WHEN YOU WALK INTO A COURTROOM JUDGE’S JURISDICTION, AT LEAST TWELVE PRESUMPTIONS ARE ALREADY IN FORCE – WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT!
by AL Whitney (C) copyround 2014
Permission is granted for redistribution if linked to original and the AntiCorruption Society is acknowledged
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:
1. The Presumption of Public Record is 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
2. The Presumption of Public Service is 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
3. The Presumption of Public Oath is 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
4. The Presumption of Immunity is 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
5. The Presumption of Summons is that by custom a summons unrebutted 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
6. The Presumption of Custody is that by custom a summons or warrant for arrest unrebutted 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
7. The Presumption of Court of Guardians is 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);
8. The Presumption of Court of Trustees is 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
9. The Presumption of Government acting in two roles as Executor and Beneficiary is 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
10. The Presumption of Executor De Son Tort is 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
11. The Presumption of Incompetence is 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
12. The Presumption of Guilt is 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.
Pingback: MASTERING THE MATRIX |
Pingback: THE TWELVE PRESUMPTIONS OF COURT
Pingback: Are we born into a world of presumptions? – "As King"
Yes I concur,as my father was a justice of the peace,elected by the people of the County in 1962 made many comments as to the corruption going on in the COURT.He saw first hand how our rights were being stripped AWAY. As he was born in 1903 he lived as a young man saw the bankers steal e the farmers land. Took away the free hold titles. The unlawful taxes on personal wage earnings. Thank our good Lord for opening eyes, at long last. Please keep up the fight.
You should really enjoy Melvin Stamper’s book Fruit from a Poisonous Tree. It explains what your father was observing. The UCC was brought into our courts in the 50’s and 60’s.
YOU ALL NEED THIS, “Law Basics”, “Fundamental Principles”. Quotes and Citations from the Highest Authorities (In U.S., but these are basic natural law valid everywhere, just find your binding local laws using key words from these, to ‘govern’ YOUR hired Public Servants, like I do)…
Click the Cover Photo image at top of my facebook, show all posts, ctrl+f, and find the post by the keywords above (In quotes).
Here is one current version (Ones “The Law, for Police Encounters”, ones all the basics of law, and next up is instructions for how to control our public servants, based on my experience (Over 100 police encounters, most on video -can be found there too, 9 cases dismissed so far, removed a prison guard from office for assault on an inmate, put a lawyer on ‘diversion classes’ for not responding to another inmate, impressed the hell out of several lawyers, and several other things almost no one has done, and many cant believe. also see letters to my probation officer).
HERES ONE DIRECT LINK (But I am still finishing these, so go to the Cover Photo for much more)…
Click to access %21%20%21%20%21%20_THE%20LAW_%20for%20Police%28Quotes%20and%20Citations-Legal%20Doc-Keep%20on%20Person-12.6.2015%29.pdf
Btw, This page is really helpful, because I believe I already have all we need to insure my motions and notices and other docs DO rebut/dispute/disprove/preclude all these presumptions.
THIS HAS WORKED FOR ME AND OTHERS, just saying this can get some petty cases and even over 100 capital charges in one mans case, dismissed…
“FOR THE RECORD: I am the beneficiary and administrator of that account, and I reserve all rights without prejudice. UCC 1-308”
(The UCC Cite is optional, seems best to include, then they can look that up and figure out what you mean, and dismiss, like for me two of the nine times, thats ALL I did, and it they dismissed by Prosecutor the next time in court).
If they ask what account? “The Defendant. Its an artificial, jurisdic person, operating under a commercial system, and I have stated I do not consent, by reserving all rights, therefore according to ‘the supreme Law of the Land’ including the U.S. Supreme Court case precedents: “It would be Treason” (Cohens v. Virginia) to take jurisdiction without corroborating evidence ‘injury or harm’ actually occurred, and was caused by ‘intent or inexcusable neglect’, or a ‘conviction cannot be sustained’, ‘even with a confession’! (Corpus Delicti Doctrine, Calif. v. San Pablo, Allen v. Wright, Tyler v. Judges, US S.Ct, and from Indiana Supr. Ct.: Jorgensen v. State, Johnson v. State, etc.).
Also, it would be a federal crime called ‘color of law abuse’ (See FBI.gov page for that), to make or enforce any legislation or order that violates the Constitution, and the ONLY ‘purpose of government’ in the Az Const., is ‘to protect and maintain individual rights’ (Art.2,Sec.2), and in the US Const. its pretty much the same (Preamble, 6pts): “…to…establish justice…promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty…”.
Knowing these (by memory), is HOW I win.
Thats why I put them on single pieces of paper for you to KEEP IN POCKET – LEGAL DOCUMENT. I’m putting that at top of each to stop cops from taking it upon arrest, so you can bring it into jail and court!
Thanks for sharing this information.
However, if anyone chooses to pursue this strategy, do so at you own risk. We have no way to screen those that contribute their comments. We also do not recommend the use of Facebook. It was created to monitor society, not to help it.
Thanks for sharing this information.
However, if anyone chooses to pursue this strategy, do so at you own risk. We have no way to screen those that contribute comments. We also do not recommend the use of Facebook. It was created to monitor society, not to help it.
Yes, I’ve known since the 90’s that the lawyers have a corrupt system going for themselves and their toadies the police. Some States like Pennsylvania the lawyers have their own private police force, what this really is, is a protection force against any ‘civilian’ who has the goods on a lawyer. You make a call to them and they obtain what info you do have and proceed to destroy your life if they see fit to. They hire ex-FBI ex-State cop type of people who really put the wing ding to your life so that any testimony from you is dubious at best. Many States have outlawed these scam ‘police forces’. We are trying to bring Pennsylvania into the 20th Century but it doesn’t look good. The problem with low population County areas in the Yankee Northeast is many unsophisticated people look up to this parasites as honorable people. Back in the 90’s Pa charged it’s attorney general with taking bribes supposedly with the help of this policing force, after he publically stated he was going to clean up the lawyers in Pa, to this day he swears, very scared like, he did take a bribe, with a wish to go on with his life look in his eyes. Hmmm. Recently another naïve attorney general has fallen in Pa, I don’t know about this one but that one in the 90’s, they scared him so bad, he admits guilt even when we know better.
I have the 12 and modified them for my trial, read them into the record. It took over 160 days to be found not guilty of trespass with a firearm. The law ORS 1.050 states 90 days, the AG and the judges refuse to follow the law.
Reblogged this on gail007.
I took those twelve presumptions and reworked them to fit me first person. I read each one into the record at my trial. I wonder what it did or if it accomplished anything. It seems to me that all the decisions were made prior to the trial. How the hell!! not guilty of trespass with a firearm and guilty of trespass in the 2nd. ORS 164.265 and 164.245. I’m thankful for what I received.
Don’t know if you read Lawfully Yours or not. You need more information than just the twelve presumptions. The best strategy is always to avoid appearing in their “jurisdiction”. Challenge their authority BEFORE hand and hopefully avoid going into their administrative courts.
Challenging the school districts authority is what got me arrested. 160 days to get a speedy trial reported 3 judges, 4 at the DA’s, i cop and 1 jailor. counter claim for jurisdiction ignored by the court. Not guilty class A misdemeanor trespass with a firearm;, guilty on trespass in the 2nd class c. no mandatory $100.00 fine , bench probation, got my gun back out of evidence. But, must stay away from Beaverton School district what are they hiding.
We voted on a Beaverton Oversight Committee at a city hall meeting and it passed Roberts rules of order and we had the floor. They refuse to talk with us almost got arrested again. Then were registered the name as a civic association and have a fed ID# and a bank account. They refused the invoice, $35,000.00 for April 2015. Now we have a civil suit for dead beat failure to pay a lawfull invoice. We did it 4/17/2015 the city refused to rebutt or respond for over a month therefore the claim to Beaverton Oversight Committee stands by default. We told them what we were going to do with two speakers recorded on the city website under visitors. I gave the City Administrator a copy of what we passed. stating work, people, numbers , money, terms everything lawful. They let it stand then refused the invoice for services rendered.
I think it is one more step to make them be transparent especially the cops.
Pingback: More IRS Defense – Additions | Freedom Truth
Thank you 4/26/15
I will be using this at my trial 4/30/15 and just learned of this today. How fortunate. I will send this on to others in need.
This is a great synopsis of the truth behind our corrupt system and its courts and judges who are complicit in the fraud.