WHEN YOU WALK INTO A COURTROOM JUDGE’S JURISDICTION, AT LEAST TWELVE PRESUMPTIONS ARE ALREADY IN FORCE – WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT!
Cannon Law researcher Frank O’Collins (one-heaven.org) ferreted out these presumptions and helped make them available to the general population. We cannot forget that our so-called ‘courts’ are run by a private guild by the name of the British Accreditation Regency. See: The BAR Card.
From the book Fruit from a Poisonous Tree (page 58) by attorney Melvin Stamper, JD:
“The scheme also provided for the control of the courts via the 1913 creation of the American Bar Association, whose parent organization was the European International Bar Association, which was the creation of Rothschild. This allowed the International Bankers to control the practice of law, in that the only ones permitted to practice before the courts were those who were educated under their brand of law, which was only Admiralty and Contract law. Common law of the people was to be replaced as it gave the natural man many jurisdictional protections from the bankers’ legislation.”
THE TWELVE PRESUMPTIONS OF COURT
A Roman Court does not operate according to any true rule of law, but by presumptions of the law. Therefore, if presumptions presented by the private Bar Guild are not rebutted they become fact and are therefore said to stand true [Or as “truth in commerce”]. There are twelve (12) key presumptions asserted by the private Bar Guilds which if unchallenged stand true being Public Record, Public Service, Public Oath, Immunity, Summons, Custody, Court of Guardians, Court of Trustees, Government as Executor/Beneficiary, Executor De Son Tort, Incompetence, and Guilt:
- The Presumption of Public Recordis that any matter brought before a lower Roman Courts is a matter for the public record when in fact it is presumed by the members of the private Bar Guild that the matter is a private Bar Guild business matter. Unless openly rebuked and rejected by stating clearly the matter is to be on the Public Record, the matter remains a private Bar Guild matter completely under private Bar Guild rules; and
- The Presumption of Public Serviceis that all the members of the Private Bar Guild who have all sworn a solemn secret absolute oath to their Guild then act as public agents of the Government, or “public officials” by making additional oaths of public office that openly and deliberately contradict their private “superior” oaths to their own Guild. Unless openly rebuked and rejected, the claim stands that these private Bar Guild members are legitimate public servants and therefore trustees under public oath; and
- The Presumption of Public Oathis that all members of the Private Bar Guild acting in the capacity of “public officials” who have sworn a solemn public oath remain bound by that oath and therefore bound to serve honestly, impartiality and fairly as dictated by their oath. Unless openly challenged and demanded, the presumption stands that the Private Bar Guild members have functioned under their public oath in contradiction to their Guild oath. If challenged, such individuals must recuse themselves as having a conflict of interest and cannot possibly stand under a public oath; and
- The Presumption of Immunityis that key members of the Private Bar Guild in the capacity of “public officials” acting as judges, prosecutors and magistrates who have sworn a solemn public oath in good faith are immune from personal claims of injury and liability. Unless openly challenged and their oath demanded, the presumption stands that the members of the Private Bar Guild as public trustees acting as judges, prosecutors and magistrates are immune from any personal accountability for their actions; and
- The Presumption of Summonsis that by custom a summons un-rebutted stands and therefore one who attends Court is presumed to accept a position (defendant, juror, witness) and jurisdiction of the court. Attendance to court is usually invitation by summons. Unless the summons is rejected and returned, with a copy of the rejection filed prior to choosing to visit or attend, jurisdiction and position as the accused and the existence of “guilt” stands; and
- The Presumption of Custodyis that by custom a summons or warrant for arrest un-rebutted stands and therefore one who attends Court is presumed to be a thing and therefore liable to be detained in custody by “Custodians”. [This includes the dead legal fiction non-human “PERSON” that corporate-governments rules and regulations are written for.*] Custodians may only lawfully hold custody of property and “things” not flesh and blood soul possessing beings. Unless this presumption is openly challenged by rejection of summons and/or at court, the presumption stands you are a thing and property and therefore lawfully able to be kept in custody by custodians; and
- The Presumption of Court of Guardiansis the presumption that as you may be listed as a “resident” of a ward of a local government area and have listed on your “passport” the letter P, you are a pauper and therefore under the “Guardian” powers of the government and its agents as a “Court of Guardians”. Unless this presumption is openly challenged to demonstrate you are both a general guardian and general executor of the matter (trust) before the court, the presumption stands and you are by default a pauper, and lunatic and therefore must obey the rules of the clerk of guardians (clerk of magistrates court);
- The Presumption of Court of Trusteesis that members of the Private Bar Guild presume you accept the office of trustee as a “public servant” and “government employee” just by attending a Roman Court, as such Courts are always for public trustees by the rules of the Guild and the Roman System. Unless this presumption is openly challenged to state you are merely visiting by “invitation” to clear up the matter and you are not a government employee or public trustee in this instance, the presumption stands and is assumed as one of the most significant reasons to claim jurisdiction – simply because you “appeared”; and
- The Presumption of Government acting in two roles as Executor and Beneficiaryis that for the matter at hand, the Private Bar Guild appoint the judge/magistrate in the capacity of Executor while the Prosecutor acts in the capacity of Beneficiary of the trust for the current matter. Unless this presumption is openly challenged to demonstrate you are both a general guardian and general executor of the matter (trust) before the court, the presumption stands and you are by default the trustee, therefore must obey the rules of the executor (judge/magistrate); and
- The Presumption of Executor De Son Tortis the presumption that if the accused does seek to assert their right as Executor and Beneficiary over their body, mind and soul they are acting as an Executor De Son Tort or a “false executor” challenging the “rightful” judge as Executor. Therefore, the judge/magistrate assumes the role of “true” executor and has the right to have you arrested, detained, fined or forced into a psychiatric evaluation. Unless this presumption is openly challenged by not only asserting one’s position as Executor as well as questioning if the judge or magistrate is seeking to act as Executor De Son Tort, the presumption stands and a judge or magistrate of the private Bar guild may seek to assistance of bailiffs or sheriffs to assert their false claim; and
- The Presumption of Incompetenceis the presumption that you are at least ignorant of the law, therefore incompetent to present yourself and argue properly. Therefore, the judge/magistrate as executor has the right to have you arrested, detained, fined or forced into a psychiatric evaluation. Unless this presumption is openly challenged to the fact that you know your position as executor and beneficiary and actively rebuke and object to any contrary presumptions, then it stands by the time of pleading that you are incompetent then the judge or magistrate can do what they need to keep you obedient; and
- The Presumption of Guiltis the presumption that as it is presumed to be a private business meeting of the Bar Guild, you are guilty whether you plead “guilty”, do not plead or plead “not guilty”. Therefore unless you either have previously prepared an affidavit of truth and motion to dismiss with extreme prejudice onto the public record or call a demurrer, then the presumption is you are guilty and the private Bar Guild can hold you until a bond is prepared to guarantee the amount the guild wants to profit from you.
*More information about “personage” and “barratry” has been made available by Anna von Reitz: The Nut is Cracked.
The Real Criminals
- Look up the Public Laws governing Citizen’s Arrest in your state. Get ready to use them.
2. Now, let’s pretend we set up a system of “naming conventions” such that the following rules apply:
john –quincy: adams = a living American endowed with all his natural rights
John Quincy Adams = a foreign situs trust used in commercial shipping
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS = a foreign estate trust
John Q. Adams = a public transmitting utility company
John q. Adams = a public foundation
JOHN Q. Adams = a cooperative
JOHN QUINCY ADAMS = a boat or ship used in public commerce
JOHN QUINCY Adams = a commonwealth trust
J. QUINCY Adams = a slave owned by Exxon Corporation
J.Q. Adams = a foreign pauper forbidden to own land
Adams, John Q. = a taxpayer
ADAMS, JOHN Q. = a soldier
adams, john q. = a slave
There are dozens of different potential meanings that can be arbitrarily assigned to anyone’s name and used to “represent” radically different entities. In a verbal conversation we can talk all day long about someone or something named “John Quincy Adams” and which john quincy adams or what kind of JOHN QUINCY ADAMS will never be known, except from the context of the conversation — but on paper the use of such a system instantly defines what or whom is being talked about — if you know the system.
This is what the lawyers, bankers, and politicians have used to enslave you. It is a crime known as “personage”. By arbitrarily creating an Estate trust named after you and claiming to own this thing they created, they have falsely claimed to own you and your assets and to literally buy and sell “you” on stock exchanges, ship “you” out of ports, and tax “you” for doing things you’ve never done. After all, there is no law against enslaving an ESTATE trust, is there? Or arresting a slave? Or charging a tax on importing revenue to Puerto Rico?
Hand in hand with personage comes “barratry” — the crime of knowingly bringing false claims into court. So what happens every day all across America, when charges are brought against the ESTATES of “dead men” who are standing right in front of the judge and jury? Barratry — a crime that is appropriately named after the “Bar Association”.
- Look at the front page of any law suit that has been filed in America for the past seventy years and there you will have proof in your hand of both personage and barratry being committed against the individual people falsely named as “DEFENDANTS”. They are being deliberately confused with foreign estate trusts merely named after them and they are suffering the crimes of both personage and barratry.
- Spread this explanation of the situation throughout the world. Take it to the provost marshals and the highest ranking police officers, to the sheriffs, and the deputies and the traffic cops, to the mayors, to the politicians responsible, to the bankers who have seized your bank accounts under the same false pretenses.
- Go in large groups, peaceably, but with grim determination. Take your video cameras and tape recorders and stand ready to use Citizen’s Arrest against any public official who does not agree to assist you in shutting down the “court” system and arresting the “District Attorneys” and “judges” and others who have participated in this grotesque fraud. Demand that the bankers agree to correct their records and honor your ownership of your private property which has been deposited in their banks in good faith.
- If any public official presented with this information refuses to help you, arrest them and hold them to face charges before a Citizen’s Grand Jury composed of twelve honest men who own land in your county. If the Sheriff of your County refuses to do his duty when confronted with this information, arrest him, and elect a new Sheriff pro tem to serve in the office until proper elections can be held.
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
WITH FORMS DECEMBER 1, 2013
Federal Rules of Practice & Procedure and etc.
Reports to the Judicial Conference
Judicial Conduct & Disability
http://www.uscourts.gov/Common/Glossary.aspx Federal Court Glossary of Legal Terms
FEDERAL RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DECEMBER 1, 2013
In his On The Duty of Civil Disobedience (1849), Henry David Thoreau asked:
How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it . . . . What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.
By Carl Watner
Readers of Strike The Root recognize that there are two principal demands that their governments make upon them: pay your taxes and vote. (Of course, there are many other “demands,” such as military service, send your children to school, have a drivers license, etc., but many of these are ancillary to the primary means of government survival, which is the collection of taxes.)
Now, of these two principal demands, taxation carries criminal sanctions: Pay your money or we imprison your body and/or confiscate your property. However, as yet in most nations of the world, failure to vote in government elections carries no penalty.
Governments, like all other hierarchical institutions, depend upon the cooperation and, at least, the tacit consent of those over whom they exercise power. In other words, government soldiers and police can force people to do things they don’t want to do, but in the long run–in the face of adamant opposition–such coercion is either too expensive or too futile to accomplish its goals of subjugating entire populations. It is far simpler to motivate people to do what you want them to do, rather than forcing them to do it by pointing guns at them all the time. As Boris Yeltsin supposedly said, “You can build a throne with bayonets, but you can’t sit on it long.”
Educating generations of parents and children in government schools and teaching them to be patriotic and support their government in political elections is one of the fundamental ways governments garner public support. Citizens are taught that it is both their right and duty to vote. But all this is done with an ulterior motive in mind. As Theodore Lowi, in his book INCOMPLETE CONQUEST: GOVERNING AMERICA pointed out:
Participation is an instrument of [government] conquest because it encourages people to give their consent to being governed . . . . Deeply embedded in people’s sense of fair play is the principle that those who play the game must accept the outcome. Those who participate in politics are similarly committed, even if they are consistently on the losing side. Why do politicians plead with everyone to get out and vote? Because voting is the simplest and easiest form of participation [of supporting the state] by masses of people. Even though it is minimal participation, it is sufficient to commit all voters to being governed, regardless of who wins.
Not voting in government elections is one way of refusing to participate; of refusing to consent to government rule over your life. Non-voting may be seen as an act of personal secession, of exposing the myth behind “government by consent.” There are many reasons, both moral and practical, for choosing “not to vote,” and they have been discussed in my anthology, DISSENTING ELECTORATE. To briefly summarize:
Truth does not depend upon a majority vote. Two plus two equals four regardless of how many people vote that it equals five.
Individuals have rights which do not depend on the outcome of elections. Majorities of voters cannot vote away the rights of a single individual or groups of individuals.
Voting is implicitly a coercive act because it lends support to a compulsory government.
Voting reinforces the legitimacy of the state because the participation of the voters makes it appear that they approve of their government.
There are ways of opposing the state, other than by voting “against” the incumbents. (And remember, even if the opposition politicians are the lesser of two evils, they are still evil.) Such non-political methods as civil disobedience, non-violent resistance, home schooling, bettering one’s self, and improving one’s own understanding of voluntarism all go far in robbing the government of its much sought after legitimacy.
As Thoreau pointed out, “All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon . . . . Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it.” So whatever you do, don’t play the government’s game. Don’t vote. Do something for the right.
Carl Watner (December 2009)