servants answer questions/follow orders.
Sovereigns ask questions/give orders.

[David Merrill]

I remember Richard's close friend David Conrad moved out here after they had a falling out over the Taco Bell case*. David and I did a lot of research and he shared a lot of the research he and Richard had done together in California.

Richard's research is good and it was very interesting what happened between David Conrad and myself. This has to do with transposing a de jure state jurisdiction and citizenship (pre-1861) to a de facto state like Colorado (1876).

We were both lecturing and attending Tuesday night Law Club meetings and going through the old Congressional Records and David, I will call him Sri (he had administratively changed his name to Sri David C. ROBERTS) wanted me to find some material about the origins of the Territory of Colorado for preparing this Approbation of the Declaration of Independence.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...probation1.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...probation2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...probation3.jpg

That was when I discovered the nature of the Territory of Colorado was a war chest based on gold ('59ers) finds in Auraria and Central City. Buchannan had been setting up the Territory for ratification and Lincoln was carried by the Freemasons to the White House only to prosecute the Civil War one day before the ratification of the Territory of Colorado could cure in law (30 days).

I touch upon this a little in my video because it was Governor Gilpin who initiated the fiat currency of the Emergency of 1861. Pay attention around the 5:00 minute mark.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...06869308133588

I imagine Richard MacDonald is a Mason and Sri boasted that he was "Second Chair" in the California Jurisdiction when he lived out there. The Freemasons carrying Lincoln to the White House is reflected in a letter about carrying a walking cane to inauguration - a symbol of the Masons as lobbying the Civil War (attached). [The legendary Albert Pike for the South in orchestrated opposition was high in Scottish Rite Masonry and wrote Morals and Dogma.] And as a result, the territorial aspects about titles of nobility have been largely lost to historical cover-up. That is to say, note that the Territory of Colorado had the de jure Thirteenth Amendment in the federal constitution decades after it allegedly failed ratification according to the Constitution of the US.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...l_6744_969.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...l_6744_970.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...l_6744_971.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...l_6744_972.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...l_6744_973.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...l_6744_974.jpg

Page 973.

Ergo a man in Colorado may access competent common law but not on the merits of state citizenship like taught by Richard MacDonald. When I uncovered this in the Congressional Record Sri became very upset with me, especially when I lectured about it; saying that one had to take Richard's work in context of a state ratified prior to March 28, 1861. This dashed Sri's hopes after already buying and building here, that he could apply state citizenship in Colorado like California as he had been researching it with Richard. (I hear he patched things up with Richard and has since moved back to California.)

Subsequently a fellow researcher with Richard - William Thornton lectured in Colorado and I pointed out the same matter of context. He agreed in the cafeteria and addressed it a little in his lectures about courts of record.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...m_Thornton.wmv

The lesson being, that state citizenship is a tough row to hoe anywhere when you consider you defeat the cash cow of traffic infractions - a major cash cow anywhere. In Texas and California it is possible to access a foundation in law for such claims. In states like Colorado Refusal for Cause in the cognizance of the US through an evidence repository is much more stable.


Regards,

David Merrill.


* Administrative letters resulting in a high school kid being paid all summer because he got fired the first day on the job for no SSN.

[Soldier of Truth]

Originally Posted by freebeme

Oh, they were not in uniform either. They were creeps.

If I were you I'd quit while I'm ahead. You just expose yourself more and more every time you rant. Saying that the rules of grammar doesn't support the use of ALL CAPS for proper names does not instantly turn into a "strawman" argument.

(1) Because "this forum" is not a court, not a legal brief, nor a discussion on putting a brief together. It is a conversational topic of the English language and what's recognized as proper when "using" the English language, and what's taught in every public school in the union, style manuals, (including the your US government style manual); and

(2) You can't point to the other components of the strawman theory ANYwhere on ANY of my posts, such as the use of a UCC-1, or whatever else that goes along with it. You can't show ANYwhere on ANY of my posts that I've suggested, or even "hinted" at making that argument. Merely pointed out that the term "natural persons" (with an "s") is a term inconsistent with the English language.

You also show your ignorance in the FACT that you have made an "admission" to committing what is now a "misdemeanor" in California law...and I quote:

Originally Posted by freebeme

Fourth: Sandman, TMR, Ready to Fight, Myself, and somew new guy on this forum have all won with my motions and post them here, with their full name and what county the sh!t was going down in. You are stupid as all hell and could not find your was out of your a$$ if there a was rose scented beacon.

With "your" motions. Wow. A motion IS recognized as a "legal" document, isn't it? They've all one using "your" "motions." Hmmm...sounds like an admission to practicing law without a licensing. Nice admission. On a "recorded" forum.

( And you call me stupid and a loser. I think some would beg to differ.)

Now let's compare what I said. People that I've "helped." Doesn't boast anything about "my motions." Just said "helped." Like they do in the law library, when they point you to the information you're looking for to "help" them solve their own "legal" problems .

Me? An "arse?" RFLMAO. Hardly. YOU on the other hand...I'll let others come to their own conclusions after reading your rants.

[Soldier of Truth]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

The lesson being, that state citizenship is a tough row to hoe anywhere when you consider you defeat the cash cow of traffic infractions - a major cash cow anywhere. In Texas and California it is possible to access a foundation in law for such claims. In states like Colorado Refusal for Cause in the cognizance of the US through an evidence repository is much more stable.


Regards,

David Merrill.

I have no knowledge him being a mason, as he's never divulged any of that information with me. He has just been knighted though, and is now Sir Richard. He's a good, upstanding guy. VERY knowledgeable.

Interesting story though.

And as far as the "tough row to hoe," aint that the truth. If you mess with the proverbial cash cow, there is no argument or status anywhere that's going to be successful without EVERYone waking up simultaneously to shut it down. Well, at least enough to force the issue.

I had the courts dead to rights over the past few years, and they were deaf, dumb and blind. My issues were the noncriminality of traffic "infractions" and the limited authority of California peace officers to criminal activity as authorized in PC 830.1(a). I had Legislative Drafts "saying" they were noncriminal, but "procedurally" to be handled as criminal. I got admissions in open court "on record" from two different judges, in two different cases "ADMITTING" traffic infractions were noncriminal. A separate Superior Court Appellate Division case, Court of Appeal in the very same District I was appearing saying it was noncriminal, the California Supreme Court saying it, and they rewrote my questions before the court and then ruled on their representation.

The California Judicial Council, in its 2002 annual report that 68.5% (4.2mil) of all court filings for that period were traffic infractions. If you crunch the numbers of the most modest traffic fine for the total of cases, @ 25.00 and the 4.2 mil. that's a whopping $400+mil. alone. This doesn't account for the insurance cases, license issues, DUI's, blah, blah, blah. The numbers are staggering.

Taking that into consideration it's not hard to comprehend why the cash cow is going to be producing as long as people stay willing to pay than fight, as well as not stand as a group. It's also not hard to comprehend the minor skirmishes we "win" (sic). For every 1 or 2 of us there are MILLIONS that just find it easier to pay and put it behind them.

Such is the nature of the beast.