The two doors between Civil Law and common law

[leatherlips]

This info came from an e-mail from Ralph Kermit Winterrowd 2nd. ralph@jusbelli.com. I thought it interesting inough to put up here for others.

First there is no lawful government of the United States today composed of the several States since the Civil War split off the Southern States under provisional military governments with no states rights and individual rights and forced them under this status to vote on the 14th amendment with what was supposedly the several States of the North that still had state's rights and individual rights. The Constitution of Virginia in the Bill of Rights on my home page clearly gives conclusive evidence of these unlawful acts of treason when the "laws of Congress" became the supreme law of the land in absolute opposition to Article VI where the Constitution and the Laws made pursuant thereof are the Supreme Law of the land. [spelling is important - see Virginia vs Article VI]

Translated, this was Congress by the War Powers, which they couldn't do, but they did it clothed under the extreme hatred for the Southern Confederacy, became the supreme law of the land, which is exactly where we are today - still. Has Virginia or any of the other Southern States been re-admitted on a equal footing with the original States and as on of the United States of America? The simple very conclusive evidence is a resounding NO!

We have two law forums in existence today, the one we think we have in the Constitutional Republic under the common law, and the other being the appearance of a government outside the Power of the three great departments which operates under the Roman Civil Law in the reality of "agencies".

As an example in Alaska, the Legislature passed into Code that it is mandatory to have Insurance, and allowed municipalities to pass additional Ordinances to take you to jail and impound the motor vehicle. [excuse many terms that are incorrect in the Republic such as motor vehicle}.

So if it is true that when I am stopped by the Anchorage Police Department (APD) without insurance, I will go to jail and the motor vehicle will be towed and under no circumstance will I not go to jail - but this is not true - why?

There are two realities that are in existence at a minimum, the one in the Republic in the common law and the one that all of the government lives in, being the Roman Civil Law, also known as the Administrative State outside of the Power of the three great branches of the Constitution.

Now, most of us have heard of the statement that you must exhaust all of your Administrative Remedies first, and then proceed to find out if you have any constitutional violations. Ever wonder what this means? Here is the secret.

There are two doors between the Civil Law and common law. The first door that must be opened to exit ASAP the Civil Law is to establish a "constitutional violation." But this will not necessarily work, if you don't open the next door and drag the Roman Civil Law (Administrative State folks) into your reality, being the Republic of the common law and the Constitution. You must also establish the Constitutional protections (door two).

Example 1
I am pulled over by APD and asked for my DL. I hand it to APD.
Next he will ask for the Registration where under my signature I have volunteered to carry insurance.
Next he will ask for proof of Insurance, and if I say I don't have any, I will emmediately go to jail and have the notor vehicle towed.

Example 2
I am pulled over by APD and asked for my DL.
I immediately ask if I am under arrest. Cop - No.
I immediately ask if I am free to leave. Cop - No.
I have established the Constitutional Violation of SEIZURE, when a reasonable person would believe he could not leave. Many cases on this
Next the 5th Amendment protections of the Right of Assistance of Counsel, the right to not give evidence against myself, and the right to shut up only works if I INVOKE IT. It is not automatic. The Marinda right is for the people that want to stay in the Civil Law Administrative State exhausting their Administrative Remedies., and the Sup. Ct. ruled that eventually we should enlighten the sucker that he has to be given the appearance of a Constitutional Republic.

This is the second Door, and this is my Constitutional Protection, i.e. immunity if you will by me invoking the 5th Amendment right of Assistance of Counsel, the right not to give evidence against myself, and to shut up. This works on any issue in dealing with the Administrative State. Get the Constitutional violation (first) and then provide the Constitutional Remedy (second). In the Courts, it is the Assistance of Counsel and Plea only after Assistance of Counsel. See Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (1938).

The Cop will then ask for a DL, and if I have this item, which a driver is conclusively only for a commercial motor vehicle, I will give it to the Cop under the law of necessity - that is to stay alive. If you withold this, the cops usually become very, very dangerous and under the Use of Force Continuum, this may escalate to deadly force.

Next the Cop will ask for registration, and I respectively decline to answer until my Assistance of Counsel arrives. He should have stopped when I invoked the 5th but they will just keep right on, but he has no evidence from that point on, including the production of the DL.

Next he will ask for proof of insurance, and again, I will respectively decline to answer, as I am waiting for Assistance of Counsel.

I have done this 5 times, and they will only write a citation for no insurance and no registration. Be careful as the cops are starting to understand that this procedure shuts down all prosecution and money collection - no evidence, and you never know what some of the praetorians will do. Keep hands on steering wheel and you should have proof of this by video camera. Aslo a cellular phone and witnesses is usually required on the jack-booted thugs, of which most are today in Alaska when you exercise your constitutionally secured rights.

Now, why the difference in the two results? In the first I stayed in the Administrative State, but in the second instance, I exhausted all of my Administrative Remedies ASAP and opened the two doors and took the Cop along with me, even though he didn't want to come into the Republic.

There is even more going on here, but I will give one other example before moving on to the IRS. Say I am stopped for a DUI under any or no pretense - this is done all of the time.

Example 1
I will be asked for my DL, which I produce.
I will be asked for registration, which I will produce.
I will be asked for Insurance and I will produce my proof of same.
I will be asked if I have been drinking (usually) and I will reply only a beer - varies, and this step is not really important.
I will be asked to step out of the car and I will be given various tests of counting, standing on one foot, moving my eyes, and to take a field breathalyzer test, which can't be used in court, but is an infraction if I don't + the loss of the DL if I refuse.

I will be arrested if I am over 0.8 and sometimes for under also, my car will be towed and I will be taken to the police station. I will be asked to blow in the breathalyzer and also to give a blood sample. After I have done all of this, I will be given the Miranda warning. I have exhasuted all of the Administrative processes, and then they will give me the impression that I have a Constitution.

Example 2
I will be asked for my DL.
I will ask if I am under arrest. Cop - No.
I will ask if I am free to go. Cop - No.
I will then invoke my 5th Amendment right of Assistance of Counsel, the right to not give evidence against myself, and the right to shut up.
I will be arrested and taken to jail.
My car will be towed.
I will be given usually one hour to hve Assistance of Counsel appear. Of course there are none in Alaska. I will then not give any other evidence.
I will make bail.
I will fight the Administrative State with an immediate demand for an administrative hearing within 7 days, and if you are not under previous conviction, you will be given a piece of paper to drive with. The only issue in the Administrative State is whether the Cop has probable cause.

Now, to understand the two realities on the DUI, I will give example from the Annotated Alaska Statutes on the implied consent that yu unknowingly sign up for when you get a DL. They are not mandated to tell you either of your right to have Assistance of Counsel, as they are not bound by any Constitution and they have NO OFFICE.

Note in both that only a STATUTORY RIGHT EXISTS - WHERE DID THE CONSTITUTION GO?

Demand Assistance of Counsel and they must allow it.

Right to counsel before breathalyzer test. - When a person is arrested for operation a motor vehicle in violation of state or local drunken driving ordinances, and requests to contact an attorney, the arrestee must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to do so before being required to decide whether or not to submit to a breathalyzer test: and where arrestee is denied that opportunity, subsequently obtained evidence, whether in form of test results or of refusal to take test, must be suppressed. Copelin v. State, 659 P.2d 1206 (Alaska 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 1017, 105 S. Ct. 430, 83 L. Ed. 2d 357 (1984)

The statutory right to contract and consult with counsel prior to being required to decide whether or not to submit to a breathalyzer test is not an absolute one, which might involve a delay long enough to impair testing results, but rather a limited one of reasonable time and opportunity that can be reconciled with the implied consent statutes. Copelin v. State, as above.

[leatherlips]

Be ignorant of your Constitutional rights, and no counsel
While a defendant has a statutory right to contact counsel, where he never requested an opportunity to contact counsel and there was nothing in the record to show that the police affirmatively interfered with any attempt by defendant to obtain counsel, he was not denied right to counsel. Svedlund v. Municipality of Anchorage, 671 P.2d 378 (Alaska Ct. App. 1983)

It is only where the totality of the arrestee's words constitute a request, express or implied, for an opportunity to contact counsel for the purpose of discussing a breathalyzer examination that an opportunity to consult counsel must be provided prior to administration of the breathalyzer. Once the breathalyzer examination is completed or fefused and videotaping finished, the suspect is entitled to the full use of the rights guaranteed by AS 12.25.150(b) and Criminal Rule 5(b). Van Wormer v. State, 699 P.2d 895 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985)

Now, hopefully with these examples, you will be able to discern that there exists two realities, one the common law in the Republic and the other one in the Roman Civil Law, i.e. the the Administrative State with some idea how to get out of the Administrative State.

In the common law, under Crime, there are basically two types of crime. I have included two pages from Bouviers Law Dictionary of 1914 three volume set on crime
You will find the following:
1 Malum in se - an act which shocks the moral sense as being grossly immoral and injurious. Black's 4th A wrong in itself; an act or case involving illegality from the very nature of the transaction, upon principles of natural, moral and public law.

2 Mala in se - Wrongs in themselves; acts morally wrong; offenses against conscience (Black's 4th) See also Boubiers.

3 Malum prohibitum - The criminality of the act or omission consists not in the simple perpetration of the act, or the neglect to perform it, but in its being a violation of a positive law. (Notice the neglect to perform some duty is for public officers- not the people!)

So, what is my point?
Well, the point is that there is no crime compelling me to do some act. Under the common law, the inability to pay a tax was not a Crime. Yes, a lien might be attached to my property, but the Homestead exemption would save my house, tools, chickens, etc.

So again in the Administrative State, I am being COMPELLED to do certain acts, which did not exist under the common law. I am compelled to have insurance, compelled to pay any individual income tax that I have a LEGAL DUTY to pay, and compelled to have a DL just to move about from one point to another.

[idknow]

Originally Posted by leatherlips

Be ignorant of your Constitutional rights, and no counsel
While a defendant has a statutory right to contact counsel, where he never requested an opportunity to contact counsel and there was nothing in the record to show that the police affirmatively interfered with any attempt by defendant to obtain counsel, he was not denied right to counsel. Svedlund v. Municipality of Anchorage, 671 P.2d 378 (Alaska Ct. App. 1983)

It is only where the totality of the arrestee's words constitute a request, express or implied, for an opportunity to contact counsel for the purpose of discussing a breathalyzer examination that an opportunity to consult counsel must be provided prior to administration of the breathalyzer. Once the breathalyzer examination is completed or fefused and videotaping finished, the suspect is entitled to the full use of the rights guaranteed by AS 12.25.150(b) and Criminal Rule 5(b). Van Wormer v. State, 699 P.2d 895 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985)

Now, hopefully with these examples, you will be able to discern that there exists two realities, one the common law in the Republic and the other one in the Roman Civil Law, i.e. the the Administrative State with some idea how to get out of the Administrative State.

In the common law, under Crime, there are basically two types of crime. I have included two pages from Bouviers Law Dictionary of 1914 three volume set on crime
You will find the following:
1 Malum in se - an act which shocks the moral sense as being grossly immoral and injurious. Black's 4th A wrong in itself; an act or case involving illegality from the very nature of the transaction, upon principles of natural, moral and public law.

2 Mala in se - Wrongs in themselves; acts morally wrong; offenses against conscience (Black's 4th) See also Boubiers.

3 Malum prohibitum - The criminality of the act or omission consists not in the simple perpetration of the act, or the neglect to perform it, but in its being a violation of a positive law. (Notice the neglect to perform some duty is for public officers- not the people!)

So, what is my point?
Well, the point is that there is no crime compelling me to do some act. Under the common law, the inability to pay a tax was not a Crime. Yes, a lien might be attached to my property, but the Homestead exemption would save my house, tools, chickens, etc.

So again in the Administrative State, I am being COMPELLED to do certain acts, which did not exist under the common law. I am compelled to have insurance, compelled to pay any individual income tax that I have a LEGAL DUTY to pay, and compelled to have a DL just to move about from one point to another.

Excellent analysis, LeatherLips!

the "marimba" typo was also well-placed

thanks much

[Gary Okupant]

Okay I understand the "with Counsel". Ohio Constitutional law, provides "ACCUSED", of confrontation
to accusers, etc, with counsel.

So I'm pulled over; and I represent myself. It seems
your questions to establish Constitutional law, still valid
here, but if I represent myself(own person), what do I say? Or; is it; I may say, I request right to counsel (with the law), This then makes it necessary when or
if the police to take me into the courthouse; to provide me with access to the LAW, written, internet etc. before I may speak.

May I also then ask for an interpreter as I don't read Latin? (Real question here).

I'm fighting a criminal misdemeanor; in which I have been appointed counsel. All three appointed counselors have quit; and judge allowed it.

So when I go to court again, I will point out; that "I", the client, not counsel, decide how to defend and as such I have counsel appointed! If counsel does not like what I
ask; and its NOT illegal; then failure to assist me is ineffective counsel, violationof ABA oath of lawyer, and violation of Contract.

Judge appointed lawyer, if the Judge lets lawyer go; then a violation of contract by Judge and Lawyer; in that constitutionally I have a right to Counsel(law or person here may be the question). At this point the municipality
has no subject matter jurisdiction in the case; as it is now a Constitutional question; not the sighted crime.

Now; since "We the People", provided in the Constitution a means to establish the Judiciary; then "We the People", pay the established experts (Judiciary - Agency), to set up the process. AND since the process is in Latin, and 'WE the People", fund it; in the case of Criminal procedures, the Judiciary bears all burdens of
establishing counsel to the defendent; as the defendent
"We the people", in explanation and definition.

Now; "We the people", fund the agency; "We the People", allowed to be set up under the Constitution; therefore, my payment of the Attr. General, Judges etc.
(taxes set upon), may not be used in combination with others taxes; to make slavery by peonage, of my per violation of rule of agency or rule of people.

Simply; the Courts must review the laws, must review the laws positive to the accused(prosecutor must divulge law affirmative to the accused). If after review the court then has grounds to continue prosecution; then the court must state so: and that the law is not in violation of the Constitution; as it is the Constitution; that is inviolate; as established in the purpose of the Judiciary; as it (Judiciary), nor legislature; may enact law, violating the Constitution.

This is all done without me being present. So you see; lawyers; may not make money in determining the correct law to use; as it is a function of the Judiciary to do so before positive law is foiested upon us.

Does this make any sense; as its what I'm using in Court tuesday!.

Originally Posted by leatherlips

Be ignorant of your Constitutional rights, and no counsel
While a defendant has a statutory right to contact counsel, where he never requested an opportunity to contact counsel and there was nothing in the record to show that the police affirmatively interfered with any attempt by defendant to obtain counsel, he was not denied right to counsel. Svedlund v. Municipality of Anchorage, 671 P.2d 378 (Alaska Ct. App. 1983)

It is only where the totality of the arrestee's words constitute a request, express or implied, for an opportunity to contact counsel for the purpose of discussing a breathalyzer examination that an opportunity to consult counsel must be provided prior to administration of the breathalyzer. Once the breathalyzer examination is completed or fefused and videotaping finished, the suspect is entitled to the full use of the rights guaranteed by AS 12.25.150(b) and Criminal Rule 5(b). Van Wormer v. State, 699 P.2d 895 (Alaska Ct. App. 1985)

Now, hopefully with these examples, you will be able to discern that there exists two realities, one the common law in the Republic and the other one in the Roman Civil Law, i.e. the the Administrative State with some idea how to get out of the Administrative State.

In the common law, under Crime, there are basically two types of crime. I have included two pages from Bouviers Law Dictionary of 1914 three volume set on crime
You will find the following:
1 Malum in se - an act which shocks the moral sense as being grossly immoral and injurious. Black's 4th A wrong in itself; an act or case involving illegality from the very nature of the transaction, upon principles of natural, moral and public law.

2 Mala in se - Wrongs in themselves; acts morally wrong; offenses against conscience (Black's 4th) See also Boubiers.

3 Malum prohibitum - The criminality of the act or omission consists not in the simple perpetration of the act, or the neglect to perform it, but in its being a violation of a positive law. (Notice the neglect to perform some duty is for public officers- not the people!)

So, what is my point?
Well, the point is that there is no crime compelling me to do some act. Under the common law, the inability to pay a tax was not a Crime. Yes, a lien might be attached to my property, but the Homestead exemption would save my house, tools, chickens, etc.

So again in the Administrative State, I am being COMPELLED to do certain acts, which did not exist under the common law. I am compelled to have insurance, compelled to pay any individual income tax that I have a LEGAL DUTY to pay, and compelled to have a DL just to move about from one point to another.