
01-07-2008, 07:40 AM
|
 |
Come and Get Some!
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: judicial district of tens: milwaukee: the county: commonwealth of Yisra'el
Posts: 2,615
|
|
The judicial districts, like the post office, existed long before the constitutional republic and are found all over the world. The federal government can not just abolish them no more than they can abolish the post office. They can only convince the people to use the commercial side so the government can dictate. The post office and the judicial districts are found in the Bible.
Although many offices are filled by de facto officers they can not just abolish the constitution short of a total revolution or a new constitution that is lawfully ratified. Even then government can not lawfully abolish rights, they can only trick their people into waiving them or use force.
You might as well remove that stuff about the Magna Carta because you obviously do not know why it trumps the Concession of England and Ireland to the Pope.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Districts are all the same in character. Now I remember that your assertions are about sovereign immunity. And that was abolished by Governors' Convention in 1933.
My assertion in debate of that was that the Congress has legislation, adopted by the States by which any NOFTL can be removed if one knows what they are doing.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uniform/vol7.html#fedln
The personal tax liens must be published through the Secretary of State.
Even a child can tell you that districts are districts. If you think there are sovereign districts, then you will find no perfection of any remedy in that misconception.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
__________________
United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in Alabama or any of the new states which were formed ... The United States has no Constitutional capacity to exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty or eminent domain, within the limits of a state or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted ...
[Pollard v. Hagan, 44 U.S. 212 (1845)]
|

01-07-2008, 10:48 AM
|
 |
Come and Get Some!
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Colorado.
Posts: 6,318
|
|
Quote:
|
No. I don't like to argue. It is a pain in the butt having to deal with people who are stubborn in their ignorance.
|
Forgive me Rottweiler; I was only saying that because you do not make much sense to me.
Here is an example of my point about districts being districts wherever and the state districts being daughter fictions of the District of Columbia. From the Bill of Rights of the Colorado constitution:
Quote:
|
Section 23. Trial by jury - grand jury. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate in criminal cases; but a jury in civil cases in all courts, or in criminal cases in courts not of record, may consist of less than twelve persons, as may be prescribed by law. Hereafter a grand jury shall consist of twelve persons, any nine of whom concurring may find an indictment; provided, the general assembly may change, regulate or abolish the grand jury system; and provided, further, the right of any person to serve on any jury shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex, and the general assembly may provide by law for the exemption from jury service of persons or classes of persons.
|
and from the federal constitution:
Quote:
|
Rights of accused. In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor; and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
|
It is city of Washington, District of Columbia. - The municipal realm of magistrates pretending to be judges.
This is better posted in the Article III courts without Authority thread.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|

01-07-2008, 06:23 PM
|
 |
Come and Get Some!
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: judicial district of tens: milwaukee: the county: commonwealth of Yisra'el
Posts: 2,615
|
|
David have you ever had to file that generic counter claim? If so has a judge ever signed a judgement for you or do you just file it in a miscellanous case jacket after default?
The daughter fictions of the District of Columbia that operate in the state's are set up for their 14th amendment citizens. You don't want to "live" in the admiralty jurisdiction federal zone. Those are federal judicial districts. There are no rights to be found there.
You want to live in the county, the common law judicial districts.
What happened was the first link in the chain of command, the county court, was removed so the people would have difficulty accessing the judicial districts. The common law magistrates and justices of the peace were renamed county supervisors/alderman/commissioners. That is where you do common law abatements of foreign instruments and were you want to file your dejure record so if a cop wants to know who you are you can just give him your local justice of the peace's phone number and he can go examine the copies of titles, photos, birth record, crap fictions send you, etc., if need be.
If you are having success with your R4C process you may be satisfied with that. If not, what I described will give you a chance to go up the chain of command with all the proof you need to make a claim for relief.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
Forgive me Rottweiler; I was only saying that because you do not make much sense to me.
Here is an example of my point about districts being districts wherever and the state districts being daughter fictions of the District of Columbia. From the Bill of Rights of the Colorado constitution:
Quote:
Section 23. Trial by jury - grand jury. The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate in criminal cases; but a jury in civil cases in all courts, or in criminal cases in courts not of record, may consist of less than twelve persons, as may be prescribed by law. Hereafter a grand jury shall consist of twelve persons, any nine of whom concurring may find an indictment; provided, the general assembly may change, regulate or abolish the grand jury system; and provided, further, the right of any person to serve on any jury shall not be denied or abridged on account of sex, and the general assembly may provide by law for the exemption from jury service of persons or classes of persons.
and from the federal constitution:
It is city of Washington, District of Columbia. - The municipal realm of magistrates pretending to be judges.
This is better posted in the Article III courts without Authority thread.
Regards,
David Merrill.
|
__________________
United States never held any municipal sovereignty, jurisdiction, or right of soil in Alabama or any of the new states which were formed ... The United States has no Constitutional capacity to exercise municipal jurisdiction, sovereignty or eminent domain, within the limits of a state or elsewhere, except in the cases in which it is expressly granted ...
[Pollard v. Hagan, 44 U.S. 212 (1845)]
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:27 PM.
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.1 Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
|
|