Defending your UCC FS in court.

Originally Posted by Montana

I am curious how you would go about defending your UCC FS in court. If I go in and say that I have a superior claim to my garnished property based on my filing and ask if somebody can show me a superiour claim then mine, I imagine that the judge will tell me that this is frivilous. Then I would ask him to prove why, and him being the judge would say some legal thing that I will probably not understand and around and around we would go.



So, since I have to do this soon, I am wondering what I can do. I am chickening out. When I presented my statement at the last hearing the judge acted like she didn't know what it was and sent me to a higher court.



Your the Creditor, they will always try to test you, because they don't want to give up thier power structure, and your threatening thier thievish way of life.



The judge that I have to go in front of now will give me no room to not know exactly what I am doing. People in our county refer to him as a "hanging judge" because he is so hard on the people in his court room.



Well when they asked are you Sarah Jane, you have to remember that what they are really saying is, are you SARAH JANE? Well are you? I think you know the answer to that question. Whatever you do, don't answer any of thier questions, if they ask you a question, just say are you addressing the Debtor or the Secured Party? Let them know that you Accept everything for Value at all times, and if they tell you to pass the bar, you know the two little doors, or the opening to the Attorney's area, just tell them no thank you Sir, I'm comfortable in my own jurisdiction, STAY OUTSIDE THE BAR AREA IF AT ALL POSSIBLE, and if they try to make you cross that bar, let them know that if I do this, then it's under duress and Coercion, then you may enter, but never ever enter a plea, let them do that for you. Because you never gave up jurisdiction. NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER EVER ANSWER A QUESTION, you can make offers, and try to direct the court, but don't let them trap you into answering one of thier questions. Your the Master, and thier the Slave, and nothing will ever change that as long as they are using your credit. By using your credit I mean that they issue bonds in your name and expect you to pay it back, and you know the whole Hjr-192 thing. About under Duress and Coercion, I'm not sure what you can do if you can get them on that,



Anybody know?









Also, the thieves that are garnishing our wages, tried to levy our bank account last week. It would seem to me that if they are takint the maximum allowable by law out of the paycheck then they wouldn't be allowed to levy our bank account as well. Does anybody know more about this.



What really gets me is that the default judgment that they received in order to do all of this to us was not only done unlawfully but extremely unethically. If I was a debt collector attorney I would be very ashamed of myself.





Oh, and another thing, I really need to know where the code is saying that evidence can not be purchased. I have searched for it but I can't find it. I know that our account was purchased by the debt collection agency, I would like to bring up that at some point.



Well, they are allowed to get that information, because they have a default judgement against you, but keep this in mind, you can go back and get them for FRAUD!!!!, Because a Corporation has no business telling a Soveran what to do. If you would like more information, just say so and I will do the best I can to answer any questions or concerns or what ever you might have to the best of my knowledge.



-lithmus





Thanks



Sara-Jane

What is TSN Squirrles?

Anybody know?



-lithmus

this is a pretty good thread. ive heard of barton buthz using a ucc3 amendment to his ucc1 and adding his bank accounts to it. im like you guys though, how would you defend it unless you can get the bank to contract with you for damages if they give your money to someone when you have a filed ucc3 on the account( barton recommends putting a copy of the ucc3 in your bank file at the bank)

[iamfreeru2]

kgod999,



Barton actually has a bank account that is exempt from levy. This is what he has told me. He opened it using his UCCFS. It is difficult, as many banks will not do this. If one doesn't just look for another that will. They are out there. CTC3 speaks of this as well, I believe. Of course the best possible scenario is do not deal with banks.



iamfreeru2

[redpilltaker]

This thread reminds me about a post in a different forum.



The concern was raised about the need for a contract between the secured party and the transmitting utility...



Stupid question....how does one sign on behalf of the strawman AND the secured party? Is that even possible?



CTC3 has examples of how to sign as an "agent"...but is the printed capitalized strawman name enough to show a contract between the two entities?



(this puzzles me through the idea of "capturing" an entity that was not created by you...still wishy-washy about that...but in the end BB will not ever come out and actually tell anyone that the SM is real and different from the flesh and blood...)



Thoughts, ideas?



RPT

This thread reminds me about a post in a different forum.



The concern was raised about the need for a contract between the secured party and the transmitting utility...



Stupid question....how does one sign on behalf of the strawman AND the secured party? Is that even possible?



I don't know, I would guess that you just print the name in all capital letters, ofcourse in your security agreement it gives you the right to sign on behalf of the debtor, so everything the debtor owns you own, then you have the bond that holds harmless the secured Party from the debtor.



CTC3 has examples of how to sign as an "agent"...but is the printed capitalized strawman name enough to show a contract between the two entities?



(this puzzles me through the idea of "capturing" an entity that was not created by you...still wishy-washy about that...but in the end BB will not ever come out and actually



Tell me something, where you fully aware that this was going on when it happened? Was your mom when the Birth Certificate was created? If not that is FRAUD!!! Do you think that the State who created the Strawman is going to file a claim against your straw man, and blow the lid off the whole scam, when they did it by an unconcious contract, and created the birth certificate, that is FRAUD.



tell anyone that the SM is real and different from the flesh and blood...)



Thoughts, ideas?



RPT







-lithmus

[redpilltaker]

Thanks...I THINK its starting to sink in...



RPT

[Jerseee]

As I sit and think of this issue--it has dawned on me that when trying to capture the STRAWMAN through the UCC process--you are stealing.



This issue has been bugging me for quite sometime and I have come to the realization that attempting control something that does not belong to you--is theft.



I think this is where folks go wrong and get pinched. I am also under the impression that any attempts to claim an interest in the STRAWMAN fall under the same category.



As I have stated numerous times--I only use my UCC 1 as proof that the STRAWMAN is not me and I am not him. However, the proof of burden is not on me when making such a claim. BUt if I ever did make such a claim--I have proof.



I'm not sure about the reaction this post may conjure up with the die hard UCC redemption crowd--but before you post a rebuttal to this, I ask you to stop and think about what I just ascerted.



Trying to capture the STRAWMAN is theft. Think about it.

Thursday, July 01 2004 @ 04:43 AM CDT

As I sit and think of this issue--it has dawned on me that when trying to capture the STRAWMAN through the UCC process--you are stealing.



Nope, unconcisouble contract. They are doing Fraud by the mere presumption that you are responsible for the Straw Man. Lets see the State bring forward thier claim on the Straw Man, It won't happen because they are in Fraud, and the know it.



This issue has been bugging me for quite sometime and I have come to the realization that attempting control something that does not belong to you--is theft.



How does it not belong to you? You are accepting thier Contract, and inserting your own terms in it. The Contract was done unconciously by your mother. It's called the Power of Acceptance.



I think this is where folks go wrong and get pinched. I am also under the impression that any attempts to claim an interest in the STRAWMAN fall under the same category.



Well think that, if the State doesn't have the guts to bring forward thier claim, then they are in FRAUD!!! If I am wrong let me know, because I believe in being a righteous man.



As I have stated numerous times--I only use my UCC 1 as proof that the STRAWMAN is not me and I am not him. However, the proof of burden is not on me when making such a claim. BUt if I ever did make such a claim--I have proof.



That you do (:



I'm not sure about the reaction this post may conjure up with the die hard UCC redemption crowd--but before you post a rebuttal to this, I ask you to stop and think about what I just ascerted.



I did, and I don't possibly see why you wouldn't use this as a business advantage every way possible wherer it could strengthen you.



Trying to capture the STRAWMAN is theft. Think about it.

Waste no effort on situations that aren't worth your time. Ignore pettiness and move on so that, you don't give pettiness more value than it deserves



I don't think it is, I think what they are doing is THEFT!!!, and by you capturing your Strawman, all you doing is saying to the enemy is that I'm not going to let you steal from me, you do have a right to defend yourself.





-lithmus

[Jerseee]

Lithmus,



Good position taken.



First things first....you mention acceptance and presumption. Both of these terms are what they are.



What I mean is dabbling in this STRAWMAN UCC stuff is an attractive nuisance to the redemtpion movement. Contracting with it means you are accepting it.



Also, who cares what their presumption is....what we care about is them proving their claim.



You can know the truth about their fraud but the real key is to catch them in it and have them admit to it, publicly or privately. You cannot do this when you are trying to capture the STRAWMAN and contract with it.



Its okay to know these things but why are you accepting them? You only use this information to your advantage and not to try to gain control of it.



And yes you are stealing. Although they are using your property without your permission--they created the STRAWMAN not you. You are allowed to use it but you can't have it. It is their property. You did not create it.



The STRAWMAN. A dubious character because this is who they license, this is who they tax, this is who they give permits to, this is who they make legislation for...if you are a true sovereign you wouldn't steal or try to control something that does not belong to you.



You would not expatriate a citizen from his government against his will. The STRAWMAN's government is the UNITED STATES, codes and statutes are his laws, FRNs are his money, he gets his permission from his government--so with all this said, why in the world would you want to contract with this person who has no rights, no money, no government, no real laws and has you as a scape goat?



You do have a right to defend yourself but are you the one being attacked?



I think the redemption folks are defending someone who does not need to be defended and argue all the way to jail. I have yet to see someone go to jail using the law and not arguing. Kgod's previous 2 posts hit it on the head and Kgod has experienced the lunacy contained in the STRAWMAN UCC theory and reported it to us.



Therefore, I can't fathom going into business or contracting with a person who is nothing but a liability.



(look up the word person and you will be surprised by its numerous meanings)