1. Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
    Dismiss Notice
  2. There are no markets
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Week of 6/24/2017 Closing prices & Chg Over Last Wk---- Gold $1256.40 Silver $16.64 Oil $43.01 USD $96.94
  4. "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"
    Dismiss Notice

COMMERCIAL LIENS: A MOST POTENT WEAPON

Discussion in 'Beginner's Forum' started by Goldhedge, Jun 8, 2014.



  1. Goldhedge

    Goldhedge Moderator Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    28,442
    Likes Received:
    32,313
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    For your infotainment...not legal advice!

    DYODD!

    Please check out the link for more info...

    COMMERCIAL LIENS:
    A MOST POTENT WEAPON


    Version 1.0

    Edited by BuildFreedom staff

    [with acknowledgments and credit to Alfred Adask (Publisher of AntiShyster magazine), Richard Boalbey, David DeReimer, and the various lien authors, for providing some of the content]

    (Applicable To The U.S.A.; Adaptable For Some Other Countries)

    Common Law Copyright, 1995 by Build Freedom Holdings
    All Rights Reserved.

    Notice: This document is free for personal use only. No part of these materials may be reproduced in any form - except for personal use - without permission from the copyright holder.

    Table of Contents

    Chapter 1

    Introduction
    Scope and Purpose of Manual
    Some Notes on the Sample Briefs
    The Commercial Lien Strategy - Background
    Some Examples of the Strategy
    The Power Of Commercial Liens

    Chapter 2

    Theory of Commercial Lien Strategy
    Introduction
    The Commercial Affidavit Process
    Constitutions as Enforceable Contracts
    Bonding of Government Officials

    Chapter 3

    Basic Concepts of Liens
    Lien - Definition
    Different Types of Liens
    Comparisons
    Liens vs. Levies

    Chapter 4

    Procedure and Implementation
    Research
    Notice and Demand
    Notice of Default
    Commercial Lien
    Lawsuits and Criminal Complaints

    Chapter 5

    Mistakes and Pitfalls to Avoid
    Defective Legal Form and Procedure
    "Hanson-type" or "Nebulous" Liens
    Aiming Too High
    Beware of "Exotic" Arguments

    Chapter 6

    Obstacles and Strategies for Overcoming Them
    Refusal to File Liens
    Abuse of Judicial Power

    Chapter 7

    The Coloring Agreement Approach
    Background
    Instructions

    Chapter 8

    Final Thoughts, by Alfred Adask

    Appendix A - Bibliography and Sources

    Appendix B - Index of Sample Legal Briefs

    Chapter 1 - Introduction

    Disclaimer
    This manual is intended purely as a communication of information in accordance with the right of free speech. It does not constitute either general or specific legal advice. Anyone seeking legal advice should consult a competent professional. Neither the author, editor or publisher guarantee that using this information will result in success or protect the reader from harm. The reader must accept that risk, and thoroughly study the law before using any of this material. Readers must take full responsibility for the consequences of any actions taken based on the contents of this manual. For most readers, you may well be best off reading this as a sort of "adventure novel." You can learn of some of the actual documents and procedures being used by many freedom fighters. If you were to actually use these documents and procedures you would probably be at substantial risk to change your life in very major ways, some of which may be very unpleasant. The use of Commercial Liens as described in this manual is EXTREMELY high-profile. For most readers, it may be advisable to use some of the "lower-profile" applications of Freedom Technology. Generally, we think that rather than fight existing systems it’s much more productive, useful, and exciting to create alternative new systems.

    http://www.freedom-school.com/commercial_liens.pdf
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2014
  2. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,710
    Likes Received:
    3,184
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right
    You beat me to this thread Goldhedge...LOL

    I was putting this post together last night, But did't get it posted...




    The Commercial Lien Strategy - Background

    Faced with corrupt lawyers and judges, no litigant can expect to win in court by simply playing defense. To beat them, you must be able to scare them. You must be able to make them respect you, and that means you must be able to take the offense — attack them personally.

    Unfortunately, judges, lawyers, and other government officials enjoy various levels of personal immunity provided by both law and "professional courtesy." How do you sue a lawyer for malpractice? You hire another lawyer — if you can find one who’ll take the case. How do you sue an IRS agent for violating your Constitutional rights? Only with great difficulty. How you sue a judge for railroading you in court? You don’t.

    As a practical matter, private citizens can’t sue the President of the United States, a Governor, judge, or even an IRS agent for failing to obey or enforce the laws. If we try to sue in court to compel our government officials to obey the law and perform their lawful duties, the judges routinely ignore our petitions and laugh us out of court.


    Because legal and de facto immunities shield government personnel from being sued for committing crimes against the People, the public is legally disarmed, unable to aggressively sue the government or its agents and compel them to obey the Law. As a result, the public’s legal posture is fundamentally defensive: we try to duck, dodge, and hide in legal loopholes to defend ourselves against the government and the courts. We try to escape, evade, and avoid, but we seldom counter-attack against our antagonists, largely because we think there are no lawful weapons to do so. However, it appears that a powerful offensive legal weapon may now have been discovered, tested, and proven for common Citizens — the commercial lien. We don’t try to sue a government official for failing to perform his lawful duties. Instead, we simply file a lien that encumbers the official’s personal property and credit rating like a ton of bricks until he voluntarily satisfies our demand to perform his lawful duty, and we, in turn, voluntarily agree to excise the lien.

    Some Examples of the Strategy

    Example 1 — Edward J. Wagner, an hourly, unionized employee at General Electric, received Notices of Levy from the IRS, garnishing his wages and moneys received from several other sources. Wagner tried to persuade G.E. not to honor the Notices, since they were not properly attested as "true bills of commerce." His efforts met with no success.
    After giving G.E. proper Notice and Demand, Wagner and his wife filed a Commercial Lien in the amount of $224,640,00.00. In the lien, Wagner impounded G.E. inventory that he had worked on (including air conditioning units, analyzing equipment, etc.) as security for the lien. This is similar to an auto mechanic impounding a car he had repaired ("mechanic’s lien"). This meant that G.E. could not lawfully sell or transfer the equipment until the lien was either extinguished or satisfied.
    Among the reasons for the high dollar amount are that the law allows for such high sums as rewards for damages incurred, and it generally has to be large enough in relation to the size of the company involved, to get its attention. Otherwise such a large company might just ignore it.
    Consequently, a legal war followed, and by June of ’92, G.E. had gone to court several times trying to remove Wagner’s lien, all without any real success. This was in spite of the fact that G.E. had the best, most highly paid, and highly motivated lawyers.
    In June of ’92, the first major victory for the Wagners came. The IRS issued four different official Releases of Levy, one to General Electric, plus three other places where they had wages and income that the IRS had levied — the Port of Seattle, Dean Witter Reynolds, and Ohio State Life Insurance Company. These effectively released the IRS’s attachment on the Wagners’ income and assets. That’s a pretty solid testimonial to the power of the arguments in Mr. Wagner’s lien.



    Example 2 — In August 1992, Mr. Nelson Starr, who lives in Florida, filed a lien on several federal judges, the Commissioner of the IRS, the Attorney General of the United States, one or more U.S. attorneys for the Southern District of Florida, and several other individuals, in the amount of $350,000 on each individual. The officials asked Mr. Alan Diamond, President of the Florida Bar Association, to inspect the lien and see if it was lawful or not.

    In spite of his desire to please his powerful friends, Diamond could find nothing illegal about the lien. In fact, in a sworn affidavit, Diamond declared that, "...the document causes irreparable harm to the system of the administration of justice. While some of the harm may be compensable at law, no degree of compensation will adequately remedy the damage to the appearance of integrity of those named and of the system of the administration of justice. In my opinion, the filing of this type of lien is a direct attack on the justice system and on the general reputations of those named in the "lien." It may negatively impact on the financial credit rating of those individuals. It will probably have a negative impact on their willingness to continue to serve as representatives of the United States. And, it constitutes an abuse of civil process that cannot be adequately remedied by an action at law. [emphasis added]" In plain English, Diamond did not like the lien, but couldn’t find any way to extinguish it. Further, he seemed to say that these liens could drive public officials right out of office! For libertarians and patriots, that is a powerful endorsement!

    <<<<<<<<SKIP>>>>>>>>

    Private Matter
    The Commercial Affidavit Process places the full power of justice back in the hands of the common man. It cannot be overstated that the whole Commercial Affidavit Process is not dependent on the court system. It functions quite well on its own outside the current legal system.

    It needs to be thoroughly understood that because it is driven by SWORN TRUTH, the Commercial Affidavit Process is outside the jurisdiction of any equity court. It is a private contract matter. Should an attempt be made to involve an equity court it would result in a trespass against the Affiant’s rights: those interfering individuals, who were unlawfully involved, would themselves become one of the accused. An equity court has no jurisdiction whatsoever, for the CAP is strictly a non-judicial or pre-judicial process between individuals and is private.

    This alone presents a very real dilemma for those who are accustomed to using the legal system to work wrongs and trespass against others with seeming impunity. They can’t hide behind a legal system that only dispenses justice to those who can afford to play the game. Those who are used to shielding themselves under "sovereign immunity" protections, hiding behind legions of attorneys and judges, and using other "legal tricks" now have none of this protection.

    NO judge, court, law, or government can invalidate these commercial processes, i.e., an affidavit or complaint or a lien based thereon because no third party can invalidate someone’s affidavit of truth. A judge CANNOT interfere with, tamper with, or in any way modify testimony without disintegrating the truth-seeking process of his profession, destroying the very fabric of his own occupation and abrogating the First Amendment which was established to protect truth. For a judge to interfere with testimony is to commit professional suicide and to invite countless civil and criminal repercussions.
    ANYONE who tampers with testimony is a threat to the peace and security of society, violating its laws and acting as its enemy and is therefore justifiably subject to the appropriate penalties. The Commercial Affidavit Process is by its very nature private, and strictly between parties of interest, only. It is unequivocally non-judicial.


    Rebuttal
    The sworn Affidavit will stand as truth if not timely rebutted by the Accused. In the instant case, thirty (30) days.

    The only one who can rebut a Commercial Affidavit is the Accused who alone, by his own affidavit, must speak for himself and only for himself. If the Accused uses someone else to speak for him, the third party must speak for and in behalf of the Accused as if he were the Accused; and the Accused still stands completely liable as if he himself were speaking. If however, the third party is identified as separated from the Accused, he also becomes a co-party with the Accused as an accomplice, thus a co-conspirator having no immunity whatsoever.

    Every charge or claim contained in the Claimant’s Affidavit must be rebutted point-for-point by the Accused. The Accused’s rebuttal must be done in the form of an Affidavit of Truth. That means it must be SWORN TESTIMONY and must be signed by at least two witnesses. The Accused/Affiant must swear to the truth, the correctness and the certainty of his or her rebuttals within that affidavit, thereby assuming complete liability for the statements contained in it and must be prepared to prove his or her statements, preferably with documentation that is unimpeachable.

    Failure to follow the correct process of rebutting the charges or ANY ATTEMPT TO PRESENT REBUTTAL EVIDENCE THAT IS NOT SWORN AS BOTH TRUE and "THE WHOLE TRUTH" INVALIDATES such response as if no evidence or rebuttal were given at all. SUCH FAILURE IS FATAL TO THE DEFENSE!


    <<<<<<<<SKIP>>>>>>>>



    Criminal Liability
    Responding to the Commercial Affidavit is critically important: the Accused is usually being charged with very serious crimes that carry very heavy, punitive penalties. The law has always viewed trespassing upon unalienable rights as being an offense so serious that it is beyond satisfaction merely by payment of the approximate money damages demanded.

    The Affidavit is a commercial complaint, but it is not yet a "criminal" complaint. The main distinction is that by resolving the charges during the Affidavit stage, the Accused can get off by simply redressing the grievances as specified in the Affidavit or as mutually negotiated. If the Accused recognizes his or her errors and wants to redress the Claimant but does not have the ability to do so within the time limit, the Accused may contact the Claimant and express that desire with a written statement to that effect. Then arrangements can be made to stop any further action. If some such arrangements are not made, then the CRIMINAL COMPLAINT issues adding PUNITIVE DAMAGES and JAIL TIME!

    The Criminal Complaint is in reality a ledger in which those details which were omitted in the Affidavit are (now) spelled out. It lists the causes of action, the number of counts, redresses demanded and the MASSIVE CIVIL PENALTIES (which occur when unalienable rights are violated), thus compounding the problems for the Accused: now, on top of the redresses being demanded, massive PUNITIVE DAMAGES are added as well! Normally this increases the cost to the Accused by a factor of at least a hundred if not a thousand fold. The effects of the criminal complaint invariably destroy all prospects for the future of the Accused!



    <<<<<<<<SKIP>>>>>>>>



    Loss Of Government Employment
    The Accused is in fact a convicted felon: unbondable by any insurance company, subject by law to immediate termination if employed by the government and forever barred from holding public office.


    Jail
    The Criminal Complaint is turned over to the appropriate Prosecuting Attorney, who must institute a sentencing hearing wherein a judge will impose the incarceration (jail-time) prescribed in the appropriate criminal codes for the offenses of which the Accused stands convicted. Should any such authority fail to prosecute sentencing against the convicted party, the mildest charge then faced by such authority is Felony Misprision; but such Prosecuting Attorney could also be charged with conspiracy to aid and abet the convicted party in commission of the same offenses.

    Under our current political situation, where the enemies of the People often occupy positions of power and authority and those same people can prevent or slow the wheels of justice, there are still many ways to publish the convictions and misdeeds of parties so convicted that can be even more humiliating to the convicted than the normal methods of publishing the results of their conviction.


    Summary
    The fundamental purpose, and one of the major objectives of the Commercial Affidavit Process is to educate wrongdoers to the fact they have abused the unalienable rights of a sovereign Citizen and cannot get away with it, and to give them an opportunity (commercial grace) to repent and undo the wrongs they have done. Unlike the typical criminal trial where the Accused no longer has the option of simply redressing the wrongs he or she has done, the Commercial Affidavit Process DOES give the Accused that option!


    Further, the CAP is designed to educate wrongdoers that they are being used by the conspirators in the war against the People. Thus they may see for themselves what is really going on and decide which side they choose to serve.


    READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE HERE:
    http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/comliens.shtml
     
  3. arminius

    arminius Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,798
    Likes Received:
    3,304
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    420 healer
    Location:
    right here right now
    http://usa-the-republic.com/jurisprudentia/commercial liens.html

    COMMERCIAL LIENS: A MOST POTENT WEAPON
    Edited by TLH staff [with acknowledgments and credit to Alfred Adask (Publisher of AntiShyster magazine),
    Richard Boalbey, David DeReimer, and the various lien authors, for providing some of the content
    ]

    (Applicable To The U.S.A.; Adaptable For Some Other Countries)



    Table of Contents
    (Note: Allow the full file to load before using the links below.)
    Chapter 1

    • Introduction
    • Scope and Purpose of Manual
    • Some Notes on the Sample Briefs
    • The Commercial Lien Strategy - Background
    • Some Examples of the Strategy
    • The Power Of Commercial Liens
    Chapter 2

    • Theory of Commercial Lien Strategy
    • Introduction
    • The Commercial Affidavit Process
    • Constitutions as Enforceable Contracts
    • Bonding of Government Officials
    Chapter 3

    • Basic Concepts of Liens
    • Lien - Definition
    • Different Types of Liens
    • Comparisons
    • Liens vs. Levies
    Chapter 4

    • Procedure and Implementation
    • Research
    • Notice and Demand
    • Notice of Default
    • Commercial Lien
    • Lawsuits and Criminal Complaints
    Chapter 5

    • Mistakes and Pitfalls to Avoid
    • Defective Legal Form and Procedure
    • "Hanson-type" or "Nebulous" Liens
    • Aiming Too High
    • Beware of "Exotic" Arguments
    Chapter 6

    • Obstacles and Strategies for Overcoming Them
    • Refusal to File Liens
    • Abuse of Judicial Power
    Chapter 7

    • The Coloring Agreement Approach
    • Background
    • Instructions
    Chapter 8

    • Final Thoughts, by Alfred Adask
    Appendix A - Bibliography and Sources

    Appendix B - Index of Sample Legal Briefs



    Appendix A, will allow you to do further research on your own.

    Some Notes on the Sample Briefs

    Included with this manual is an Appendix containing sample legal briefs, based upon actual examples used by others.

    You will have to reformat these briefs using your word processing software, and you MUST adapt them to your situation, and to the requirements of your state or locality. These are not and (in the nature of things) cannot be "fill-in-the-blank" forms.

    The Commercial Lien Strategy - Background

    Faced with corrupt lawyers and judges, no litigant can expect to win in court by simply playing defense. To beat them, you must be able to scare them. You must be able to make them respect you, and that means you must be able to take the offense -- attack them personally.

    Unfortunately, judges, lawyers, and other government officials enjoy various levels of personal immunity provided by both law and "professional courtesy." How do you sue a lawyer for malpractice? You hire another lawyer -- if you can find one who'll take the case. How do you sue an IRS agent for violating your Constitutional rights? Only with great difficulty. How you sue a judge for railroading you in court? You don't.

    As a practical matter, private citizens can't sue the President of the United States, a Governor, judge, or even an IRS agent for failing to obey or enforce the laws. If we try to sue in court to compel our government officials to obey the law and perform their lawful duties, the judges routinely ignore our petitions and laugh us out of court.

    Because legal and de facto immunities shield government personnel from being sued for committing crimes against the People, the public is legally disarmed, unable to aggressively sue the government or its agents and compel them to obey the Law. As a result, the public's legal posture is fundamentally defensive: we try to duck, dodge, and hide in legal loopholes to defend ourselves against the government and the courts. We try to escape, evade, and avoid, but we seldom counter-attack against our antagonists, largely because we think there are no lawful weapons to do so. However, it appears that a powerful offensive legal weapon may now have been discovered, tested, and proven for common Citizens -- the commercial lien. We don't try to sue a government official for failing to perform his lawful duties. Instead, we simply file a lien that encumbers the official's personal property and credit rating like a ton of bricks until he voluntarily satisfies our demand to perform his lawful duty, and we, in turn, voluntarily agree to excise the lien.

    Some Examples of the Strategy

    Example 1 -- Edward J. Wagner, an hourly, unionized employee at General Electric, received Notices of Levy from the IRS, garnishing his wages and moneys received from several other sources. Wagner tried to persuade G.E. not to honor the Notices, since they were not properly attested as "true bills of commerce." His efforts met with no success.

    After giving G.E. proper Notice and Demand, Wagner and his wife filed a Commercial Lien in the amount of $224,640,000.00. In the lien, Wagner impounded G.E. inventory that he had worked on (including air conditioning units, analyzing equipment, etc.) as security for the lien. This is similar to an auto mechanic impounding a car he had repaired ("mechanic's lien"). This meant that G.E. could not lawfully sell or transfer the equipment until the lien was either extinguished or satisfied.

    Among the reasons for the high dollar amount are that the law allows for such high sums as rewards for damages incurred, and it generally has to be large enough in relation to the size of the company involved, to get its attention. Otherwise such a large company might just ignore it.

    Consequently, a legal war followed, and by June of '92, G.E. had gone to court several times trying to remove Wagner's lien, all without any real success. This was in spite of the fact that G.E. had the best, most highly paid, and highly motivated lawyers.

    In June of '92, the first major victory for the Wagners came. The IRS issued four different official Releases of Levy, one to General Electric, plus three other places where they had wages and income that the IRS had levied -- the Port of Seattle, Dean Witter Reynolds, and Ohio State Life Insurance Company. These effectively released the IRS's attachment on the Wagners' income and assets. That's a pretty solid testimonial to the power of the arguments in Mr. Wagner's lien.

    Example 2 -- In August 1992, Mr. Nelson Starr, who lives in Florida, filed a lien on several federal judges, the Commissioner of the IRS, the Attorney General of the United States, one or more U.S. attorneys for the Southern District of Florida, and several other individuals, in the amount of $350,000 on each individual. The officials asked Mr. Alan Diamond, President of the Florida Bar Association, to inspect the lien and see if it was lawful or not.

    In spite of his desire to please his powerful friends, Diamond could find nothing illegal about the lien. In fact, in a sworn affidavit, Diamond declared that, "... the document causes irreparable harm to the system of the administration of justice. While some of the harm may be compensable at law, no degree of compensation will adequately remedy the damage to the appearance of integrity of those named and of the system of the administration of justice. In my opinion, the filing of this type of lien is a direct attack on the justice system and on the general reputations of those named in the "lien." It may negatively impact on the financial credit rating of those individuals. It will probably have a negative impact on their willingness to continue to serve as representatives of the United States. And, it constitutes an abuse of civil process that cannot be adequately remedied by an action at law. [emphasis added]" In plain English, Diamond did not like the lien, but couldn't find any way to extinguish it. Further, he seemed to say that these liens could drive public officials right out of office!For libertarians and patriots, that is a powerful endorsement!

    Example 3 - Another a man in Florida filed Commercial Liens against nine IRS agents and was later taken to court by the IRS agents'wives. The wives tried unsuccessfully to remove the liens, because their credit cards had stopped working. The liens had compromised their credit rating, and they couldn't go shopping except with cash. Imagine the distress that the IRS agents themselves had to endure from their wives on account of these liens! Evidently, the liens hit the agents where they lived, in a way that other actions at law could not do.

    Example 4 - Perhaps the most imaginative use of the Commercial Lien Strategy is a lien by Mr. Phil Marsh of the Pilot Connection against the President of the United States, the U.S. Congress, the Federal Reserve, and the Commissioner of IRS on behalf of all 250 million Americans (see Appendix B.6). For each of the 250 million Americans, the lien demands $10,000. If the lien were enforced, it would mean the government would owe the people $2.5 trillion, over half the annual Gross National Product.

    This "class action lien" will almost certainly never be enforced. However, if the courts find a way to extinguish it, it may have the effect of weakening the power of all liens (including the one the IRS files on us!).

    [Editor's Note: Everything in this manual is "information" only, not legal advice. This caveat applies with particular force to Mr. Marsh's lien. We present this lien as an interesting and imaginative application of the Commercial Lien Strategy, not as an "endorsement."

    Our organization originally included Phil Marsh and The Pilot Connection on our list of sources. However, some of our customers began to complain about poor service, and some raised questions about the integrity of the group. Later, Marsh appeared on the television show20/20 and vigorously denounced the IRS. Also, it appears that The Pilot Connection may have been stockpiling arms and ammunition. These actions invited official retaliation, which was not long in coming.

    In 1994, Phil Marsh and other members of The Pilot Connection were prosecuted by Federal territorial gangsters on a smorgasbord of criminal charges. In November of that year, the trial ended in a hung jury on most counts, and a few outright acquittals, with no convictions. The defense team included "public defenders" and two experienced pro se litigants from the National Commodity and Barter Association. The pro se's from N.C.B.A. later reported that Marsh was highly resistant to their legal advice throughout the trial.

    These facts suggest that Marsh is relatively blind to strategy, and that his reasoning is at a "proto-conscious" level, with a strong commitment to being "right" regardless of new information. Given Mr. Marsh's track record, we strongly advise readers of his lien to thoroughly scrutinize and research his legal theories before using any of them.]


    THE POWER OF COMMERCIAL LIENS
    Ease of Use

    Although this lien strategy is explosive, it's more like nitro-glycerin than hydrogen bombs. You need to be knowledgeable and careful to use nitro-glycerin, but you don't need to be a nuclear physicist. However, nitro-glycerin can blow up in your face if you handle it carelessly!

    Likewise, "bombing" government officials with liens is a craft, not a science, that can be used as easily by knowledgeable pro se's as it can by lawyers and legal scholars. The commercial lien is simple, inexpensive, and takes very little time. It requires no court action or judge's approval. And, it has proven to be very direct and effective, if it is handled correctly. However, a few careless pro se's have had their liens "blow up" in their faces (see Chapter 5), so be meticulous when you use them.

    Long Range

    You can file a commercial lien on property in another state or on property you've never seen. With a commercial lien, you can attack the personal property of your adversary at long range rather than merely fighting to defend your own property in your own back yard. This offensive capability makes the commercial lien a powerful legal weapon. With the commercial lien, you can literally take the fight to their back yards.

    The Helplessness of Judges

    The commercial lien, which is authorized both by the common law and by Title 15 of the United States Code (USC), is reportedly the same lien the IRS uses to take Americans' homes and cars. However, some pro se litigants do not depend upon Title 15, but upon the common law of negotiable instruments (a.k.a. Commercial Law).

    As such, it's almost impossible to remove a commercial lien without the approval of the individual claimant who filed the lien. Although a commercial lien can be challenged by a common law court or by a 7th Amendment jury trial, it does not require a court process or a court judgment for its establishment, validity, or execution. Therefore, it appears that the courts may not be able to simply extinguish this lien on their own discretion (or on motion from the lien debtors) without the voluntary approval of the person who filed the lien.

    Traditionally, these liens can only be removed by the voluntary decision of the person who filed the lien, by the decision of a constitutional common-law jury trial, or by waiting 99 or 100 years. Since the common law has been smothered in the U.S.A., all judges are essentially powerless to overcome the liens.

    The Right Way L.A.W.

    Before utilizing any of the procedures suggested in this manual, we strongly suggest that you join an organization called "The Right Way ... L.A.W." They are experts on legal and court procedures, as well as liens in general. They also have great expertise regarding Title 42 (civil rights violation suits).



    Appendix B).
    This explanation will, no doubt, be very different from anything you have been taught. In fact, licensed attorneys may have the hardest time understanding this, because they have been taught to think only in a certain way. An intelligent lay reader will probably understand the following article without much trouble.

    Most of us have been hypnotized into believing that the meaningless scribbles of "legislators," "Presidents," etc., constitute "the law." After reading this chapter, one thing should be absolutely clear to you. The law is whatever you give your consent to. This insight frees you from being a "victim" and a "subject," and restores you to your rightful position of power and sovereignty. (Always remember, though, that Territorial Gangsters [TG's] have all sorts of ways to obtain your "consent"! Standing up for your rights always involves risk.)


    THE COMMERCIAL AFFIDAVIT PROCESS
    by an anonymous Christian patriot

    A Powerful Weapon

    The Commercial Affidavit Process -- or "CAP" -- is perhaps one of the most powerful devices available to the common man for righting wrongs and accomplishing justice. The process is not new, as some may believe. At its foundation are the laws of commerce which spring from the eternal, immutable Laws of God, and those laws have been in force since the beginning of human existence. Provoke the use of the Commercial Affidavit Process against you and you provoke the wrath of all that is just and right.

    Today, those who are availing themselves of the CAP system are equipping themselves with a very powerful equalizer. Make no mistake! The CAP is a very lethal weapon in the war against injustice. It is capable of righting wrongs while eliminating the "cost factor" that deprives thousands of people from getting justice. The expression "equal under the law" again has real meaning, thanks to CAP. When the CAP methodology is properly loaded and sighted on a wrongdoer, success is "as good as in the bag." The Process is powerful and dangerous to those who are in the line of fire. There is no escape: either acquiesce and justly recompense or suffer the awful consequences. And, those consequences can be calamitous as will be shown.

    The Foundation Of Law

    There are basically three classes of laws: The Laws of God, which encompass the Laws of Nature; The Law of the Land, also referred to as the Common Law; and lastly there is Private Law, or man-made law, also referred to as Contract Law.

    Our Founding Fathers believed that it was self-evident that the God of Nature is the sovereign of the universe and everything in it (as well as mankind) and that He had endowed all mankind with "certain unalienable rights" making them self-directing sovereigns, which means that any governments instituted among men derive their just powers (only) from the consent of the governed, who are the source of earthly power and authority. Hence any attempt to exercise any powers NOT conveyed by the People is unjust and unauthorized, and any act done pursuant to such usurpation of power is void.

    They were further convinced that God's temporal law for mankind was expressed in the law of the land. Common law is common-sense law. It is simple, straightforward and self evident, primarily because it is based on God's Laws. It is the foundational law of the union of States.

    The Founding Fathers authorized three legal systems in the Constitution, first Common Law, secondly Equity Law, and thirdly Admiralty Law, which is the law of the sea. Gradually Common Law has been displaced by Equity Law until today the Common Law is rarely heard of or understood because it has been covered up and hidden away by the legal profession for very understandable business reasons. Such people are pursuing their own private agenda. In fact the Common Law is generally looked upon as obscene, example: to have a common law marriage is considered to be unclean. Why? The first marriage license in the United States was issued in 1863. The question is not whether some third party should or should not perform the service; it is whether sovereigns must get permission from their servants (the government) before they can be married.

    Private Law

    Private Law is that law which comes into being when people enter into agreements creating the rules and terms by which they agree to be bound together.

    State and federal constitutions are examples of private law. They come under the heading of contract law because they are contracts that establish governments and are designed to protect the People from the government. To keep the government under control, the People were very precise in the language they used to make it perfectly clear exactly what powers were being delegated AND that any powers not specifically delegated were reserved (by the People) to the states or the People.

    It should be remembered that the People are the sovereigns of State governments and the States are the sovereigns of the federal government. Thus the People, either directly or indirectly, are the sovereigns over both governments. The States have been given specific and limited power. They also made sure there were provisions that safeguarded the People's right to abolish or change that government and to create a different one if they chose.

    Public Law is a form of private law that results when laws are made in proper application of the delegated authority conveyed to the legislators. Title 18 (the Federal Criminal Code) is an example of public law. It was drafted to grant unto non-citizens the protections and defenses Citizens have under common law; Title 18 does not apply to sovereign Citizens, who answer directly to violations of GOD's Laws.

    Administrative Law is one term used to describe private law that comes into existence when someone acquires dominion over others and can dictate to them what the law is. Title 26 (the Internal Revenue Code) in an example of Administrative Law; it and the other federal titles classified by congress as "non-public" (administrative) laws, thus apply only to subjects of the federal government.

    In 1938 the United States abandoned Public Law and adopted an unconstitutional system called Public Policy. An understanding of this distinction is so vital that the definitions of these terms follow:

    Public Law

    That portion of law which deals with the powers, rights, duties, capacities and incapacities of government and its delegated authority. Those laws which are concerned with a government in its political capacity, considered in its quasi-private personality, i.e., as capable of holding or exercising rights or acquiring and dealing with property in the character of an individual.

    Public Policy

    The rules and procedures (policy) of a sovereign over its subjects. It holds that no subject can lawfully do that which has a tendency to be injurious to the public or against the public good as defined by the sovereign. Public policy is set by legislative acts and, pursuant thereto, by judicial and administrative promulgating of rules and regulations.

    Such rules and regulations are therefore not laws but rather terms imposed by contract agreements. It's the contracts themselves which make these rules and regulations binding. If you are not a party to those contracts, not a subject (property) of the government, you can make yourself a party by volunteering to comply. But once you decide to play the game you are compelled by the rules of that game to continue to play. Once compelled, the best out is to reassert your sovereign rights. The very concept of Public Policy and its inherent usurpation of power from the sovereign People is so addictive and has become so widely accepted by bureaucrats in all levels of government that they act as if they were the masters of the People.

    This shift in government was instituted with the Supreme Court's decision in the Erie Railroad case, as a result of which, all Supreme Court decisions prior to that time are being treated as no longer relevant in equity court proceedings. And so another milestone was reached in the conspiracy to overthrow the rights of the People.

    This Administrative Law is much like Roman Law which is also called Civil Law. Conceptually, Roman or Civil Law, which is practiced in most of Europe, is diametrically opposite to the Common Law.

    Under Roman or Civil Law you are guilty until proven innocent and have only those rights your master the government chooses to grant you; and what your master giveth, he can take away. Under the Common Law as practiced in America, you are innocent until proven guilty and retain all rights not delegated to government.

    We are seeing more and more of this Roman class of laws in this country: if you are charged you are treated as being guilty until proven innocent. If that is happening to you, it's because of your legal status -- or what "they" perceive as your legal status. If your legal status is that of being a sovereign Citizen your unalienable rights are being violated!

    Principles Of Law Making

    In the days before the turn of the century in America, the custom was for those studying law to study the Bible and the laws contained therein so that those principles would occupy a preeminent place in the minds of those practicing law. This is not the case today; rather the opposite is true. The eternal truths contained in the Bible have been lost from the view of those who need them the most. It is still the best place to learn about laws generally, as well as other eternal truths. The concept of a system of laws not founded upon those eternal truths is tantamount to building a house on quick sand.

    In America, the sovereign power resides in and comes only from the People. "We the People" are the sovereigns. All the power and authority the government has ... was given to it by the People! If we don't have the right to do a thing, then we cannot delegate such a right to any government! ("We cannot give to anyone or anything any power or authority we do not have!")

    Is it not in controversion to this principle that representatives of the People -- legislators or bureaucrats or judges -- pretend they can make laws to implement powers We the People did not and cannot give them? It is self-evident! Yet they pretend they can do virtually anything they or even a majority of them merely agree among themselves (vote) to do; they publish interpretations of laws and promulgate rules based on those interpretations; or they render decisions that are clearly antithetical to the concepts set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as the Founding Fathers understood and expounded them; and thereby they violate their sworn oath to defend and uphold the Constitution.

    They know that few if any who discover such usurpation will have the perseverance, let alone the financial means and time required to find a qualified, willing attorney to utilize the court system to expose their usurpation and bring them to account and thus rectify their malfunction.

    They also promote and rely on the general MISCONCEPTION that any statute passed by a legislature is valid. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail! This is succinctly stated as follows:

    "The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed ...

    "Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it ... No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." 16 Am Jur 2d §177

    "The general rule is that an unconstitutional act of the Legislature protects no one. It is said that all persons are presumed to know the law, meaning that ignorance of the law excuses no one; if any person acts under an unconstitutional statute, he does so at his peril and must take the consequences."16 Am Jur 2d §178

    "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them."Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436 at 491.

    In order for a law to be proper, it must be just. It must protect equally the rights of all without violating the rights of any. There is nothing mysterious about proper law; it is based on reasonableness and common sense, and is harmonious with the Laws of God.

    Check a law against this measure to see if it fits the mold of eternal truth and justice: say to yourself, "Would I be unwilling to have this law applied to myself or my closest friend?" If such application seems repugnant to you, if it seems unfair or unjust, then there is probably something wrong with that law. God knows that people's political standards are a reliable reflection of their moral standards and that the laws which they support are a good test of how they wish to be judged (Matthew 7:1). People can clearly see that taking money from some one by force is a crime when done by individuals, but they may fail to recognize the criminality of the same act when done by government.

    For example, how would you feel if you had a particular "entitlement" and the government told you that you were authorized to collect a portion of this government handout from each of your neighbors? Let's suppose that your "entitlement" is food stamps: instead of giving you stamps, the government gives you a list of people from whom you are "authorized" to collect the money to buy the food. How would you feel if they told you it was all right to force your neighbors to give you the money? And every time you needed more food, you had to do it all over again? Would that be right? If not, why? Would changing the name of the collector make it right? Would it go against your grain to do so? How would your neighbors feel when you presented your "authorization"? How would you feel if your neighbors were coming to collect FROM YOU for some other "entitlement" program they were "authorized" to collect?

    The Commercial Affidavit Process is a pre-common law process. It is also referred to as a "commercial law process," not to be confused with the [Uniform] Commercial Code and other manipulated and complicated rules and regulations. It is a pre-common law process because until there is a disagreement, there is no dispute. All that is being done is the establishment of claims and obligations. The purpose of the CAP is to make claims and determine if the accused agrees or not. If the Accused does not contest the claims there is no dispute to be adjudicated thus the appropriate damages are consensually agreed-upon. Thus it is pre-judicial. It may also be completely non-judicial if it is properly (composed of unrebuttable truth) and successfully implemented.

    The term "commercial" as used herein refers to any dealings people have among themselves. Thus the "laws of commerce" refers to the just rules of procedure governing human relationships, the self-evident principles of right and wrong which are the foundation of the common law.

    The foundation of COMMERCIAL LAW rests solidly on the bedrock of justice and common sense. These laws are so sound and so universally accepted that they cannot with impunity be overturned, overwritten or tampered with in any way: they are founded on eternal truths, needing no proof from anyone to justify their validity (i.e., self-evident); they are immutable; they provide equal justice to all parties of interest and thus are completely fair. That is the KEY to their power. All other just laws spring from this foundation. (By contrast, corrupted laws are mere shadows of these true and correct principles.)

    Justice is delivered quickly, simply, fairly and conclusively with the Commercial Affidavit Process. This may be a terrible disappointment to wrong-doers who are confident they can get away with their illegitimate activities. Those who are subverting just laws, setting them aside, covering them up, creating shadow-law or colorable law and just generally using self-serving laws to subject and plunder their fellow man are in for a rude awakening. In summary, the Common Law grows out of the laws of commerce which themselves are based upon self-evident truths. Such truths are commonly expressed as maxims.

    Maxims In Law

    Maxims are as much a part of the laws of human relations (commerce) as a foundation is a part of a building. They are fundamental and immutable, having their basis in God's Laws. No one of sound mind argues against them. They are the bedrock of logic, of reason, of common sense, of truth. They are fundamental principles upon which all that is right, just and true is founded. They are the standards to measure the correctness of any course or action.

    The word "maxim" is defined as an expression of an absolute truth or principle. Maxims are so powerful and unequivocal that they are the foundation of all human relationships. They have the power to cut to the heart of a matter in a heartbeat with reason, logic, and authority. They cover every topic imaginable and every aspect of our lives. They are not easily misunderstood, misapplied, or subverted; they are universally accepted for what they are: self-evident TRUTHS.

    Maxims might be considered the redundant backup system when all else fails.

    Anyone who is not schooled in the logic of maxims is easily confused for the want of such understanding. The legal profession has a vested interest in keeping the People ignorant of these principles: protecting the need for their "priestcraft." Priestcraft is "the craft of specialists who work to create the illusion their craft is too complex to be understood by anyone else."

    It doesn't take a law degree to understand maxims.

    The light of truth in maxims cannot be extinguished through the evil works and craftiness of men. They may be forgotten by many, intentionally concealed by some, but they still exist, no matter what, and they won't go away!

    Below are maxims that surround the rightfulness and lawfulness of the Commercial Affidavit Process. This by no means is an exhaustive list:

    Regarding Justice:

    • All are equal under the Law.
    • A matter must be expressed to be resolved.
    • Claims made without accountability are void.
    • Might does not make right.
    • Force, perjury or subornation of perjury, voids all.
    • Fraud vitiates the most solemn promise.
    • While the battle continues, he who first leaves the field or refuses to contend loses by default.
    • You are free to make any decision you wish, but you are never free to escape the consequences of your decisions.
    • A laborer is worthy of his hire.
    • Thou shalt not steal.
    • Notice to the agent is notice to the principal and notice to the principal is notice to the agent.
    • Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
    Regarding Truth:

    • Truth stands supreme.
    • Truth affects but cannot be affected.
    • Truth is expressed in the form of an affidavit.
    • Truth will out.
    • An unrebutted affidavit stands as the truth.
    • An affidavit must be rebutted point-for-point.
    • Thou shall not bear false witness.
    • Ignorance is no respecter, it affects all without regard to position or title.
    Regarding Sovereignty:

    • It is self-evident that all men are endowed by their creator (God) with equal and unalienable rights.
    • The created cannot be greater than its creator.
    • A man can give to another no more than he himself has.
    • A man may not with impunity infringe upon another man's rights.
    • The People are Sovereign.
    • In America the government is the servant of the "sovereign" People.
    Regarding Power and Authority:

    • We cannot give to anyone or anything any power or authority we do not have.
    Failed Legal System

    Although the court system MAY have an essential part to play once the Commercial Affidavit has been served AND ANSWERED, that system is not and cannot be invoked until the charges in the affidavit have been answered by (1) acquiescence, (2) rebuttal or (3) default: until that point, THERE IS NO DISAGREEMENT TO ADJUDICATE. A disagreement could arise only from a rebuttal.

    But even though it would be feasible to involve the court system to adjudicate such disagreement, no one seeking JUSTICE really would want to do so because the court system has become extremely costly, very slow and corrupted by the conniving convolutions of man-made rules and legalisms and by the natural inclinations of those who live from the legal system to promote the financial success of the legal business!

    If any adjudication is found necessary (only in the event of rebuttal) it will be done by a common law jury invoked at the discretion of the Claimant (see "RESOLUTION BY JURY" below). In stark contrast to the equity court system of today, the CAP system is so effective in exposing the truth, in rendering and enforcing justice, that it is a lethal weapon in the war for the freedoms and liberties -- the unalienable rights -- of the People.

    Private Matter

    The Commercial Affidavit Process places the full power of justice back in the hands of the common man. It cannot be overstated that the whole Commercial Affidavit Process is not dependent on the court system. It functions quite well on its own outside the current legal system.

    It needs to be thoroughly understood that because it is driven by SWORN TRUTH, the Commercial Affidavit Process is outside the jurisdiction of any equity court. It is a private contract matter. Should an attempt be made to involve an equity court it would result in a trespass against the Affiant's rights: those interfering individuals, who were unlawfully involved, would themselves become one of the accused. An equity court has no jurisdiction whatsoever, for the CAP is strictly a non-judicial or pre-judicial process between individuals and is private.

    This alone presents a very real dilemma for those who are accustomed to using the legal system to work wrongs and trespass against others with seeming impunity. They can't hide behind a legal system that only dispenses justice to those who can afford to play the game. Those who are used to shielding themselves under "sovereign immunity" protections, hiding behind legions of attorneys and judges, and using other "legal tricks" now have none of this protection.

    NO judge, court, law, or government can invalidate these commercial processes, i.e., an affidavit or complaint or a lien based thereon because no third party can invalidate someone's affidavit of truth. A judge CANNOT interfere with, tamper with, or in any way modify testimony without disintegrating the truth-seeking process of his profession, destroying the very fabric of his own occupation and abrogating the First Amendment which was established to protect truth. For a judge to interfere with testimony is to commit professional suicide and to invite countless civil and criminal repercussions. ANYONE who tampers with testimony is a threat to the peace and security of society, violating its laws and acting as its enemy and is therefore justifiably subject to the appropriate penalties. The Commercial Affidavit Process is by its very nature private, and strictly between parties of interest, only. It is unequivocally non-judicial.

    Sworn Truth

    The foundation of the law, commerce and the whole legal system consists in telling the truth ("I solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth ...") either by testimony, by deposition or by affidavit. Every honorable judge requires those who appear before him to be sworn to tell the truth and is compelled by the high principles of his profession to protect and seek out the truth.

    A Commercial Affidavit is an Affidavit of Truth. It is the sworn testimony of the Affiant who solemnly swears that the facts contained therein are true, correct and certain. Every claim made in the Affidavit is backed up by documentary evidence that is provable without any contrivance.

    Meeting The Demands

    If (as is usually the case) the Accused recognizes the charges are true and/or decides (correctly) that the wisest thing to do is meet the demands rather than face the staggering punitive damages which accompany the issuance of the Criminal Complaint, the Accused has the option of simply meeting the demands for redress as required by or negotiated with the Claimant. If the Accused has the good sense to meet the demands of the Claimant, then the wrongs have been satisfactorily redressed; and that is the end of the issue: all charges are resolved; the Commercial Affidavit Process is closed.

    Anyone is free to use the CAP system; but it is a two-edged sword: it cuts both ways! Anyone who undertakes it MUST follow the maxim, "Be honest with yourself," because, especially under the Commercial Affidavit Process, "Truth will out!" Consequently it is extremely important to ensure that everything in the affidavit is true and unrebuttable.

    Acquiescence

    When one is the Accused in a commercial affidavit process properly (truthfully) done, by far THE WISEST COURSE IS TO REDRESS THE CLAIMANT AS DEMANDED -- whatever must be done to accomplish it.

    Should the Accused be misguided into choosing ANY response other than acquiescence, the Criminal Complaint will issue accompanied by the Commercial Lien based on the Complaint's ledger of charges, counts, redresses demanded and ADDING (1) PUNITIVE DAMAGES and (2) INCARCERATION as provided in the applicable federal and/or State criminal codes. Although it is extremely unlikely in the face of a properly done affidavit, should the Accused believe that Affiant's charges are somehow in error, he or she may (DURING THE GRACE PERIOD ONLY) rebut any such charge; however, (1) such response will NOT avoid issuance of the Trial Criminal Complaint; (2) the Commercial Lien will still issue for any charges not rebutted AND (3) a second Commercial Lien will issue for any rebutted charges about which the Common Law Jury thereby convened remains unpersuaded! Hence REBUTTAL (unless 100% successful -- which is highly unlikely) WILL NOT AVOID the horrendous PUNITIVE DAMAGES and INCARCERATION provided by law.

    Rebuttal

    The sworn Affidavit will stand as truth if not timely rebutted by the Accused. In the instant case, thirty (30) days.

    The only one who can rebut a Commercial Affidavit is the Accused who alone, by his own affidavit, must speak for himself and only for himself. If the Accused uses someone else to speak for him, the third party must speak for and in behalf of the Accused as if he were the Accused; and the Accused still stands completely liable as if he himself were speaking. If however, the third party is identified as separated from the Accused, he also becomes a co-party with the Accused as an accomplice, thus a co-conspirator having no immunity whatsoever.

    Every charge or claim contained in the Claimant's Affidavit must be rebutted point-for-point by the Accused. The Accused's rebuttal must be done in the form of an Affidavit of Truth. That means it must be SWORN TESTIMONY and must be signed by at least two witnesses. The Accused/Affiant must swear to the truth, the correctness and the certainty of his or her rebuttals within that affidavit, thereby assuming complete liability for the statements contained in it and must be prepared to prove his or her statements, preferably with documentation that is unimpeachable.

    Failure to follow the correct process of rebutting the charges or ANY ATTEMPT TO PRESENT REBUTTAL EVIDENCE THAT IS NOT SWORN AS BOTH TRUE and "THE WHOLE TRUTH" INVALIDATES such response as if no evidence or rebuttal were given at all. SUCH FAILURE IS FATAL TO THE DEFENSE!

    If a proper rebuttal is offered, any of several conclusions may result:

    1. If any or all charges are rebutted, those charges will (at Claimant's discretion) be resolved as described under "RESOLUTION BY JURY."
    2. Any charges not rebutted or redressed will result in a DEFAULT CONVICTION for those charges and the issuance of a "non-trial" criminal complaint which will be covered under "CRIMINAL LIABILITY."
    Resolution By Jury

    The Claimant may accept or reject Accused's rebuttal of any charge, point-for-point. Claimant's acceptance of the rebuttal of any point resolves that point. At the discretion of the Claimant ALL UNACCEPTED POINTS may be either resolved by another affidavit on those points, repeating the process. The fallout of all the Affidavits are resolved by a common-law jury. If and when the jury system is used, the Claimant will draft the Criminal Complaint, subpoena a jury, and the process will move to a full-blown, common-law criminal trial.

    If the matter goes to a common-law criminal trial, the trial will be held under the rules of common law. These rules are significantly different from those in an equity court proceeding. In common-law trials, technical rules are virtually non-existent. Like its name, the rules of common-law trials are from common sense. The procedure is very simple and straightforward. It's designed to arrive at the true facts, assess guilt and render a just verdict without undue delays or fancy maneuvering, thus eliminating delays intended to forestall or get the Accused acquitted on some technicality. The jury is the real boss. It decides what is relevant and what is not. The jurors hear what they want to hear and exclude what they feel is not relevant. The Claimant or his appointee becomes the prosecutor, and the Accused or his appointee becomes the defense attorney. The parties of interest (the Claimant and the Accused) may have anyone they want as counsel, professional or not.

    The risk faced by the Accused is very real. A common-law court only recognizes common law, and it applies common-law decisions. Equity court decisions and rules that conflict with the common law are without standing in common-law proceedings.

    In the Commercial Affidavit Process, the claimants are almost always sovereign Citizens. As such they have legal standing at common law. The Accused are usually "subject citizens" being charged with crimes against "sovereign Citizens." Typically the acts committed have been done under colorable law with colorable authority or colorable jurisdiction, in which case is patently unconstitutional and therefore void, leaving the Accused defenseless: so a second Commercial Lien will issue for those redresses and punitive damages of which the jury has not exonerated the Accused.

    Due Process

    In order to meet the demands of due process, the parties must have reasonable time to express their versions of the controversy ("In order for a matter to be resolved, it must be expressed.") Therefore a grace period must be allowed, commonly referred to as "commercial grace." Many court jurisdictions allow only 20 days, which may be sufficient; but the Claimant in his discretion believes that 30 days is more reasonable. At the Claimant's discretion, even more time may be granted without notice; HOWEVER, that does not relieve the defense of the obligation to respond within the time of commercial grace given -- default falls by declaration in thirty (30) days.

    How important is it to TIMELY answer the accusations made in a Sworn Affidavit of Truth? IT IS VITALLY IMPORTANT! If the Accused fail to properly and timely answer, he stands to lose all and will have foreclosed to himself any future possibility of redressing or rebutting those charges. The primary objective is to insure justice quickly and with a minimum of difficulty. Failure to timely answer is fatal to the outcome. It is equivalent to abandoning the battlefield and causes loss by default ("While the battle continues, he who first leaves the field or refuses to contend loses by default.")

    The Accused, having started the contest by violating and trespassing upon the Affiant's rights, cannot with impunity leave the contest. The victory and the spoils goes to him who stays and is the last to leave the battle. The loser loses and in so doing, grants the spoils to the victor. There is no recovery for the loser; notwithstanding any new battle which may ensue, the loss still stands; it can't be set aside. Consequently, the Accused's failure to redress or rebut charges contained in a Commercial Affidavit is tantamount to abandoning the battlefield: thus losing by default.

    Some in government, by trying to hide behind some rule or procedure that requires Claimants to follow some predetermined course or time limit, commit a fatal error! They are usually relying on some statute or other inferior level of protection, which might apply to those who are subject to such jurisdiction, but not to sovereign Citizens. When "estoppel by acquiescence" caused by failure to timely answer enters the picture, as it surely will in this setting, the result has a far-reaching impact on the future of each Accused.

    Criminal Liability

    Responding to the Commercial Affidavit is critically important: the Accused is usually being charged with very serious crimes that carry very heavy, punitive penalties. The law has always viewed trespassing upon unalienable rights as being an offense so serious that it is beyond satisfaction merely by payment of the approximate money damages demanded.

    The Affidavit is a commercial complaint, but it is not yet a "criminal" complaint. The main distinction is that by resolving the charges during the Affidavit stage, the Accused can get off by simply redressing the grievances as specified in the Affidavit or as mutually negotiated. If the Accused recognizes his or her errors and wants to redress the Claimant but does not have the ability to do so within the time limit, the Accused may contact the Claimant and express that desire with a written statement to that effect. Then arrangements can be made to stop any further action. If some such arrangements are not made, then the CRIMINAL COMPLAINT issues adding PUNITIVE DAMAGES and JAIL TIME!

    The Criminal Complaint is in reality a ledger in which those details which were omitted in the Affidavit are (now) spelled out. It lists the causes of action, the number of counts, redresses demanded and the MASSIVE CIVIL PENALTIES (which occur when unalienable rights are violated), thus compounding the problems for the Accused: now, on top of the redresses being demanded, massive PUNITIVE DAMAGES are added as well! Normally this increases the cost to the Accused by a factor of at least a hundred if not a thousand fold. The effects of the criminal complaint invariably destroy all prospects for the future of the Accused!

    An S.E.C. Security

    When the Commercial Affidavit has matured, (after 30 days) it is evidence of a debt and/or obligations. In order for it to be classed as a security, it must carry the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (S.E.C.) TRACER FLAG on it from the very beginning. As a security it must conform to the rules governing securities and must be identified and monitored as such from the beginning.

    A Ledger Identifying The Penalties

    Since the Criminal Complaint is in reality a ledger in which the causes of action and the number of counts are listed and the civil penalties (punitive damages) determined, the criminal complaint acts as a punishment tool for wrongdoers who will not repent.

    Should the Accused be so foolish as to ALLOW the Criminal Compliant to be activated (i.e., fail to answer by redressment or rebuttal), the war is over: all that remains is collecting the spoils of battle. The Accused has lost and lost in a very big way. In all probability the Accused will never recover from the consequences.

    This is true is because THE "TRIAL" WAS GOING ON DURING THE 30 DAYS. To compare the Commercial Affidavit Process to a conventional trial would look like this: The Commercial Affidavit presents the prosecutor's case in one fell swoop. The moment the Accused is served, the defense process begins. THE ACCUSED THEN HAS 30 DAYS TO MAKE A CASE. If during that time the Accused make no defense nor redress of the charges, he or she then stands convicted by default! The "trial" is now over. The Criminal Complaint is only a formality to calculate the punitive damages against the Accused which thus have been awarded to the Claimant.

    Accompanying the Criminal Complaint is the COMMERCIAL LIEN which issued by CONSENSUAL DEFAULT against all the assets of the Accused. This effectively gives the Claimant lien rights against all of the property of the Accused. Such a lien may be filed in the county recorder's office; however, this filing is not a necessity, but a convenience. Any common law commercial lien will stand by law for one hundred years or until the damages have been collected. In most cases that means practically forever because the Accused does not, and probably never will have enough property to satisfy the damages thus assessed.

    Now the full power of the legal enforcement system can be brought to bear to collect the damages owed by the Accused. The Sheriff is empowered to seize pay checks, cars, homes: anything and everything.

    Loss Of Government Employment

    The Accused is in fact a convicted felon: unbondable by any insurance company, subject by law to immediate termination if employed by the government and forever barred from holding public office.

    Jail

    The Criminal Complaint is turned over to the appropriate Prosecuting Attorney, who must institute a sentencing hearing wherein a judge will impose the incarceration (jail-time) prescribed in the appropriate criminal codes for the offenses of which the Accused stands convicted. Should any such authority fail to prosecute sentencing against the convicted party, the mildest charge then faced by such authority is Felony Misprision; but such Prosecuting Attorney could also be charged with conspiracy to aid and abet the convicted party in commission of the same offenses.

    Under our current political situation, where the enemies of the People often occupy positions of power and authority and those same people can prevent or slow the wheels of justice, there are still many ways to publish the convictions and misdeeds of parties so convicted that can be even more humiliating to the convicted than the normal methods of publishing the results of their conviction.

    Summary

    The fundamental purpose, and one of the major objectives of the Commercial Affidavit Process is to educate wrongdoers to the fact they have abused the unalienable rights of a sovereign Citizen and cannot get away with it, and to give them an opportunity (commercial grace) to repent and undo the wrongs they have done. Unlike the typical criminal trial where the Accused no longer has the option of simply redressing the wrongs he or she has done, the Commercial Affidavit Process DOES give the Accused that option!

    Further, the CAP is designed to educate wrongdoers that they are being used by the conspirators in the war against the People. Thus they may see for themselves what is really going on and decide which side they choose to serve.

    Role of the Courts

    An affidavit is someone's solemn expression of truth. The foundation of the law, commerce, and the whole legal system consists of telling the truth ("I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth ..."), either by testimony, deposition, and/or by affidavit.

    Every honorable judge requires those who appear before him to be sworn to tell the truth, and is compelled by the high principles of his profession to protect truth and do nothing to tamper with that truth, either directly or indirectly, either in person or by proxy, or by subornation of an affiant or other person.

    A judge CANNOT interfere with, tamper with, or in any way modify testimony without disintegrating the truth-seeking process in his sacred profession and destroying the fabric of his own occupation. To do so abrogates the First Amendment, which was established to protect truth. It is committing professional suicide, as well as inviting countless civil and criminal repercussions.

    ANY judge who tampers with testimony, deposition, or affidavit, is a threat to the Commercial Peace and Dignity of the County, State, and United States of America, thereby violating the laws of all those political subdivisions and acting in the nature of a foreign enemy agent (A MIXED WAR), justifiably subject to penalties of TREASON.

    WHOEVER acts against Commercial Affidavits without executing the necessary Commercial Paperwork under affidavit is subject to being charged criminally. Said charges begin with FRAUD, which is gaining at the expense of the loss of another using trickery or deception, and the charges expand from there to include all those violations that extend to and are a natural outgrowth of such fraud.

    Commercial processes are fundamentally non-judicial and pre-judicial. NO judge, court, law, or government can invalidate these commercial processes; i.e., an affidavit or a lien or complaint based thereon, because no third party can invalidate someone's affidavit of truth. To act against such affidavit is to create a situation and or enhance the condition of A MIXED WAR. No one can rebut an affiant except a party (e.g., a lien debtor) who alone, by his own affidavit, must speak for himself if challenged. Only someone himself knows his truth and has the right and responsibility to assert it.

    The MIXED WAR situation and or condition is that where those in authority have violated their oaths of office, violated the fundamental law they took an oath to uphold and protect, violated the codes, statutes and regulations that govern them thereby they disregarded the peace and safety of the community by their actions, acting for undisclosed foreign agents or governments, against those whom they swore to protect [see Black's Law Dictionaryon "War"]. Simply, an act or acts of TREASON in a secret war against the people.

    Notes on the Above Article

    What you have read gives you the theoretical foundation for most of this manual. Practically, there are difficulties with the strategy described above. Conducting a common-law criminal trial is not easy, as the author noted. The court system has, for practical purposes, extinguished that option. Thus, territorial gangsters are often shielded from criminal prosecution. However, the one aspect of the strategy that can still be effective is Commercial Liens. As of this writing, it seems that no judge can extinguish such a lien if it is properly executed.

    Constitutions as Enforceable Contracts

    The Commercial Lien Strategy depends upon one "maxim" as its linchpin: the idea of a constitution as aspecific performance contractbetween a governing official and the people in a particular jurisdiction. Some writers (such as Lysander Spooner) have denounced the U.S. Constitution as a fraud, on the grounds that it is not an enforceable contract.

    The Commercial Lien Strategy, by contrast, holds that constitutions are enforceable contracts. The instruments of contract? OATHS OF OFFICE. The Commercial Lien Strategy assumes that, when an official signs an oath, he/she signs a contract to exercise the powers of office within the limitations of the constitution and the laws. On paper, there are sanctions against officials who violate their oaths.

    "Whoever, having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer, or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true, is guilty of perjury and shall be fined no more than $2,000.00 or imprisoned not more than five years or both." 18 U.S.C. §1621

    In practice, it is very difficult to prosecute a malfeasant public official. However, such officials may be exposed to great personal, commercial liability for violating their oaths of office.

    Apparently, many government officials realize this. Alfred Adask, editor/publisher of The AntiShyster, writes:

    "A friend of mine recently asked the [Texas] Secretary of State for copies of Governor's and AG's oaths, but received no response for nearly two months. Finally, he received a copy of the AG [Dan] Morales's oath which was dated January, 1991, but was not file stampeduntil March 26, 1993. Very suspicious. Governor [Anne] Richard's oath is yet to be found by the Secretary of State. Likewise, verysuspicious.

    "It appears possible (probable?) that the Governor and AG had not taken their oaths of office for two years after they were elected. If so, they were (are?) probably in office illegally. It would follow then, that anything they'd done or signed in an official capacity in the last two years might also be unlawful and without legal merit.

    "The potential for legal havoc could be huge. Laws signed by the Governor during the last two years might not be lawful; the entire Executive branch of the Texas State government might be without lawful authority to enforce any law or regulation; innumerable criminal convictions might be reversed. All of the civil court cases prosecuted by Attorney General Morales and the entire AG's office (which derives its authority from the AG's oath) might also be unlawful.

    "Of course, it's virtually impossible that the courts will rule that all official acts of Texas for the last two years are unlawful. But whether those official acts are bogus or not, there is an infinitely more important question:

    "Why weren't the oaths of the Governor and Attorney General of Texas -- the two most important officials in the Executive branch of our state's government -- on file at the Secretary of State's office?

    "Why? Some sort of clerical error?

    "I don't think so. I think the oaths were missing because they didn't exist ... [Emphasis added]

    "So perhaps some officials simply choose to be "oathless" in an attempt to "cover their butts" from being sued (or "liened on") for not "upholding and defending" the state constitution? Could be."


    Bonding of Government Officials

    Some pro se litigants postulate the requirement that government officials be "bonded." As far as anyone knows, this theory has not been tested in court. Nonetheless, some readers of this manual may wish to research this topic further. Therefore, what follows is a brief exposition of the theory.

    The "bonding" theory states that most elected officials and government administrators (perhaps even lawyers), are legally required to be "bonded." That is, they must purchase a "performance bond" (a kind of insurance policy) which guarantees that the official will perform the duties required by his office.

    In the event the government official fails to perform his duties, any party injured by this breach of contract can recover the cost of his damages from the bonding company.

    According to these pro se litigants, despite the legal requirement that government officials be bonded, many, perhaps most, are not. Therefore, the "bonding requirement" strategy is based on first determining if a given official is legally required to be bonded. Then, if he is bonded -- and evidence can be shown to the bonding company that he is failing to meet the performance requirements of his bond -- the bonding company may revoke the bond or raise his premium, which should help "encourage" the wayward official to obey the law.

    Further, if the bond is required by law in order to hold a particular office, once that bond is lost, it's possible that the office must also be surrendered.

    If the official is not bonded, then the lien process includes notifying the government official of this legal deficiency. If he does not correct the deficiency (purchase a performance bond) within 90 days, then anyone damaged by his actions can file a commercial lien on the government official for all of his personal property.

    Also (according to this theory) a government official's bond is dependent upon his legal immunity, and that immunity is to some extent based on having a legal Oath of Office on file (usually with the Secretary of State). If his Oath of Office is insufficient to meet the Constitutional or statutory requirements, he may lose his immunity and his bond. If he loses his bond, he becomes personally liable ("lienable") for any illegal act he commits in office.



    Appendix B.1). In this Notice, Mr. Gray alleges that Judge Feldman had broken various laws in the process of taking of some of Mr. Gray's property to repay back taxes to the IRS.

    Although you can use ideas from Mr. Gray's "Notice and Demand," obviously your own must be custom designed for your own purpose. Yet there are certain common elements that should always characterize it:

    1. It should be in the form of an Affidavit, and it should address the individual(s) personally.
    2. The "Notice" should be as concise as possible, preferably avoiding religion or morality. It should focus on applicable law, and contain appropriate citations of law, if possible, to support what is being claimed.
    3. It must quote the legal amount of time given for the recipient to fulfill the demand, and what will happen if the demand is not satisfied within that time.
    4. It should give the recipient a certain period of time in which to rebut the claims made therein.
    5. Finally, it should be "served" by Sheriff or "served" registered mail, return receipt requested. (Sheriff's number or the registered mail number is the SEC tracer [case] number).
    Notice of Default

    If the individual does not respond to or rebut your Notice and Demand (see Appendix B.1), you should then send a Notice of Default, stating that (1) the recipient has acquiesced to your claims by default, and that (2) payment or satisfaction is expected.

    Filing this Notice of Default (see Appendix B.2) with the County Recorder or Clerk of Court where the lien debtor has property creates a public, legal record in support of your subsequent lien.

    Commercial Lien

    If, after the lawful period passes without correction, only then can a Commercial Lien be served to the offending official or sent Registered Mail, Return Receipt Requested, and also filed at the courthouse(s) for the county(ies) in which the offender has property. The lien must be accompanied by (or must contain) a Commercial Affidavit, containing a ledger of damages suffered. The lien must also cite the law(s), action(s) or obligation(s) that gave rise to the damages. Models of both documents are listed in Appendix B.

    Lawsuits and Criminal Complaints

    Some pro se litigants will first file a lawsuit (Title 42 U.S. Code §1983) or a criminal complaint before filing a commercial lien. This step is included to show a "good faith" attempt to obtain justice according to normal legal procedures. After the courts refuse to consider the litigant's legal complaints (which is usually the case), the litigant declares a state of "Mixed War," and files the commercial lien.

    An example of a Criminal Complaint is included in Appendix B.4. If you use it, you must change the document to suit your particular situation. There is no "fill-in-the-blanks" magic here!



    Appendix B.5), substitute your name and the name of the government official in question, and be sure to substitute all references to Arizona law with those of your own state or locality. If the presentee is a Federal official, you may choose to omit the references to state law.

    Present the Coloring Agreement to the official in question, either in person or by registered mail. If the official is under oath to defend the Constitution of the United States (or the state in question), (s)he is bound by the agreement, whether or not (s)he accepts it or dishonors it. Present the agreement up to three times. If it is returned (dishonored) each time, then you may sue to compel him/her to accept it, based upon the oath of office.

    Don Smith expands upon the theory as follows:

    "The object is to create a civil contract (not tort) liability for the government agent for violating your constitutional rights, which rights are probably not part of the agreement that you signed, and is the reason the government agent is bothering you in the first place. This will likely have a chilling effect on the agent's activities toward you; i.e., you will probably not hear from him again...

    "For any violation, simply file contract (not tort) action to recover the amount specified in the Coloring Agreement's schedule. If the violator is a Federal sworn employee, sue in U.S. Court of Federal Claims, 717 Madison Pl N.W., Washington, D.C. ...

    "When The Beast invades [your] rights thereafter, your suit is in CONTRACT instead of equity. If IRS is involved, this moves the case into the Court of Claims, if over $10,000, sounding in admiralty-instance. Under $10,000, the District Court sits as a Court of Claims to enforce the contract dispute if a federal defendant, and if the case sounds in admiralty-instance ... You WANT TO BE IN ADMIRALTY, not equity, since you don't have any "squish" in the decision of the court. The same can be done in state court, sounding in admiralty-instance. You need only characterize your pleading as a complaint in the way of "libel." "Libels" may be used for judgments as well as prize. You want strict enforcement of the contract. You don't want equity civil rights enforcement ...

    "If the government employee/official ignores the Coloring Agreement and proceeds to violate the rights you have established by contract, you may file a Commercial Lien against him ..." [for a sample lien see Appendix B.8].

    Smith points out that this approach only creates an agreement between you and the specific government official involved. He also states that it will only work if the official has sworn an oath of office; otherwise the official will simply dishonor the agreement. However, if the official is not under an oath of office, this can still have a chilling effect.

    Imagine an official pleading, in court, to have the agreement set aside because he (the official) has not sworn an oath of office! This creates many "embarrassing issues." For example, if the official is not under oath, is he an impostor, acting in his own capacity? If not, who does he really work for? Are all his official acts legally void? Should all prisoners prosecuted by him/her be released from prison? Rather than open up such a "can of worms," the "oathless" official is much more likely to drop matters and leave you alone.

    Don Smith writes a newsletter, "Writ Rap." To obtain a copy, send SASE to Don Smith, nRa, c/o General Delivery, Laveen 39, Arizona. For back issues or teleconference, send one unopened roll of stamps to the same address, and you will receive three 720 kB disks (Word Perfect 4.2 format). All of Mr. Smith's material used in this manual is reproduced with permission.



    Example of Notice and Demand

    B.2 - Example of Notice of Default

    B.3 - Model Commercial Affidavit

    B.4 - Model Criminal Complaint

    B.5 - The Coloring Agreement

    B.6 - Phil Marsh's Lien on the U.S. Government

    B.7 - Nelson Starr's Lien on Judges and IRS Agents

    B.8 - Model Commercial Lien
     
    Goldhedge and TRYNEIN like this.
  4. arminius

    arminius Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Messages:
    2,798
    Likes Received:
    3,304
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    420 healer
    Location:
    right here right now
    The Commercial Lien Process

    What is a Commercial Lien?

    If someone has 'wronged' you, by their actions, you have a remedy, in Law. The Common Law is the Law-of-the-Land, and is the highest man-made Law under which the People of the Nation are bound.

    Under the Common Law, everyone is individually responsible for their own actions. The 'office' they may hold, the 'authority' they may consider they have, and/or the uniform they may wear, does not protect them in any way, shape, form. Simply because they (like everyone else) are responsible for every action they take. This was set into tablets of stone following Word War II, at the Nuremberg Trials. German Officers claimed "I was only obeying orders", yet they were still found guilty, and hung accordingly. This also forms a part of the Geneva Convention to which most Countries are signatories, especially the United Kingdom. Thus "I was only obeying orders" isnot a defence.

    The reasoning is simple: BEFORE taking any actions against anyone else, make sure that what you are doing is lawful and moral. If you suspect that the action you have been ordered to take is either unlawful or immoral, then you must refuse to obey. You can report the order, and your reasons for believing it to be unlawful and/or immoral to a higher authority. You can go as high as you like in the chain of authority, pointing out that anyone who conspires to support the unlawful/immoral order are making themselvesaccomplices, in Law. And that, as a consequence, they (themselves) will be held fully accountable, in Law.

    The Process itself

    In simple terms you write down The Exact Truth of what occurred, based on your first-hand knowledge, including any necessary supporting documentation. You will be writing under penalty of perjury, so do not lie, or make any Statements you feel you cannot prove. You explain the 'wrong', and you claim damages. You claim damages that you feel you deserve.

    You write this in the form of a sworn Affidavit, and send it to whoever 'wronged' you, giving them 30 days to rebut what you have said. You tell them that you will remove any Statements they can prove to be incorrect, but the result (after all removals) will be Notarised and placed on to the Public Record.

    You must take this step. Because it is honourable, and you must remain in honour. You cannot expect a Commercial Lien to work if you cannot prove this step. Thus your Notice should be sent by Recorded Delivery, such that you can prove it was received. If you do not take this step you can expect your collar to be felt at some later date because it is essential, and the essence of the Common Law, that a Party you consider offended you has the chance put their side of the story, and you must not deny them that chance.

    It is very important to remember how the Common Law works. This is solely by Verdicts of Juries (upon hearing first-hand knowledge-based evidence) and by unrebutted Statements of Truth (also based solely upon first-hand knowledge).

    What remains unrebutted, in substance, creates The Truth, in Law. (This is the only way the Law can work. It relies on people being truthful, with the possibility of perjuring themselves if they lie). Note that 'in substance' does not mean 'simple denial' as in "No, I didn't!". 'In substance' means denial with supporting proof. (And remember "I was only obeying orders" is not 'proof', nor is it any kind of defence. Neither, by the way, is "I didn't know" - because ignorance of the Law is no excuse. They should have checked, and discovered whether or not their actions were lawful and/or moral, before doing whatever they did).

    Being The Truth, in Law, it immediately becomes The Judgement, in Law.

    This is why, as a Witness, you are required to swear to: "Tell The Truth, the Whole Truth, and nothing but The Truth". Simply because all judgements are based on that. (I repeat ... it is the only way the Law can work).

    Now that you have an Affidavit that remains unrebutted, you can get it notarised by a Notary Public. 'Notarising' consists of identifying yourself to the Notary (Passport, Driving Licence, etc), and signing your Affidavit in his or her presence ... such that he or she can verify that it was you, yourself, making your signature. The Notary will apply his seal, and will sign accordingly. (Their fees for doing this range from £30 to £50 on average).

    All you need to do from this point onward is to 'place the fact that your Affidavit exists on to the Public Record'. This can be done by talking out a small advertisement in a newspaper. Within the advertisement you can invite Debt Collection Agencies to contact you - in order to actually exercise the Commercial Lien debt.

    What can the Lienee do about this?

    Judges know that they cannot affect a Commercial Lien because it is based on first-hand knowledge, which they can never have. Only you can have that knowledge. Only you can make the Statements you made. Thus there is nothing for them to 'judge', and they know that.

    The Lienee, therefore has three options:

    1. To pay up the full amount you have demanded

    2. To engage a Common Law Court, with a Jury of 12, to have their side of the story considered. In this Court you will also be able to explain your side of the story to the Jury. The Jury has the power to wipe away your Lien (if, for example, they don't believe what you stated), or to modify the amount you have demanded (if they think it was unreasonable). This is because the whole process derives from the Common Law (Note: Not Statute Law, which is subsidiary to Common Law!)

    3. To wait 99 years with the Lien hanging over their head. However, within this period, you can progress your Lien via Debt Collection Agencies and Credit Reference Agencies.

    Who can you take out a Lien against?

    Anyone you feel who has wronged you - or conspired to wrong you. For example, the Directors of a Company who have made demands upon you, without a Contract of Obligation from you. For example, all Debt Collection Agencies who simply write, demanding money, when you have never heard of them before, and know that you have no obligation to 'do business' with them. They may write on the basis of a Parking Fine, or whatever. The point is they do this without having first obtained a lawful obligation from you. They may very well claim a Warrant from the Northampton Bulk Clearing Centre, but you never consented to be 'judged' at Northampton Bulk Clearing Centre (and were never given any opportunity to put your side of the story). Furthermore the Warrant is not based on the Verdict of a Jury, or sworn Affidavit from first-hand knowledge (computers do not have first-hand knowledge!). So any such Warrant is void in Law. Consequently, if they continually harass you, they are (seriously and criminally!) 'wronging' you.

    Therefore you go to the Companies House Website, and pay £1 for a Current Appointments Report on the Debt Collection Agency. This will list the names of the Directors. You apply a Lien to each of the Directors, because it it their responsibility to make sure that their Agency acts in honour, and within the Law, not outside of it..

    Important Notes

    If you read the description above carefully, you will see that - in order to apply a Commercial Lien - you do not need to get a Court's permission. The Lienee would need to take you to Court (with a Jury of 12) in order to get it removed, or the amount reduced, without making a payment.

    Obviously you need to be prepared to remove it yourself, if they do pay up.



    A Detailed Example Template:

    1. Sample Notice of First And Final Warning


    Notice of First And Final Warning

    Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent; Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal


    The Commercial Lien Process

    A Common Law Commercial Lien is a process that any Human Being can employ in order to obtain lawful remedy from the actions of another Human Being(s) who have – or have attempted to – or have conspired to - damage said Human in some way. Such wrongs are known as “torts”, and are the subject of Tort Law. This includes ‘harassment’, such as ‘threats with menaces’, which is considered to be ‘psychological damage’, and also ‘defamation of character’, which is also considered to ‘damage a reputation’. The reason for this is very simple: Since all are equal under the LAW, then each Human Being has a Duty of Care to each other Human Being, such as to make sure that – whatever action we take towards each other – we have the Common Law behind those actions, and thus can live together in peace. Abrogating said Duty of Care is a CRIMINAL ACT, and constitutes a tort.


    I believe that you have created a tort, or torts, against My Human Self.


    The Commercial Lien process is a construct of the Common Law (The Law-of-the-Land), and England is a Common Law jurisdiction (being, as it is, on Land). Thus any Human Being residing in this country is subject to the Common Law above all else. And that includes the individual(s), to whom this Notice is addressed.


    The process comprises:


    1. The subject of the harassment (myself in this case), will write a Statement of Truth (Affidavit), under penalty of perjury. This being the case, what I will write will be “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, and will thus be based on first-hand knowledge.

    2. You will be sent a copy of this Affidavit, comprising my allegations. You will have to REBUT EACH POINT in order to ward off the possibility of a Lien. You will be given 30 (thirty) days to do so, but I can assure you that you will not be able to rebut EVEN ONE SINGLE POINT. You will need to rebut by means of a sworn Affidavit of your own, written under the same criteria, namely: From first-hand knowledge, and under penalty of perjury.

    3. Any points you manage to rebut will be removed from my allegations, and the remainder kept as my final Affidavit. The result will be Notarised (by a Notary Public) to become My Statement of Truth, which will not only become THE TRUTH, IN LAW – but will also become A JUDGMENT, IN LAW.

    4. That being the case, no Hearing will be required. Because the judgement has already been made by the truth. (That’s Common Law!)

    5. I will then place a Public Advertisement, warning whomsoever may be concerned, that your creditworthiness is henceforth highly suspect. I will inform Credit Reference Agencies to this effect. I would then be LAWFULLY ENTITLED TO SIEZE ANY OF YOUR PROPERTY, up to (and including) the value of the Lien.

    6. This process will occur in a LAWFUL manner – because you are given the chance to REBUT IN SUBSTANCE - and I will thus retain entirely ‘clean hands’ (unlike yourselves, which is why your mechanism is UNLAWFUL, and why I am able to counter it by this LAWFUL means).

    7. As footnotes, I should add that

    a. Even if I make an honest mistake, WHICH YOU FAILED TO REBUT, my mistake BECOMES THE TRUTH, IN LAW. You will not be able to claim ‘libel’, ‘slander’, etc, because you were given thirty days to rebut the allegations, before public announcement.

    b. By a failure to REBUT IN SUBSTANCE you would have tacitly acquiesced to my Statements as Truths, in Law.

    c. REBUT IN SUBSTANCE does not comprise simply dismissing my allegations. That is mere gainsaying. “IN SUBSTANCE” means “accompanying with HARD proofs” (in this case, “to the contrary”).

    1. As a part of the Lien, I will demand a substantial sum in recompense/settlement of the damages.

    1. Being Common Law construct, the only way this Lien can be removed is:

    1. By Full Payment … in which case I will remove it

    1. The passage of 99 years

    1. The verdict of a Jury of 12, deciding that the Lien should not have been imposed. But this will require YOU to take ME to a Court de Jure (Common Law Court) … whereupon I will be able to explain (to said Jury) exactly how you took actions which comprised the tort(s) against me WITHOUT ANY LAWFUL EXCUSE WHATSOEVER. DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, ASSUME THAT ANY JUDGE CAN REMOVE A LIEN. A JUDGE CONNOT DO THAT, AND JUDGES KNOW THAT (because it is a Common Law, NOT A STATUTORY, process)

    This was your last and final warning. If I receive one further communication from any of your Agents by means of mail, phone call, or knocks on my door, then I will undertake the Commercial Lien process against those individual(s) to whom this Notice is addressed.


    That being the case, I suggest that you take full Notice of this Notice, and immediately cease & desist from your UNLAWFUL actions in respect of My Self. You will find, in the future, that you will need to contend with this Commercial Lien process more frequently as time goes on, and more people discover it. Now might be a very good time to find yourself a decent, honest, upright, honourable job – instead of the thoroughly despicable, dishonest, and downright FRAUDULENT one you currently get away with.


    If you wanted an obligation from me, you should have requested it – before doing ANYTHING else. It’s far too late now. To carry on, under the gross mis-assumption that you have such an obligation, is simply CRIMINAL. And, if you persist, you will eventually pay very dearly.


    Sincerely, without ill-will, frivolity or vexation,






    <1>: of the <2> family, as commonly called, English Sovereign, and subject SOLEY to The Common Law.

    Without any admission of any liability whatsoever, and with all Natural Indefeasible Rights reserved.




    2. Sample Statement of Truth (Affidavit)


    Affiant: <1>: of the family <2>

    Sworn on: _________________________


    Statement of Truth of

    <1>: of the family <2>


    In relation to the individual who accepts liability for the Name: “<5>”.



    Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent; Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal.



    I, <1>: of the family <2> (as commonly called), being the Undersigned, do solemnly swear, declare, and depose:

    1. THAT I am competent to state the matters set forth herein.

    2. THAT I have first-hand knowledge of the facts stated herein.

    3. THAT all the facts stated herein are true, correct, and certain, admissible as evidence, and if called upon as a witness, I will testify to their veracity.

    4. THAT the eternal, unchanged principles of Law are:

    a) A workman is worthy of his hire.

    b) All are equal under the Law.

    c) In Law, truth is sovereign.

    d) Truth is expressed in the form of an Affidavit.

    e) An unrebutted Affidavit stands as truth in Law.

    f) An unrebutted Affidavit becomes the judgment in Law.

    g) All matters must be expressed to be resolved.

    h) He who leaves the battlefield first loses by default.

    i) Sacrifice is the measure of credibility.

    j) A lien or claim can be satisfied only through an Affidavit by a point-for-point rebuttal, resolution by Jury or payment.

    5. THAT Commercial processes (including this Affidavit and the required responses to it) ARE NON-JUDICIAL and pre-judicial because:

    I. No judge, court, government or any agencies thereof, or any other third parties whatsoever, can abrogate anyone’s Affidavit of Truth; and

    II. Only a party affected by an Affidavit can speak and act for himself and is solely responsible for responding with his own Affidavit of Truth, which no one else can do for him.

    6. THAT the lawful seizure, collection, and transfer of ownership of money or property must be effected by means of a valid Commercial Lien.

    7. THAT I am not the creation or chattel property of any person or any government agency whatsoever. I am not under any obligation whatsoever to any governmental agency, state or federal (i.e. union), or any of their self-passed laws, statutes, regulations or policies.

    8. THAT any and all of the various papers, documents, adhesion contracts, or "agreements" I may have signed with any government agency or entity or any others that might be construed to indicate a conclusion contrary to my herein-below assertions were made, signed by me on the basis of mistake due to lack of full disclosure creating a deliberate lack of full knowledge, a deliberate action of fraud, non-disclosure, concealment of material fact, and misrepresentation. Such action thereby creates a stressful situation of duress and intimidation, vitiating all documents by such action of fraud.

    9. THAT it is the sincerest belief and spiritual conviction of this Affiant that slavery and peonage are immoral, are violations of the First Precept of Commercial Law (“a workman is worthy of his hire”), that fraud, misrepresentation, nondisclosure, intimidation, deceit, concealment of material fact, lying, and treachery are morally wrong.

    10. THAT I have absolutely no desire whatsoever to be a "client" (slave) of any governmental agency, state or federal (i.e. union), or any of their Principals, or the "United Kingdom," or to incur any debts or obligations to said entities for whatever "benefits" said entities might purpose to provide or seek to provide to this Affiant, or be directed by, subject to, or accountable to any parties other than my own conscience and best judgement for the purpose of preserving inviolate my unalienable/inalienable indefeasible rights to life, liberty, freedom and property while engaging in the honourable, productive, and non-harmful activities of my life.

    11. THAT I, <1>: of the family <2>, am the sole and absolute owner of myself, my body, and my estate, and possess unconditional, allodial, sovereign title thereto, and that I abjure, renounce, forsake, and disavow utterly and absolutely now and forever all presumptions of power, authority, or right by any governmental agency, its Principals, over the rights, life, liberty, freedom or property of this Affiant from whatever source presumed or derived.

    12. THAT I, the Affiant, am NOT a Legal Fiction Person (as defined in a Law Dictionary) “<3>” as being a Corporate Entity (incorporated or non-incorporated) or some other kind of Partnership, BUT INSTEAD a living breathing, sovereign, flesh and blood Human Being with a living soul, with a distinct Mind that is capable of possessing personal knowledge commonly called <1>: (of the family <2>, when necessary to distinguish my Clan).

    13. <4>

    14. THAT all parties who act against this Affiant on their alleged basis must produce the Commercial Affidavits of TRUTH, sworn by the claimants to be "true, correct, and complete (certain)," which prove the origin and foundation of their claims and include providing the contract(s) or agreement(s) with the signature of this Affiant thereon wherein this Affiant has knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily, in full legal and lawful capacity, agreed to waive or surrender rights to “<5>”, their Principals, or the "United Kingdom" or agreed to become subject to or the slave or property of said entities in any way or in any jurisdiction whatsoever.

    15. In order for a crime to exist, four elements must exist; there must be a defined crime, there must be a victim, and that the victim must have been damaged, and the intent must be established on the part of the accused. Without proof of all four elements, no crime can said to have been committed. In this Affidavit, crimes are defined – namely the unlawful ejection and the lack of Duty of Care, the Affiant is the victim, this Affidavit verifies the damages, and the intent is established at the end of the thirty (30) day grace period, if the respondents fail to rebut (respond to) the wrongs they have been a party to as noted herein.

    16. NOTICE is hereby given, and demands made, on “<5>” that:

    a) ALL properties taken unlawfully, removed in violation of commerce, or otherwise converted, sold, or seized by “<5>”, or other Parties in collusion therewith, be immediately returned IN FULL VALUE (£) PLUS 10% to the original Owner, the Undersigned Affiant; OR

    b) All Parties who proceed to act or assist in said actions, against this Affiant, <1>: of the family <2>, without thorough, verifiable, point-by-point rebuttal of each and every point set forth in this Affidavit shall be immediately charged with criminal fraud, theft, conspiracy of extortion, theft and fraud, and commercial liens shall be placed against all their real and personal properties (defined crimes: criminal conspiracy, robbery, misprision of felony, conspiracy against the rights of peoples, extortion, fraud and false statements, and other such crimes as are related to issues of RACKETEERING plus such Constitutional violations not listed combined and described simply as TREASON); and

    c) All court costs and legal fees relating to this instant case shall be paid by those who have drawn the Undersigned Affiant <1>: of the family <2> into this instant matter.

    17. THAT failure to respond as herein required to this Affiant, within the herein a prescribed time of thirty (30) days will be deemed by this Affiant to invoke the doctrine of acquiescence and admission, to recover, in commerce, the lost or damaged properties plus damages, penalties and costs.

    18. THAT this Commercial Affidavit, Notice and Warning of Commercial Grace, is the ONE AND ONLY such Notice and Warning. If all actions are not abated within thirty (30) days, or if at any time in the future any actions are reinstated, it shall be considered a wilful disregard for this Notice and Warning, and such shall engender the immediate filing of Criminal Complaints (Affidavits of Information) and Commercial Liens (Affidavits of Obligation) against all parties involved.

    19. THAT the foundation of Commercial Law, being based on certain eternally just, valid, and moral precepts, has remained unchanged for at least six (6) millennia. Said Commercial Law forms the underpinnings of Western Civilization if not all Nations, Law, and Commerce in the world, is NON-JUDICIAL, and is prior and superior to, the basis of, and cannot be set aside or overruled by, the statutes of any governments, legislatures, quasi-governmental agencies, or courts. It is therefore an inherent obligation on all Authorities, Officials, Governments, Legislatures, Governmental or Quasi-governmental Agencies, Courts, Judges, Attorneys, and all aspects and Agents of all Law Enforcement Agencies to uphold said Commercial Law, without which said entities are violating the just basis of their alleged authority and serving to disintegrate the society they allegedly exist to protect.

    CONTRACT OF LIABILITY FOR ALLEGATIONS

    20. THAT if the Respondent, “<5>” fails to rebut such claims or charges, the Undersigned is LAWFULLY entitled to claim default against the Respondent. In that case, the Undersigned is fully entitled to take whatever LAWFUL steps may be necessary in order to execute this Lien.

    21. THAT only I, the Human Being involved against my free will in this instant matter, can determine how much stress, harassment, and other disturbance I have suffered by virtue of being UNLAWFULLY ejected from the dwelling I was inhabiting at the time, and consequently only I am in the position of decide and dictate my desired compensation, being the amount of <6> for all combined attempts to trespass on my absolute sovereignty, that being the sum total demanded by this Commercial Lien on the individual who accepts liability for the Name “<5>”.

    22. THAT by specifically offering “<5>” the chance to apologise in writing (although the opportunity has always been there for the taking) via a Notice of First And Final Warning, dated <7>, in this instant matter, I come to this position with clean hands as having shown good faith.

    23. THAT for all the purposes of all of the forgoing, all references to “<5>” shall be construed to refer to an individual who considers their Legal Fiction Name to be “<8>”, or any variant thereof, including Names phonetically sounding the same or similar, and who can accept service via <9>.

    24. THAT I, <1>: of the family <2>, the Undersigned Affiant, depose and certify that I have written the foregoing with intent and understanding of purpose, and believe the statements, allegations, demands and contents herein to be true, correct, and complete, commercially reasonable, and just, to the best of my knowledge and belief.


    * All words herein are as Affiant defines them.



    Signed and sealed this ____________________ day of ____________________, 20____.



    All rights reserved.



    By: ___________________ (Affiant)

    <1>: of the family <2>, in rerum natura







    (Seal)



    3. Sample Public Notice


    TO WHOMSOEVER IT MAY CONCERN



    A Common Law Commercial Lien has been LAWFULLY established between myself, <1>: of the family <2>, and the individual who accepts liability for the Name "<5>", at address<9>, herein referred to as “the Tortfeaser”.


    The reason for this Lien is that I have been the subject of a wrong (i.e. a tort) at the hands of the Tortfeaser, and my remedy IN LAW is to be able to place Lien on their property, until the wrong has been set aright. Thus I am LAWFULLY able to seize goods and assets that belong to the Tortfeaser, up to the amount of the Commercial Lien, which is <6>.


    This Notice is to inform whomsoever may be concerned that the creditworthiness of this Tortfeaser is, henceforth, highly suspect, until the Lien lapses - or is, by some other means, removed.





    Notes for the Templates

    DO NOT CHANGE THE FORMAT OF THE AFFIDAVIT/STATEMENT OF TRUTH (Notary Publics love it, and will have an orgasm when they see it).

    Simply Embed it by means of "Replace All", searching for the "<..>" codes given below, and replacing with your specific text

    Use "View > Headers and Footers", on the first page, to change the Given & Family Names in the Footer.

    Add any "evidence pages" as extra pages at the end, such as scanned 'Signed for' receipts, and scanned samples of letters sent/received, which are referred to in the listed complaints, torts, etc.

    The UK Column have agreed to publish Public Notices for free. It would then be possible to send the Subject a copy of the UK Column Edition containing the Public Notice.

    Replacements Codes:

    <1> = Given Name e.g. Veronica
    <2> = Family Name e.g. Chapman
    <3> = Affiant's Legal Fiction Name e.g. MS VERONICA CHAPMAN
    <4> = All listed complaints, torts, detail, etc inserted … see specimen, below.
    <5> = Subject's Full Name e.g. MR. ROBERT DOE
    <6> = Amount - as numbers, then spelled in words within brackets e.g. £5,000,000 (FIVE MILLION POUNDS STERLING)
    <7> = Date when "Notice of First And Final Warning" was 'Signed for', as received e.g. 22nd January, 2012 (Note: this is NOT <12>, below)
    <8> = Subject's Name variants e.g. BOB DOE
    <9> = Subject's full Service Address e.g. 1 Any Street, Anytown, Anywhere, AnyPostalCode
    <10> = Your Address (in "Notice of First And Final Warning" only)
    <11> = Individual(s) Name(s) and Service Address (in "Notice of First And Final Warning" only)
    <12> = Date (in "Notice of First And Final Warning" only)

    Specimen complaints, detailed torts, etc. - which go in at <4>

    ("Word" will automatically number these in, and re-number everything that follows)

    1. THAT on the <date> at a place commonly known as "<place>", "<5>" arrived just after <time>am, and started to 'fling his weight about'.

    2. THAT on that date, and at that time, "<5>" disturbed me, the Peaceful Inhabitant, without LAWFUL authority to do so.

    3. THAT on that date, and at that time, "<5>" ejected me, the Peaceful Inhabitant, from that dwelling without any LAWFUL authority so to do.

    4. THAT on that date, and at that time, "<5>" attempted to deceive me with a statement "I'm a Bailiff, I can do what I like".

    5. THAT having ejected me, "<5>" made no attempt to discover whether or not I had the means to summon a taxi or some other kind of aid necessary to leave the place.

    6. THAT I, <1>: of the family <2>, the Undersigned, herewith and herein demand of "<5>" to furnish answers to the following:

    a) Where is the real and true Commercial Paperwork bearing on this instant matter that made me liable to summary ejection from said dwelling?

    b) Where are the real, true, proper and lawful assessments bearing on this instant matter that I am said to be liable to summary ejection from said dwelling?

    c) Where are the clean hands?

    d) Where is the good faith action?

    e) Where are the truth, mercy, grace, and all similar just and virtuous qualities and proceedings based on them that are supposed to inhere in the Common Law, and commerce via the Uniform Commercial Code?

    7. THAT if "<5>" believes his actions against me carried the force of Law behind them, let him show the Common Law precedent.

    8. THAT if "<5>" believes that the Common Law (the Law-of-the-Land) does not exist, has no value, is not supreme in this Land, or that it is inferior to any Administrative Court-produced 'Warrant' he may have possessed, then let him show that there is no crime of murder (a Common Law crime), or Misconduct in Public Office (a Common Law misdemeanour), or Contempt of Court (a Common Law misdemeanour).

    9. THAT if "<5>" disavows the Common Law, then let him explain whether or not he disavows the crime of murder.

    10. THAT if "<5>" disavows the Common Law, but does not disavow the crime of murder, then let him show how this is possible.

    11. THAT if "<5>" disavows the Common Law, and also disavows the crime of murder, then this places him an "Outlaw" (i.e. "Wanted - Dead or Alive"), with no protection from the Common Law, and thus fair game for anyone to take his life, not only "without facing any penalty" for so doing, but may possibly even "receive a bounty" for so doing. (Read up on history!)

    Notice of First And Final Warning
    Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent; Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal

    The Commercial Lien Process

    A Common Law Commercial Lien is a process that any Human Being can employ in order to obtain lawful remedy from the actions of another Human Being(s) who have – or have attempted to – or have conspired to - damage said Human in some way. Such wrongs are known as “torts”, and are the subject of Tort Law. This includes ‘harassment’, such as ‘threats with menaces’, which is considered to be ‘psychological damage’, and also ‘defamation of character’, which is also considered to ‘damage a reputation’. The reason for this is very simple: Since all are equal under the LAW, then each Human Being has a Duty of Care to each other Human Being, such as to make sure that – whatever action we take towards each other – we have the Common Law behind those actions, and thus can live together in peace. Abrogating said Duty of Care is a CRIMINAL ACT, and constitutes a tort.

    I believe that you have created a tort, or torts, against My Human Self.

    The Commercial Lien process is a construct of the Common Law (The Law-of-the-Land), and England is a Common Law jurisdiction (being, as it is, on Land). Thus any Human Being residing in this country is subject to the Common Law above all else. And that includes the individual(s), to whom this Notice is addressed.

    The process comprises:


    1. The subject of the harassment (myself in this case), will write a Statement of Truth (Affidavit), under penalty of perjury. This being the case, what I will write will be “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”, and will thus be based on first-hand knowledge.
    2. You will be sent a copy of this Affidavit, comprising my allegations. You will have to REBUT EACH POINT in order to ward off the possibility of a Lien. You will be given 30 (thirty) days to do so, but I can assure you that you will not be able to rebut EVEN ONE SINGLE POINT. You will need to rebut by means of a sworn Affidavit of your own, written under the same criteria, namely: From first-hand knowledge, and under penalty of perjury.
    3. Any points you manage to rebut will be removed from my allegations, and the remainder kept as my final Affidavit. The result will be Notarised (by a Notary Public) to become My Statement of Truth, which will not only become THE TRUTH, IN LAW – but will also become A JUDGMENT, IN LAW.
    4. That being the case, no Hearing will be required. Because the judgement has already been made by the truth. (That’s Common Law!)
    5. I will then place a Public Advertisement, warning whomsoever may be concerned, that your creditworthiness is henceforth highly suspect. I will inform Credit Reference Agencies to this effect. I would then be LAWFULLY ENTITLED TO SIEZE ANY OF YOUR PROPERTY, up to (and including) the value of the Lien.
    6. This process will occur in a LAWFUL manner – because you are given the chance to REBUT IN SUBSTANCE - and I will thus retain entirely ‘clean hands’ (unlike yourselves, which is why your mechanism is UNLAWFUL, and why I am able to counter it by this LAWFUL means).
    7. As footnotes, I should add that
      1. Even if I make an honest mistake, WHICH YOU FAILED TO REBUT, my mistake BECOMES THE TRUTH, IN LAW. You will not be able to claim ‘libel’, ‘slander’, etc, because you were given thirty days to rebut the allegations, before public announcement.
      2. By a failure to REBUT IN SUBSTANCE you would have tacitly acquiesced to my Statements as Truths, in Law.
      3. REBUT IN SUBSTANCE does not comprise simply dismissing my allegations. That is mere gainsaying. “IN SUBSTANCE” means “accompanying with HARD proofs” (in this case, “to the contrary”).

    8. As a part of the Lien, I will demand a substantial sum in recompense/settlement of the damages.



    1. Being Common Law construct, the only way this Lien can be removed is:



    1. By Full Payment … in which case I will remove it



    1. The passage of 99 years



    1. The verdict of a Jury of 12, deciding that the Lien should not have been imposed. But this will require YOU to take ME to a Court de Jure (Common Law Court) … whereupon I will be able to explain (to said Jury) exactly how you took actions which comprised the tort(s) against me WITHOUT ANY LAWFUL EXCUSE WHATSOEVER. DO NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, ASSUME THAT ANY JUDGE CAN REMOVE A LIEN. A JUDGE CONNOT DO THAT, AND JUDGES KNOW THAT (because it is a Common Law, NOT A STATUTORY, process)


    This was your last and final warning. If I receive one further communication from any of your Agents by means of mail, phone call, or knocks on my door, then I will undertake the Commercial Lien process against those individual(s) to whom this Notice is addressed.

    That being the case, I suggest that you take full Notice of this Notice, and immediately cease & desist from your UNLAWFUL actions in respect of My Self. You will find, in the future, that you will need to contend with this Commercial Lien process more frequently as time goes on, and more people discover it. Now might be a very good time to find yourself a decent, honest, upright, honourable job – instead of the thoroughly despicable, dishonest, and downright FRAUDULENT one you currently get away with.

    If you wanted an obligation from me, you should have requested it – before doing ANYTHING else. It’s far too late now. To carry on, under the gross mis-assumption that you have such an obligation, is simply CRIMINAL. And, if you persist, you will eventually pay very dearly.

    Sincerely, without ill-will, frivolity or vexation,





    <1>: of the <2> family, as commonly called, English Sovereign, and subject SOLEY to The Common Law.
    Without any admission of any liability whatsoever, and with all Natural Indefeasible Rights reserved.

    Affiant: <1>: of the family <2>
    Sworn on: _________________________

    Statement of Truth of
    <1>: of the family <2>

    In relation to the individual who accepts liability for the Name: “<5>”.

    Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent; Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal.

    I, <1>: of the family <2> (as commonly called), being the Undersigned, do solemnly swear, declare, and depose:

    1. THAT I am competent to state the matters set forth herein.
    2. THAT I have first-hand knowledge of the facts stated herein.
    3. THAT all the facts stated herein are true, correct, and certain, admissible as evidence, and if called upon as a witness, I will testify to their veracity.
    4. THAT the eternal, unchanged principles of Law are:


    1. A workman is worthy of his hire.
    2. All are equal under the Law.
    3. In Law, truth is sovereign.
    4. Truth is expressed in the form of an Affidavit.
    5. An unrebutted Affidavit stands as truth in Law.
    6. An unrebutted Affidavit becomes the judgment in Law.
    7. All matters must be expressed to be resolved.
    8. He who leaves the battlefield first loses by default.
    9. Sacrifice is the measure of credibility.
    10. A lien or claim can be satisfied only through an Affidavit by a point-for-point rebuttal, resolution by Jury or payment.


    1. THAT Commercial processes (including this Affidavit and the required responses to it) ARE NON-JUDICIAL and pre-judicial because:
      1. No judge, court, government or any agencies thereof, or any other third parties whatsoever, can abrogate anyone’s Affidavit of Truth; and
      2. Only a party affected by an Affidavit can speak and act for himself and is solely responsible for responding with his own Affidavit of Truth, which no one else can do for him.

    2. THAT the lawful seizure, collection, and transfer of ownership of money or property must be effected by means of a valid Commercial Lien.
    3. THAT I am not the creation or chattel property of any person or any government agency whatsoever. I am not under any obligation whatsoever to any governmental agency, state or federal (i.e. union), or any of their self-passed laws, statutes, regulations or policies.
    4. THAT any and all of the various papers, documents, adhesion contracts, or "agreements" I may have signed with any government agency or entity or any others that might be construed to indicate a conclusion contrary to my herein-below assertions were made, signed by me on the basis of mistake due to lack of full disclosure creating a deliberate lack of full knowledge, a deliberate action of fraud, non-disclosure, concealment of material fact, and misrepresentation. Such action thereby creates a stressful situation of duress and intimidation, vitiating all documents by such action of fraud.
    5. THAT it is the sincerest belief and spiritual conviction of this Affiant that slavery and peonage are immoral, are violations of the First Precept of Commercial Law (“a workman is worthy of his hire”), that fraud, misrepresentation, nondisclosure, intimidation, deceit, concealment of material fact, lying, and treachery are morally wrong.
    6. THAT I have absolutely no desire whatsoever to be a "client" (slave) of any governmental agency, state or federal (i.e. union), or any of their Principals, or the "United Kingdom," or to incur any debts or obligations to said entities for whatever "benefits" said entities might purpose to provide or seek to provide to this Affiant, or be directed by, subject to, or accountable to any parties other than my own conscience and best judgement for the purpose of preserving inviolate my unalienable/inalienable indefeasible rights to life, liberty, freedom and property while engaging in the honourable, productive, and non-harmful activities of my life.
    7. THAT I, <1>: of the family <2>, am the sole and absolute owner of myself, my body, and my estate, and possess unconditional, allodial, sovereign title thereto, and that I abjure, renounce, forsake, and disavow utterly and absolutely now and forever all presumptions of power, authority, or right by any governmental agency, its Principals, over the rights, life, liberty, freedom or property of this Affiant from whatever source presumed or derived.
    8. THAT I, the Affiant, am NOT a Legal Fiction Person (as defined in a Law Dictionary) “<3>” as being a Corporate Entity (incorporated or non-incorporated) or some other kind of Partnership, BUT INSTEAD a living breathing, sovereign, flesh and blood Human Being with a living soul, with a distinct Mind that is capable of possessing personal knowledge commonly called <1>: (of the family <2>, when necessary to distinguish my Clan).
    9. <4>
    10. THAT all parties who act against this Affiant on their alleged basis must produce the Commercial Affidavits of TRUTH, sworn by the claimants to be "true, correct, and complete (certain)," which prove the origin and foundation of their claims and include providing the contract(s) or agreement(s) with the signature of this Affiant thereon wherein this Affiant has knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily, in full legal and lawful capacity, agreed to waive or surrender rights to “<5>”, their Principals, or the "United Kingdom" or agreed to become subject to or the slave or property of said entities in any way or in any jurisdiction whatsoever.
    11. In order for a crime to exist, four elements must exist; there must be a defined crime, there must be a victim, and that the victim must have been damaged, and the intent must be established on the part of the accused. Without proof of all four elements, no crime can said to have been committed. In this Affidavit, crimes are defined – namely the unlawful ejection and the lack of Duty of Care, the Affiant is the victim, this Affidavit verifies the damages, and the intent is established at the end of the thirty (30) day grace period, if the respondents fail to rebut (respond to) the wrongs they have been a party to as noted herein.
    12. NOTICE is hereby given, and demands made, on “<5>” that:


    1. ALL properties taken unlawfully, removed in violation of commerce, or otherwise converted, sold, or seized by “<5>”, or other Parties in collusion therewith, be immediately returned IN FULL VALUE (£) PLUS 10% to the original Owner, the Undersigned Affiant; OR
    2. All Parties who proceed to act or assist in said actions, against this Affiant, <1>: of the family <2>, without thorough, verifiable, point-by-point rebuttal of each and every point set forth in this Affidavit shall be immediately charged with criminal fraud, theft, conspiracy of extortion, theft and fraud, and commercial liens shall be placed against all their real and personal properties (defined crimes: criminal conspiracy, robbery, misprision of felony, conspiracy against the rights of peoples, extortion, fraud and false statements, and other such crimes as are related to issues of RACKETEERING plus such Constitutional violations not listed combined and described simply as TREASON); and
    3. All court costs and legal fees relating to this instant case shall be paid by those who have drawn the Undersigned Affiant <1>: of the family <2> into this instant matter.


    1. THAT failure to respond as herein required to this Affiant, within the herein a prescribed time of thirty (30) days will be deemed by this Affiant to invoke the doctrine of acquiescence and admission, to recover, in commerce, the lost or damaged properties plus damages, penalties and costs.
    2. THAT this Commercial Affidavit, Notice and Warning of Commercial Grace, is the ONE AND ONLY such Notice and Warning. If all actions are not abated within thirty (30) days, or if at any time in the future any actions are reinstated, it shall be considered a wilful disregard for this Notice and Warning, and such shall engender the immediate filing of Criminal Complaints (Affidavits of Information) and Commercial Liens (Affidavits of Obligation) against all parties involved.
    3. THAT the foundation of Commercial Law, being based on certain eternally just, valid, and moral precepts, has remained unchanged for at least six (6) millennia. Said Commercial Law forms the underpinnings of Western Civilization if not all Nations, Law, and Commerce in the world, is NON-JUDICIAL, and is prior and superior to, the basis of, and cannot be set aside or overruled by, the statutes of any governments, legislatures, quasi-governmental agencies, or courts. It is therefore an inherent obligation on all Authorities, Officials, Governments, Legislatures, Governmental or Quasi-governmental Agencies, Courts, Judges, Attorneys, and all aspects and Agents of all Law Enforcement Agencies to uphold said Commercial Law, without which said entities are violating the just basis of their alleged authority and serving to disintegrate the society they allegedly exist to protect.

    CONTRACT OF LIABILITY FOR ALLEGATIONS

    1. THAT if the Respondent, “<5>” fails to rebut such claims or charges, the Undersigned is LAWFULLY entitled to claim default against the Respondent. In that case, the Undersigned is fully entitled to take whatever LAWFUL steps may be necessary in order to execute this Lien.
    2. THAT only I, the Human Being involved against my free will in this instant matter, can determine how much stress, harassment, and other disturbance I have suffered by virtue of being UNLAWFULLY ejected from the dwelling I was inhabiting at the time, and consequently only I am in the position of decide and dictate my desired compensation, being the amount of <6> for all combined attempts to trespass on my absolute sovereignty, that being the sum total demanded by this Commercial Lien on the individual who accepts liability for the Name “<5>”.
    3. THAT by specifically offering “<5>” the chance to apologise in writing (although the opportunity has always been there for the taking) via a Notice of First And Final Warning, dated <7>, in this instant matter, I come to this position with clean hands as having shown good faith.
    4. THAT for all the purposes of all of the forgoing, all references to “<5>” shall be construed to refer to an individual who considers their Legal Fiction Name to be “<8>”, or any variant thereof, including Names phonetically sounding the same or similar, and who can accept service via <9>.
    5. THAT I, <1>: of the family <2>, the Undersigned Affiant, depose and certify that I have written the foregoing with intent and understanding of purpose, and believe the statements, allegations, demands and contents herein to be true, correct, and complete, commercially reasonable, and just, to the best of my knowledge and belief.


    * All words herein are as Affiant defines them.


    Signed and sealed this ____________________ day of ____________________, 20____.


    All rights reserved.


    By: ___________________ (Affiant)
    <1>: of the family <2>, in rerum natura



    (Seal)


    Acknowledgment

    For verification purposes only

    SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me by <1>: of the family <2>, known to me or proven to me to be the real human signing this Affidavit this


    _______________________ day of _________________________, 20_____.


    WITNESS my hand and official seal.


    ___________________________________ ________________ (Seal)
    NOTARY PUBLIC [Print Name]



    Sworn at:_________________________________ ________________________________________
    ________________________________________
    ________________________________________
    End of document.
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2017
    Goldhedge likes this.

Share This Page