zip code voluntary and jurisdiction

[Shoonra]

To IDKNOW: The Becraft url turned out to be a 404 error, and the Gary Scott url was not sufficiently definite; I got Scott's search page but his search engine did nothing. Please be more specific about the date, etc. of Scott's stuff on the zip code. (My recollection of Becraft is that he does NOT believe in this zip code story.)

To SQUIRREL: "Without recourse" on an envelope has no legal effect. I am not sure what else you are asking about, but there is no "secret oath" for either lawyers or govt employees, and a bankruptcy is not a secret event - by its very nature there must be notification of all the creditors.

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

Judging from other comments on the net, the judge supposedly said that because Cooper had been using the US mail he was, therefore, a citizen. This is absurd and no judge would say this.

So this supposed quote was not in the Westlaw cases you pulled up?

Anyway, receiving mail is a gov't benefit.

Read the common law maxim in my sig line concerning those who receive benefits

[squirrel]

Shoonra.
Your a liar and treasonous TRAITOR !! and you know it !!
The overwhelming evidence proves it !!

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/secretoath.htm

http://www.skolnicksreport.com/

bllaahhh, you make me sick with the blasphemy you spew forth from your fingers.
what kind of sicko knows their selling their childrens soul for a buck.
To all readers and posters, as you can see you'll never get an appropriate responsive answer from these treasonous traitors and it's by design.


THEIR ARE NO JUDGES IN AMERICA !! ONLY MAGISTRATES WHO TAKE THEIR ORDERS FROM THE CROWN !!

http://www.peoples-rights.com/doc15.htm

[idknow]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

To IDKNOW: The Becraft url turned out to be a 404 error, and the Gary Scott url was not sufficiently definite; I got Scott's search page but his search engine did nothing. Please be more specific about the date, etc. of Scott's stuff on the zip code. (My recollection of Becraft is that he does NOT believe in this zip code story.)

To SQUIRREL: "Without recourse" on an envelope has no legal effect. I am not sure what else you are asking about, but there is no "secret oath" for either lawyers or govt employees, and a bankruptcy is not a secret event - by its very nature there must be notification of all the creditors.

Shoonra, I found no cites to include in my post - I would have had there been.

and without the name of prosecuting party, google has a difficult time searching its database.

[Shoonra]

Presumably the parties would have been United States v. Cooper -- possibly Cooper first.

Going over Cooper's own propaganda, Cooper says that the US Attorney argued that because Cooper had an SSN and used the US mails he was therefore liable for the whole national debt. This is moronic. The national debt was not an issue in whatever case he was involved with. He was charged and convicted and imprisoned for tax evasion and tax fraud. So evidently the judge himself didn't say it, and I'll bet the mortgage that the US Attorney didn't say it either. I have found more than one pdf file of Cooper's court arguments and he is seriously warped. He seems to be overwhelmed with delusions and he certainly is a con-artist.

[macerico]

A heads up....they changed it again. It's now DMM 602.

DMM 508 6.0 covers "general delivery"

I know they say general delivery is "temporary" but as I see it, most people don't get a lot of personal mail anyhow.

I don't see "general delivery" as refusing business mail (bills, etc.), but who knows.

PDFs current as of 1/28/06

Also, one last time....

On getting mail. I have a P.O. Box

I've been having stuff sent to me as....

(my name)
c/o P.O. Box xxx
(city), (state) (zip)

Unfortunately, with automated mailing systems, it's a fight to get them to use the "c/o" or to use the first address line to say "send care of". Likewise, you are stuck with the two letter state and zip code being present. Seems counterproductive.

Does having something sent "care of" someone negate this problem? If not, I'd say using a remailing service would be fruitless as well. You basically have to stop having bills sent to your mailing location if they can't address correctly.

[Soldier of Truth]

Ummm... Has anyone noticed that the ZIPCode is "trademarked" and has a URL of ".com" ?

.com - commercial
.edu - school
.org - organization.
.net - network
.gov - gov

Get the picture? Can anyone say Clearfield Doctrine?

Here's more food for thought? When's the last time anyone's been charged by a commercial corporation of committing a crime?

[Shoonra]

On top of the cases I have previously cited, the decision in Biermann v. Cook (Fla.App. 6/4/99) 619 So.2d 1029 involved a defendant who evidently thought that not using a zip code somehow made him invisible to the law. It didn't work.

Additionally there are a bunch of cases where pro se plaintiffs had their suits dismissed because they refused to comply with the court rules (including the model forms found in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure) requiring court papers to show a complete address including zip code. Courts have, at least, the power to insist that submitted pleadings comply with the court's rules. Using a ZIP Code may be voluntary .... so persisting in not using zip codes means you are voluntarily letting the judge throw out your pleadings.

The courts will take judicial notice of the ZIP code associated with an address, based on the USPS ZIP Code Directory, just as they would take judicial notice of the longitude and latitude of an address. There have been instances of judges telling litigants that the court would use the zip codes in sending them envelopes and the litigants would be regarded as having full notice of the contents even if they refused the envelopes unopened. Litigants who persisted in mailing court papers without the court's zip code on the envelope have been told that no allowance will be made for them if the Post Office delivers their un-zipped mail after deadlines have expired.

Someone cited a 1900 Supreme Court decision for the notion that using a zip code somehow conceded jurisdiction or even proved US citizenship; checking the decision itself showed nothing of the kind. Not a surprise since Zip Codes weren't in use before 1964. Even foreigners, including those writing from foreign countries, use Zip Codes for US addresses. Using a Zip Code doesn't prove anything about citizenship and, for jurisdiction, it only confirms that the address is somewhere in the United States or its possessions -- a fact that can also be ascertained by the street address or checking a road atlas.

As for ZIP Codes being "private": They were worked up by the USPS (or by a commercial outfit under contract to the USPS), using govt money, and therefore are public domain and can be used by everybody freely, without obtaining any permit or paying a fee. However the USPS insists on retaining the authority for fine-tuning the codes and inventing new numbers as time goes by. Every year the USPS has to cook up new ZIP numbers for new housing developments or new high-rise buildings.

Once again there is no court decision that says (in essence) because you didn't include the ZIP Code you are somehow immune from the law or the court. Or, by including the ZIP Code you somehow gave up some sort of immunity or right you'd otherwise have. I keep asking about this and nobody has pointed to such a decision.