Law Enforcers Are Supposed To Know “Due Process of Law”!

Law and justice concept – Themis statue, judge hammer and books. Courtroom.

#RulesoOfCivilProcedure #DueProcessofLaw #Court #CaseLaw #Statutes #Constitution #Charter

#NoticeOfTrespass #NoticeOfLiability

The information shared herein is intended to assist those that have difficulty finding resolution when it comes to our interaction with the “Legal Society”. It is important for us to realize that we have a fundamental right to be free from violence.

Matthew 17 (KJV)[i]Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets. I am not come to destroy them, but to [j]fulfill them. 

What Are Human Rights?

Everyone in the world is entitled to the same fundamental human rights. There are 30 of them, in fact. They are the universal human rights that we, as citizens of this world, have agreed we are all entitled to. They include the right to live free from torture, the right to live free from slavery, the right to own property, and the right to equality and dignity, and to live free from all forms of discrimination.

  • Human rights describe how we instinctively expect to be treated as persons.
  • Human rights define what we are all entitled to a life of equality, dignity, respect, and a life free from discrimination.
  • You do not have to earn your human rights. You are born with them. They are the same for every person.
  • Nobody can give them to you. But they can be taken away.
  • Countries have human rights laws to make sure that people and governments are held accountable if your human rights are not respected. In Canada, your human rights are protected by provincial, territorial, federal and international laws.

What they do not tell us is the “legal definition of the word “person”,

n. 1) a human being. 2) a corporation treated as having the rights and obligations of a person.  Counties and cities can be treated as a person in the same manner as a corporation. However,  corporations, counties and cities cannot have the emotions of humans such as malice, and therefore are not liable for punitive damages.


Source: Person legal definition of person (

49 CFR § 171.8 – Definitions and abbreviations.


Person means an individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partnership, society, joint stock company; or a government, Indian Tribe, or authority of a government or Tribe, that offers a hazardous material for transportation in commerce, transports a hazardous material to support a commercial enterprise, or designs, manufactures, fabricates, inspects, marks, maintains, reconditions, repairs, or tests a package, container, or packaging component that is represented, marked, certified, or sold as qualified for use in transporting hazardous material in commerce. This term does not include the United States Postal Service or, for purposes of 49 U.S.C. 5123 and 5124, a Department, agency, or instrumentality of the government.

Rights cannot be taken away they can only be ignored!!!

We should all be asking “why are our innate and inherent rights being ignored and our will violated?

The people of the world must come to realize that the “Legal Society” is the same everywhere. It does not matter what so called, “country” you believe yourself from:

“same Crown, same BAR, same administers acting fraudulently as “judges”. cheers”! mark feller

Those that are enforcing the “laws” are the ones that must recognize when they are actually “breaking the Laws”. it is odd that we have been programmed and hypnotized in our training to ignore what is right in front of us.

It has come our attention during an altercation with a “policy enforcers”, member of the “RCMP”, that they are not aware that they are the standing army for the “Legal Society” and enforcing corporate policies and procedures of said “Crown Service Corporations”. These “militarized” men and women are blind to the fact that they have no right to order a man or women they are calling “civilians”.

We have a fundamental right to not be involved in their system. How do we extricate ourselves from this system that has been laid down over millions of years?

The following online document should be read by everyone:


When we procure a Lawyer or an Attorney we are seen as incompetent to handle our own affairs. The Lawyer or Attorney cannot represent another man, it is the man that must speak for him/herself. Attorneys and Lawyers are 3rd party interlopers as they do not have 1st hand knowledge of the events at hand.

The judge may try to trip us up in court and ask questions in a deceptive way, it is how they have been trained. If the Judge asks if we want to represent our self we must say, “i cannot represent myself for i am myself”.

Know that a Lawyer or Attorney has no authority. If we require assistance we should be hiring “counsel” to assist us in the process.

“Never allow an attorney(attorner) to “Represent” You! Only allow them to play the role of “assistance of counsel”! This has worked for me 100% of the time , as well as for everyone I have taught it to. Say this and ONLY this, and repeat it each time you have an opportunity to speak..and add “on and for the record’ as many times as you can… script: they call the “Person” “I am here by special appearance, I am the authorized representative for that “person”[for me ie/I do not recognise the “Legal Person” so do not authorize its use] I reserve all of my rights without prejudice UCC 1-308, before we proceed I need you to answer some questions for me regarding the nature and cause of the charges (allegations) and the Jurisdiction under which they are brought, first you have taken an oath of office in which you have sworn a solemn oath to uphold protect and defend the state and federal Constitutions is that correct.?….Administrator (Judge) ….Yes……’Thank you for answering that Your honor [ie/I would call the judge by name and would never call him “your honor”]……Under what Jurisdiction is this court operating?…..Administrator (Judge)….Statutory(or some other bullshit)! “again Thank you your Honor but I have studied the State and Federal Constitutions and they only make mention and authorize Common Law, Equity, Maritime and Admiralty Jurisdictions, You didn’t mention any of those, Clearly you are operating under some secret rogue Jurisdiction, You do not have Jurisdiction therefore I hereby Challenge the Jurisdiction of this court. are you aware that if you violate my reservation of rights that you loose immunity from civil suit, I would therefore in standing in Honor sue you civilly and I will notify your bonding company, furthermore are you aware of the numerous Supreme Court rulings such as’……and then start citing these….Whichever ones you like best…and I have more if you need them, but I think these are all you will need…….They’ll go find something easier to eat!………. “ **The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings.” Author Unknown

Hagans v Lavine 415 U. S. 533. “ “Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but rather, should dismiss the action.” Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026

*In regard to courts of inferior jurisdiction, “if the record does not show upon its face the facts necessary to give jurisdiction, they will be presumed not to have existed.” Norman v. Zieber, 3 Or at 202-03

**US v Will, 449 US 200,216, 101 S Ct, 471, 66 Led2nd 392, 406 (1980) Cohens V Virginia, 19 US (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5LEd 257 (1821) “When a judge acts where he or she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason.”

Zeller v. Rankin, 101 S.Ct. 2020, 451 U.S. 939, 68 L.Ed 2d 326 When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost.
JURISDICTION: NOTE: It is a fact of law that the person asserting jurisdiction must, when challenged, prove that jurisdiction exists; mere good faith assertions of power and authority (jurisdiction) have been abolished.
“Jurisdiction of court may be challenged at any stage of the proceeding, and also may be challenged after conviction and execution of judgment by way of writ of habeas corpus.”

[U.S. v. Anderson, 60 F.Supp. 649 (D.C.Wash. 1945)]
*“The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings.” Hagans v Lavine 415 U. S. 533.
“Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but rather, should dismiss the action.” Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026

“A judgment rendered by a court without personal jurisdiction over the defendant is void. It is a nullity.” Sramek v. Sramek, 17 Kan. App 2d 573, 576-7, 840 P. 2d 553 (1992) rev. denied 252 Kan. 1093(1993)

“A court cannot confer jurisdiction where none existed and cannot make a void proceeding valid. It is clear and well established law that a void order can be challenged in any court.” Old wayne Mut, L. assoc b. McDonough, 205 U.S. 8, 27 S Ct 236(1907)

**“There is no discretion to ignore lack of jurisdiction.” Joyce v. U.S. 474 2D 215 “Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted.” Lantana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York 37 Fsupp. 150

****“The law provides that once State and Federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it musts be proven.” Main v Thiboutot, 100 S Ct. 2502(1980)

“Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time,” and “Jurisdiction, once challenged, cannot be assumed and must be decided.” Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 395 F 2d 906, 910

“Defense of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter may be raised at any time, even on appeal.” Hill Top Developers v. Holiday Pines Service Corp. 478 So. 2D, 368 (Fla 2nd DCA 1985)

***“Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proved to exist.” Stock v. Medical Examiners 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 289

***“There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction.” Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215

****“the burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction.” Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F2d 416
“a universal principle as old as the law is that a proceedings of a court without jurisdiction are a nullity and its judgment therein without effect either on person or property,” Norwood v. Renfield, 34 C 329; Ex parte Giambonini, 49 P. 732

****“jurisdiction is fundamental and a judgment rendered by a court that does not have jurisdiction to hear is void ab initio.” In re Application of Wyatt, 300 P. 132;p Re Cavitt, 118 P2d 846

“Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term.” Dillon v. Dillon 187 p27

**A court has no jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction, for a basic issue in any case before a tribunal is its power to act, and a court must have the authority to decide that question the first instance.” Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of Los Angeles, 171 P2d 8: 331 US 549, 91 K, ed, 1666m 67 S, Ct, 1409

“A departure by a court from those recognized and established requirements of law however close apparent adherence to mere form in methods of procedure which has the effect of depriving one of a constitutional right, is an excess of jurisdiction.” Wuest v. Wuest, 127 P2d 934, 937.

Here’s some additional ammo………….Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, (1886) “An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d. 486,489 “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” Mattox v. U.S., 156 US 237,243. (1895) “We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted.”
S. Carolina v. U.S., 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905). 
“The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now.”

SHAPIRO vs. THOMSON, 394 U. S. 618 April 21, 1969 . Further, the Right to TRAVEL by private conveyance for private purposes upon the Common way can NOT BE INFRINGED. No license or permission is required for TRAVEL when such TRAVEL IS NOT for the purpose of [COMMERCIAL] PROFIT OR GAIN on the open highways operating under license IN COMMERCE.

Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137,(1803) “The Constitution of these United States is the supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law.”

Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105, (1943) “No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.”

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 373 US 262, (1969) “If the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.”

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, (1966) “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation, which would abrogate them.”

“The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government.” 
City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944

Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425, (1886) “An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”

Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d. 486,489 “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”

“To take away all remedy for the enforcement of a right is to take away the right itself. But that is not within the power of the State.” Poindexter v. Greenhow, 114 U.S. 270, 303 (1885).

-Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S. 742, 748,(1970) “Waivers of Constitutional Rights, not only must they be voluntary, they must be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness.”

-Carnley v. Cochran, 369 U.S. 506, 516 (1962), “Presuming waiver from a silent record is impermissible. The record must show, or there must be an allegation and evidence which show, that an accused was offered counsel but intelligently and understandingly rejected the offer. Anything less is not waiver.”

Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). “No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.” The constitutional theory is that we the people are the sovereigns, the state and federal officials only our agents.

On May 16, 2021 we published a Public Notice and suggest everyone read this electronic document meant to inspire right action and bring resolution to the conundrum we are facing. collectively.

The following is a link to an article titled “Judicial code of conduct”. While we were not looking our world has been usurped. It is us that has not been diligent in holding our fellow men accountable for their “misconduct”. The time has come to make them knowing and stand firm in the fact that we all have an innate and inherent right to experience life the way we intended when we incarnated here.

When we actually go over the documents filed in specific court cases we notice that their is a whole lot of “Fraud upon the Court” taking place. The following electronic document is very informative:

Fraud upon the court (

31 U.S. Code § 333 – Prohibition of misuse of Department of the Treasury names, #symbols, etc.

(a) General Rule.—No person may use, in connection with, or as a part of, any advertisement, solicitation, #businessactivity, or product, whether alone or with other words, letters, symbols, or emblems—

(6) any colorable imitation of any such words, titles, abbreviations, initials, symbols, or emblems,
in a manner which could reasonably be interpreted or construed as conveying the false impression that such advertisement, solicitation, business activity, or product is in any manner approved, endorsed, sponsored, or authorized by, or associated with, the Department of the Treasury…

[Is the use of the alleged #dollar #dollhair symbol for the collection of a debt considered: “colorable imitation that could be reasonable construed as conveying a false impression that such business activity is associated with the Department of Treasury…” ? Especially when it’s a bill of attainder/citation given by a re-venue officer/policy officer and other debt collectors??] author malika dulce

It is up to each of us to over see the “instruments” being given to us and call out the creators of such “Insturment” for “fraud” and extortion:

There have been many presumptions and assumptions made by the members of this “Legal Society” and we are here to expunge these presumptions and assumptions nunc pro tunc, for the times that we did not have the awareness, the comprehension, or the education to exert this right. No one has the right to override the will of another as a result of miscommunication, illiteracy, spiritual and emotional immaturity, and or lack of awareness.

For those interesting in expanding their comprehension s to how we got to this conundrum the information shared in the following online document is worth reading, “Presumptions of Canon Law”:

The oath of office we must have for any statute, code, ordinance, mandate or other order to apply to us>>

5 U.S. Code § 3331. #OathofOffice
An #individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services, shall take the following oath:

“I, AB, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” This section does not affect other oaths required by law.
(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 424.)

Sec. 546.002. When conduct Permissible

(a) In this section, “ police escort” means facilitating the movement of a funeral, oversized or hazardous load, or other traffic disruption for public safety purposes by a peace officer described by Articles 2.12(1)-(4), (12) and (22) Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Bible is the Foundation of the Laws as written by man and has lead to the creation of the Canons, Statures, Charters, Codes, Bills, Acts, etc.

When will we mature as spiritual being?

What will it take for us to mature as spiritual beigns?

“State v. Murphy, 148 S.W.2d 527 (MO. 1941). A writ of quo warranto is in the nature of a writ of right for the king, against him who claims or usurps any office, franchise, or liberty, to inquire **by what authority he supports his claim**, in order to determine his right.” “It is also true that it will lie against a county officer who has been legally elected but has forfeited his office by misconduct.” “The officer who violates his oath of office by corruption, wilful misconduct or neglect of official duty automatically loses the right to office and becomes a mere interloper.” “In either case the judgment in quo warranto does not try the question of forfeiture. It merely recognizes judicially fait accompli and ousts the wrongdoer from enjoying the privileges of a franchise which he has cased to possess.” …where the officer steps entirely outside the scope of his authority to exercise a function which neither the Constitution nor the statue has entrusted to him, the remedy by quo warranto is available.” State v. Prevatt, 148 So. 578 (Fla. 1933). The granting of quo warranto against a corporation is equivalent to a judgment of seizure at common law. Rowan v. City of Shawneetown, 38 N.E.2d 2 (Ill. 1941). There are 70 Bible verses about all men are created equal which can be read by following the link below. There are a few that are worth highlighting

Galatians 3:28 [ESV] There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Genesis 1:27 [ESV] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Romans 2.11 [ESV]For God shows no partiality.

It would serve us to ask ourselves “who is this God”? Our Divine Nature is to be unconditionally loving. What has pulled us out to the resonant frequency of our true nature “unconditional Love” or “ullu love”?

Proverbs 22.2 [ESV] The rich and the poor meet together; the Lord is the maker of them all.

Under Interpretation Act [RSBC 1996] Chapter 238 Corporate rights and powers

17 (2) A majority of the members of the corporation may bind the others and the corporation by their acts

We require you to explain to me how a corporation has the capacity to act? And were in the Constitution or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms , statutes, codes, ordenances, bills, acts, etc. does it state that a “Minister” has the “power” or the “authority” or the “right” to administer another mans property? Where in the Constitution or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, statues, codes, ordenances, billls, acts, etc. does it state that an officer has the “power” or “authority” to arrest a man or woman from travelling upon the earth while enjoying life, and loving life, and exploring life?

Interpretation Act[Rsbc 1996] Chapter 238
Included powers

22 Words in an enactment authorizing the appointment of a public officer include power to do the following:

(a)set his or her term of office;

(b)terminate his or her appointment or remove or suspend the public officer;

(c)reappoint or reinstate the public officer;

(d)set the public officer’s remuneration and vary or terminate it;

(e)appoint another in his or her place or to act in his or her place;

(f)appoint a person as the public officer’s deputy.

Powers to act for ministers, deputy ministers and public officers

23 (1)Words in an enactment directing or empowering a minister of the government to do something, or otherwise applying to the minister by his or her name of office, include a minister designated to act in the office and the deputy or associate deputy of the minister.

(2)If a deputy minister is absent or unable to act, an assistant deputy minister, or some other official authorized by the minister, has the powers and must perform the duties of the deputy minister.

(3)Words in an enactment directing or empowering a public officer to do something, or otherwise applying to the public officer by his or her name of office, include a person acting for the public officer or appointed to act in the office and the deputy of the public officer.

Powers to make regulations

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.

41 (1)If an enactment provides that the Lieutenant Governor in Council or any other person may make regulations, the enactment must be construed as empowering the Lieutenant Governor in Council or that other person, for the purpose of carrying out the enactment according to its intent, to

(a)make regulations as are considered necessary and advisable, are ancillary to it, and are not inconsistent with it,

(b)provide for administrative and procedural matters for which no express, or only partial, provision has been made,

(c)limit the application of a regulation in time or place or both,

(d)prescribe the amount of a fee authorized by the enactment,

(e)provide, for a regulation made by or with the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, that its contravention constitutes an offence, and

(f)provide that a person who is guilty of an offence created under paragraph (e) is liable to a penalty not greater than the penalties provided in the Offence Act.

(2)A regulation made under the authority of an enactment has the force of law.

Genesis 1:26-27 [ESV] Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Interpretations Act Rules of Construction (continued)

Miscellaneous Rules (continued) Offences

Marginal note:Indictable and summary conviction offences

34 (1) Where an enactment creates an offence,

(a) the offence is deemed to be an indictable offence if the enactment provides that the offender may be prosecuted for the offence by indictment;

(b) the offence is deemed to be one for which the offender is punishable on summary conviction if there is nothing in the context to indicate that the offence is an indictable offence; and

(c) if the offence is one for which the offender may be prosecuted by indictment or for which the offender is punishable on summary conviction, no person shall be considered to have been convicted of an indictable offence by reason only of having been convicted of the offence on summary conviction.

In researching the term “Dominion of Canada” we came to read the following:

“Dominion” of Canada

Dominionthe term adopted in 1867 to describe the status of Canada in the British Empire, and now used to describe also the status of Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Newfoundland. The story is told that the adoption of the term was due to a suggestion of Sir Leonard Tilley. When the delegates from Canada, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia, were discussing in London, in December, 1866, the details of the British North America Act, some difference of opinion arose as to the proper term to be used to describe the new federation. Sir John Macdonald, the leading Canadian delegate, was in favour of styling it “the Kingdom of Canada “; but Lord Derby, the British foreign minister, was afraid that the word “Kingdom” would wound the tender susceptibilities of the people of the Great Republic to the south of Canada. The Canadians, on the other hand, were firm in rejecting the term “colony”. The night of this debate, Sir Leonard Tilley, who was in the habit of reading a chapter of the Bible before retiring to rest, stumbled on the verse in the seventy-second Psalm which runs, “He shall have dominion from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the earth.” The next morning he suggested that the new federation should be called “the Dominion of Canada”; and this suggestion was adopted. Some doubt has been cast on this story, owing to the fact that it owes its currency to the second Lady Tilley, who married Sir Leonard only in 1867; and it should be observed that the term “dominion” is not new in colonial history, for the colony of Virginia was originally known as “the Old Dominion”. But these objections are perhaps not strong enough to invalidate the story; and the probability is that it is true. In any case, it has obtained general credence; and the arms of the Dominion of Canada now bear, in allusion to this story, the legend A mari usque ad mare (From sea to sea).

Source: W. Stewart WALLACE, ed., The Encyclopedia of Canada, Vol. II, Toronto, University Associates of Canada, 1948, 411p., p. 223.


Jurisdiction Always Matters:

There are 4 courts:

  1. municipal
  2. county
  3. state
  4. federal

Licensing and Certification and all contracts are administrative so we should be requesting an Administrative Judge in these matters and not judicial. This would fall under the Coast Guard!

The following are just a small sample of the many cases that uphold the requirement that anytime jurisdiction is challenged it must be proven (by the man or woman or other acting as the officer or agent for the Crown Corporation (s).

• “…there is, as well, no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction.” Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215

• “A court lacking jurisdiction cannot render judgment but must dismiss the cause at any stage of the proceedings in which it becomes apparent that jurisdiction is lacking.” Bradbury v. Dennis, 310 F.2d 73 (10th Cir. 1962)

• The burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction. Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F2d 416

• …if the issue is presented in any way the burden of proving jurisdiction rests upon him who invokes it. Latana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188 • When it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach the merits. In such a situation the action should be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.” Melo v. United States, 505 F. 2d 1026

• Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted. Latana v. Hopper, 102 F. 2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp. 150

• No officer can acquire jurisdiction by deciding he has it. The officer, whether judicial or ministerial, decides at his own peril.” Middleton v. Low(1866), 30 C. 596, citing Prosser v. Secor (1849), 5 Barb.(N.Y) 607, 608

Where a court has jurisdiction, it has a right to decide any question which occurs in the cause, and whether its decision be correct or otherwise, its judgments, until reversed, are regarded as binding in every other court. But if it acts without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable, but simply void, and form no bar to a remedy sought in opposition to them, even prior to a reversal. They constitute no justification, and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentences are considered in law as trespassers. Elliott v Peirsol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340, 7L.Ed. 164 (1828)

• Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term.” Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P 27

• A court has no jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction, for a basic issue in any case before a tribunal is its power to act, and a court must have the authority to decide that question in the first instance.” Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of Los Angeles, 171 P2d 8; 331 US 549, 91 L. ed. 1666, 67 S.Ct. 1409 (Use local common header format) Cause No(s).

Does the information shared below prove “Territorial Jurisdiction” or does it actually proof that damaging another living man or women is not a crime according to those that have created the “Legal World” who thrive on causing and seeing others in pain and misery?

The following has been extracted directly from the United States Department of Justice website:

666 Proof Of Territorial Jurisdiction

There has been a trend to treat certain “jurisdictional facts” that do not bear on guilt (mens rea or actus reus) as non-elements of the offence, and therefore as issues for the court rather than the jury, and to require proof by only a preponderance that the offence was committed in the territorial jurisdiction of the court to establish that venue has been properly laid. See United States v. Bowers, 660 F.2d 527, 531 (5th Cir. 1981); Government of Canal Zone v. Burjan, 596 F.2d 690, 694 (5th Cir. 1979); United States v. Black Cloud, 590 F.2d 270 (8th Cir. 1979) (jury question); United States v. Powell, 498 F.2d 890, 891 (9th Cir. 1974). The court in Government of Canal Zone v. Burjan, 596 F.2d at 694-95, applied the preponderance test to determinations of whether or not the offences took place within the Canal Zone which established not merely proper venue but subject matter jurisdiction as well. Other cases, however, hold that the issue of whether the United States has jurisdiction over the site of a crime is a judicial question, see United States v. Jones, 480 F.2d 1135, 1138 (2d Cir. 1973), but that the issue of whether the act was committed within the borders of the Federal enclave is for the jury and must be established beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Parker, 622 F.2d 298 (8th Cir. 1980); United States v. Jones, 480 F.2d at 1138. The law of your Circuit must be consulted to determine which approach is followed in your district.

The decision in Burjan should be viewed with caution. The analogy between territorial jurisdiction and venue has much to recommend it. Nevertheless, it is important to recognize that the two are not of equal importance. As the Burjan court noted, citing Fed. R. Crim. P. 12, subject matter jurisdiction is so important that it cannot be waived and may be noticed at any stage of the proceeding, see Government of the Canal Zone v. Burjan, 596 F.2d at 693, whereas the Ninth Circuit in Powell rested its ruling that venue need be proved by only a preponderance on the relative unimportance of venue as evidenced by its waivability. There is a clear distinction between the question of which court of a sovereign may try an accused for a violation of its laws and whether the sovereign’s law has been violated at all.

Proof of territorial jurisdiction may be by direct or circumstantial evidence, and at least at the trial level may be aided by judicial notice. See United States v. Bowers, 660 F.2d at 530-31; Government of Canal Zone v. Burjan, 596 F.2d at 694. Compare Government of Canal Zone v. Burjan, 596 F.2d 690 with United States v. Jones, 480 F.2d 1135, concerning the role judicial notice may play on appeal.


cestui que trust

n. (properly pronounced ses-tee kay, but lawyers popularly pronounce it setty kay) from old French. 1) an old fashioned expression for the beneficiary of a trust. 2) “the one who trusts” or the person who will benefit from the trust and will receive payments or a future distribution from the trust’s assets. (See: beneficiary)

Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.

cestui que trust an archaic term in English law for the beneficiary under a trust.

Collins Dictionary of Law © W.J. Stewart, 2006

CESTUI QUE TRUST, A barbarous phrase, to signify the beneficiary of an estate held in trust. He for whose benefit another person is enfeoffed or seised of land or tenements, or is possessed of personal property. The cestui que trust is entitled to receive the rents and profits of the land; he may direct such conveyances, consistent with the trust, deed or will, as he shall choose, and the trustee (q.v.) is bound to execute them: he may defend his title in the name of the trustee. 1 Cruise, Dig. tit. 12, c. 4, s. 4; vide Vin. Ab. Trust, U, W, X, and Y 1 Vern. 14; Dane’s Ab. Index, h.t.: 1 Story, Eq. Jur. Sec. 321, note 1; Bouv. Inst. Index, h.t.

A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States By John Bouvier. Published 1856.


How Cestui Que Vie Works

Cestui que vie as a legal concept dates to the medieval period, specifically England. During this time, the owners of farms and other properties could be absent for extended periods of time as they traveled, whether for business or religious purposes. It became important to ensure that family members, business partners or tenants could use the property without fear of it being expropriated by feudal lords. While the individual was away, a trustee took care of the land but did not retain legal ownership over the property. The trust often relied on a good faith understanding between the parties.

In practice, it was often a way to avoid paying taxes by granting land and property to the Church, which was exempt from taxation, while still allowing descendants to reside in and enjoy the estates. Henry VIII, under his advisers Thomas Cromwell and Thomas More, attempted to invalidate cestui que vie trusts, a process continued under the English Reformation.

1666 is the year the British government enacted the Cestui Que Vie Act.

Cestui Que Vie Is Now a Part of Modern Law

Later, however, after the Great Plague of 1665 and the Great Fire of 1666 had destroyed London, the British government enacted the Cestui Que Vie Act in 1666, which reinstated the legal concept. After those twin catastrophes, hundreds of thousands of British citizens died or fled. In response, the government took all private property into the trust until the proper heirs or owners could be identified—the cestui que vie. Some parts of the 1666 Act are still law in the United Kingdom.

The legal concepts behind cestui que vie changed a bit over the centuries in order to reduce fraud and to ensure that property owners couldn’t shift their property into trusts in order to dodge creditors. More recently, laws against property held in perpetuity required that parties named as the beneficiaries in a trust should vest, and thus have an interest in the trust rather than passively receive benefits.

When a trust is created it is done for the benefit of a specific individual who is identified in the trust document. In a trust, the cestui que trust is the person who has an equitable interest in the trust. The legal title of the trust, however, is given to the trustee. Cestui qui use, or he who uses, is the person for whose benefit the trust is made. During the medieval period, cestui que use arrangements became so common that they were often assumed to be present even when they had not been arranged.

A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.



He whose life is the measure of the duration of an estate. 1 Washb. Real Prop. 88. The person for whose life any lands, tenements, or hereditaments are held. Cestuy que doit inheritor al pcre doit inheriter al fils. He who would have been heir to the father of the deceased shall also be heir of the son. Fitzh. Abr. “Descent,” 2; 2 Bl. Comm. 239, 250. CF. An abbreviated form of the Latin word confer, meaning “compare.” Directs the reader’s attention to another part of the work, to another volume, case, etc., where contrasted, analogous, or explanatory views or statements may be found. CH. This abbreviation most commonly stands for “chapter,” or “chancellor,” but it may also mean “chancery,” or “chief.” CHACE. L. Fr. A chase or hunting ground. CHACEA. In old English law. A station of game, more extended than a park, and less than a forest; also the liberty of chasing or hunting within a certain district; also the way through which cattle are driven to pasture, otherwise called a “drove- way.” Blount Chacea est ad communem legem. A chase is by common law. Reg. Brev. 806.


The following Canons were published on the world wide web yet we cannot find any where that they are supported so they are unsubstanicated; and, we are looking for clarification of the following Canons.

Canon 2051 Each Cestui Que Vie Trust created since 1933 represents one of the 3 Crowns representing the 3 claims of property of the Roman Cult, being Real Property, Personal Property and Ecclesiastical Property and the denial of any rights to men and women, other than those chosen as loyal members of the society and as Executors and Administrators.

Canon 2052 The Three (3) Cestui Que Vie Trusts are the specific denial of rights of Real Property, Personal Property and Ecclesiastical Property for most men and women, corresponds exactly to the three forms of law available to the Galla of the Bar Association Courts. The first form of law is corporate commercial law is effective because of the 1st Cestui Que Vie Trust. The second form of law is maritime and trust law is effective because of the 2nd Cestui Que Vie Trust. The 3rd form of law is Talmudic and Roman Cult law is effective because of the 3rd Cestui Que Vie Trust of Baptism.

Canon 2053 The Birth Certificate issued under Roman Law represents the modern equivalent to the Settlement Certificates of the 17th century and signifies the holder as a pauper and effectively a Roman Slave. The Birth Certificate has no direct relationship to the private secret trusts controlled by the private banking network, nor can it be used to force the administration of a state or nation to divulge the existence of these secret trusts.

Canon 2054 As the Cestui Que Vie Trusts are created as private secret trusts on multiple presumptions including the ongoing bankruptcy of certain national estates, they remain the claimed private property of the Roman Cult banks and therefore cannot be directly claimed or used.

Canon 2055 While the private secret trusts of the private central banks cannot be directly addressed, they are still formed on certain presumptions of law including claimed ownership of the name, the body, the mind and soul of infants, men and women. Each and every man and woman has the absolute right to rebuke and reject such false presumptions as a member of One Heaven and holder of their own title.

Canon 2056 Given the private secret trusts of the private central banks are created on false presumptions, when a man or woman makes clear their Live Borne Record and claim over their own name, body, mind and soul, any such trust based on such false presumptions ceases to have any property.

Canon 2057 Any Administrator or Executor that refuses to immediately dissolve a Cestui Que (Vie) Trust, upon a Person establishing their status and competency, is guilty of fraud and fundamental breach of their fiduciary duties requiring their immediate removal and punishment. One can take control of it the Trust Estate or “Dissolve” it completely and move all Asset to your own account and take control of your Copyright Name and Name Trademark and Tradename. and write Promissory note as this is Tender Cash.


Memorandum of Law and Definitions by and for the Legal Society of which we have been mistakenly assumed to be a party to. We wish to make it known that we do not agree to fraud, or misleading, and/or corrupt business practices resulting in the exploitation, sexploitation, and trafficking of man and animal..

Definitions by the “Legal Society” are being misapplied in most cases. Most problems in the courts arise because of the fact the there is a discrepancy in “terminology” and the fact that we do not request an “Administrative Judge” under the “Coast Guard” Title 5 US Code 3105

“A Weasel word”– a word that has the appearance and feel of meaning one thing while meaning something entirely different.

“Debt” Definition from Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary

1) An amount owed by one person or entity to another (amount of what exactly?).

2) A cause of action in a lawsuit to recover a set amount owed by another person or entity.

3) The total of everything a person or entity owes to all creditors. For example, everything the United States government owes is collectively called “the national debt,” and that amount is made up of a number of debts.                                                                                                                                                                                      

“Deception”: Generally, deception is the act of causing one to believe information that is not true or an untruth or not the whole truth. The Federal Trade Commission will find an act or practice deceptive if there is a misrepresentation, omission, or other practice that misleads the consumer acting reasonably in the circumstances, to the consumer’s detriment.

“Deception” occurs when a person knowingly:

(1) Creates or confirms another’s impression which is false and which the defendant does not believe to be true;

(2) Fails to correct a false impression which the person previously has created or confirmed;

(3) Prevents another from acquiring information pertinent to the disposition of the property involved;

(4) Sells or otherwise transfers or encumbers property, failing to disclose a lien, adverse claim, or other legal impediment to the enjoyment of the property, whether that impediment is or is not valid, or is or is not a matter of official record; or

(5) Promises performance which the person does not intend to perform or knows will not be performed, but a person’s intention not to perform a promise shall not be inferred from the fact alone that the person did not subsequently perform the promise.

The term “deception” does not, however, include falsity as to matters having no pecuniary significance, or puffing by statements unlikely to deceive ordinary persons in the group addressed.”: a grantor is a person or entity that transfers to another person or entity the interest or ownership rights to an asset. Legal documents, such as deeds, detail the transfer of assets between grantors and grantees.

The actual “deception” stems from the idea of an entity having the ability to grant or transfer property to another person or entity claiming to have interest or ownership rights of an asset. This “deception” arises from our perceptual misinterpretation as a result of separation consciousness. We deceive ourselves in believing we can own something.

“attorn” at·torn/əˈtərn/verb LAW formally make or acknowledge a transfer of something.

transfer (something) to someone else.

“a lord might attorn his vassals service to some other”

The etymology of the word, “citizen”: citizen (n.) c. 1300, citisein (fem. citeseine) “inhabitant of a city or town,” from Anglo-French citesein, citezein “city-dweller, town-dweller, citizen” (Old French citeien, 12c., Modern French citoyen), from cite (see city) + -ain (see -ian). According to Middle English Compendium, the -s-/-z- in Anglo-French presumably replaced an earlier *-th-.Old English words were burhsittend and ceasterware. Source:

“Fraud” in the inducement occurs when a person tricks another person into signing an agreement to one’s disadvantage by using fraudulent statements and representations. Because fraud negates the “meeting of the minds” required of a contract, the injured party can seek damages or terminate the contract.”

`“#practiceoflaw” includes
(a) appearing as counsel or advocate,
(b) drawing, revising or settling
(i) a petition, memorandum, notice of articles or articles under the Business
Corporations Act, or an application, statement, affidavit, minute,
resolution, bylaw or other document relating to the incorporation,
registration, organization, reorganization, dissolution or winding up of
a corporate body,
(ii) a document for use in a proceeding, judicial or extrajudicial,
(iii) a will, deed of settlement, trust deed, power of attorney or a document
relating to a probate or a grant of administration or the estate of a
deceased person,
(iv) a document relating in any way to a proceeding under a statute of
Canada or British Columbia, or
(v) an instrument relating to real or personal estate that is intended,
permitted or required to be registered, recorded or filed in a registry or
other public office,
(c) doing an act or negotiating in any way for the settlement of, or settling, a claim
or demand for damages,
(d) agreeing to place at the disposal of another person the services of a lawyer,
(e) giving legal advice,
(f) making an offer to do anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (e), and
(g) making a representation by a person that he or she is qualified or entitled to do
anything referred to in paragraphs (a) to (e),
but does not include
(h) any of those acts if performed by a person who is not a lawyer and not for or
in the expectation of a fee, gain or reward, direct or indirect, from the person
for whom the acts are performed,
(i) the drawing, revising or settling of an instrument by a public officer in the
course of the officer’s duty,
(j) the lawful practice of a notary public,
(k) the usual business carried on by an insurance adjuster who is licensed under
Division 2 of Part 6 of the Financial Institutions Act, or
(l) agreeing to do something referred to in paragraph (d), if the agreement is made
under a prepaid legal services plan or other liability insurance program;
“practising lawyer” means a member in good standing who holds or is entitled to hold
a practising certificate;

“Color of Law”

“Color of Law” means “The appearance or semblance, without the substance, of legal right. Misuse of power, possessed by virtue of state law and made possible only because wrongdoer is clothed with authority of state is action taken under ‘color of law.'” Atkins v. Lanning. D.C.Okl., 415 F. Supp. 186, 188.

If something is “color of law” then it is not law, it only looks like law. If you go to the website for the Office of Law Revision Counsel, you will see that most of the titles of the United States Code are “prima facia evidence of the laws of the United States”.

Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla 32, 227 F. 417

“Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a Constitutional right, from liability. For they are deemed to know the law.”

The courts are not bound by an officer’s interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act. Owen v. Independence, 100 S.C.T. 1398, 445 US 622

Hoffsomer v. Hayes, 92 Okla 32, 227 F. 417
The courts are not bound by an officer’s interpretation of the law under which he presumes to act.

Owen v. Independence, 100 S.C.T. 1398, 445 US 622
“Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a Constitutional right, from liability. For they are deemed to know the law.”

“Equity follows the law.”

Equity does not replace or violate the law, but it backs it up and supplements it. Equity follows appropriate rules of law, such as the rules of evidence and pretrial discovery.

Statutory/Legal Society Definition(s) from Interpretation Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. I-21)

“British Commonwealth or British Commonwealth of Nations” has the same meaning as Commonwealth; (Commonwealth, Commonwealth britannique, Commonwealth des nations ou Commonwealth des nations britanniques)

“Canada”, for greater certainty, includes the internal waters of Canada and the territorial sea of Canada; (Canada)

“Canadian waters” includes the territorial sea of Canada and the internal waters of Canada; (eaux canadiennes)

“Commonwealth or Commonwealth of Nations” means the association of countries named in the schedule; (Commonwealth, Commonwealth britannique, Commonwealth des nations ou Commonwealth des nations britanniques)

New birth certificate upon legitimation. In cases of legitimation the Vital Statistics Unit, upon receipt of proof thereof, shall prepare a new certificate of birth in the new name of the legitimated child. The evidence upon which the new certificate is made and the original certificate shall be sealed and filed and may be opened only upon the demand of the person involved, if of legal age, or by an order of court.Cross Reference:Legitimation of child, see 8 P.C.C. 335, 387, 76A Stat. 689, 691. See also 7 P.C.C. 576, 76A Stat. 571.

United States

“United States means the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth”. Source:


§ 3002 – Definitions

(15)“United States” means—

(A)a Federal corporation;

(B)an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C)an instrumentality of the United States.

The US Government is a corporation correct? 28 USC §3002(15(A)(B)(C), 22 USCA 286(e)) lays down its sovereignty and takes on that of a private citizen. It can exercise no power which is not derived from the corporate charter. (See: The Bank of the United States v. Planters Bank of Georgia, 5 L.Ed. (Wheat) 244; U.S. v. Butt, 309 U.S. 242).]

5 CFR § 2635.101 Basic obligation of public service.

  • Public service is a public trust. Each employee has a responsibility to the United States Government and its citizens to place loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical principles above private gain. To ensure that every citizen can have complete confidence in the integrity of the Federal Government, each employee shall respect and adhere to the principles of ethical conduct set forth in this section, as well as the implementing standards contained in this part and in supplemental agency regulations.
  • General principles. The following general principles apply to every employee and may form the basis for the standards contained in this part. Where a situation is not covered by the standards set forth in this part, employees shall apply the principles set forth in this section in determining whether their conduct is proper.

Minimum Contacts  

A nonresident defendant’s connections with the forum state (i.e., the state where the lawsuit is brought) that are sufficient for jurisdiction over that defendant to be proper. Lack of minimum contacts violates the nonresident defendant’s constitutional right to due process and “offends traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice” (International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945)). Examples of minimum contacts include conducting business within the state, incorporating in the state, and visiting the state.

26 USC 7701(h)

(h) Motor vehicle operating leases

(1) In general

For purposes of this title, in the case of a qualified motor vehicle operating agreement which contains a terminal rental adjustment clause—

  • such agreement shall be treated as a lease if (but for such terminal rental adjustment clause) such agreement would be treated as a lease under this title, and
  • the lessee shall not be treated as the owner of the property subject to an agreement during any period such agreement is in effect.

(2) Qualified motor vehicle operating agreement defined

For purposes of this subsection—

  • In general

The term “qualified motor vehicle operating agreement” means any agreement with respect to a motor vehicle (including a trailer) which meets the requirements of subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D) of this paragraph.

  • Minimum liability of lessor

An agreement meets the requirements of this subparagraph if under such agreement the sum of—

(i) the amount the lessor is personally liable to repay, and

(ii)the net fair market value of the lessor’s interest in any property pledged as security for property subject to the agreement, equals or exceeds all amounts borrowed to finance the acquisition of property subject to the agreement. There shall not be taken into account under clause (ii) any property pledged which is property subject to the agreement or property directly or indirectly financed by indebtedness secured by property subject to the agreement.

 (C) Certification by lessee; notice of tax ownership

An agreement meets the requirements of this subparagraph if such agreement contains a separate written statement separately signed by the lessee—

(i) under which the lessee certifies, under penalty of perjury, that it intends that more than 50 percent of the use of the property subject to such agreement is to be in a trade or business of the lessee, and (ii)which clearly and legibly states that the lessee has been advised that it will not be treated as the owner of the property subject to the agreement for Federal income tax purposes. 

(D) Lessor must have no knowledge that certification is false

An agreement meets the requirements of this subparagraph if the lessor does not know that the certification described in subparagraph (C)(i) is false.


Authorized Emergency Vehicles

Sec. 546.001. Permissible Conduct

In operating an authorized emergency vehicle the operator may:

(1) park or stand, irrespective of another provision of this subtitle;

(2) proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, after slowing as necessary for safe operation;

(3) exceed a maximum speed limit, except as provided by an ordinance adopted under Section 545.365, **as long as the operator does not endanger life or property; ** and

(4) disregard a regulation governing the direction of movement or turning in specified directions.

(b) Section 546.001 applies only when the operator is:

(1) responding to an emergency call;

(2) pursuing an actual or suspected violator of the law;

(3) responding to but not returning from a fire alarm;

(4) directing or diverting traffic for public safety purposes; or

(5) conducting a police escort

Pursuit by police

3   (1)To engage in or continue a pursuit, a peace officer must

(a)have an emergency light and siren activated, and

(b)have reasonable grounds to believe that

(i)the driver or a passenger in the vehicle being or to be pursued has committed, is committing or is about to commit an offence, and

ii)the seriousness of the offence and the need for immediate apprehension outweigh the risk to the safety of members of the public that may be created by the pursuit.

[when the “law enforcement officer” stops someone while operating an “automobile” or “automated covered wagon” on “public roads” and create an emergency when none existed and without a warrant secured by a sworn complaint, that “ticket citation” is a “bill of attainder” and certainly, deceptive…]

15 U.S. Code § 1692j – Furnishing certain deceptive forms

(a) It is unlawful to design, compile, and furnish any form knowing that such form would be used to create the false belief in a consumer that a person other than the creditor of such consumer is participating in the collection of or in an attempt to collect a debt such consumer allegedly owes such creditor, when in fact such person is not so participating.

(b) Any person who violates this section shall be liable to the same extent and in the same manner as a debt collector is liable under section 1692k of this title for failure to comply with a provision of this subchapter

Definitions Securities Transfer Act [SBC 2007] Chapter 10

“government” or “government of British Columbia” means Her Majesty in right of British Columbia;

monarch (n.) Section 29 Interpretation Act

mid-15c., monark, “supreme governor for life, a sole or autocratic ruler of a state,” from Old French monarche (14c., Modern French monarque) and directly from Late Latin monarcha, from Greek monarkhēs “one who rules alone” (see monarchy). “In modern times generally a hereditary sovereign with more or less limited powers” [Century Dictionary, 1897].

(1)Without limiting any other rights, powers or advantages of the minister under this or any other enactment, the minister may do whatever is or may be necessary to do any or all of the following:

Transportation Act

[SBC 2004] Chapter 44

Part 2 — Powers of The Minister

Division 1 — General

Rights, powers and advantages of minister

(a)plan, design, acquire, hold, construct in any manner and in any place the minister considers appropriate, use, operate, upgrade, alter, expand, extend, maintain, repair, rehabilitate, protect, remove, discontinue, close and dispose of provincial public undertakings and related improvements;

(b)acquire, carry on or dispose of any business or commercial or industrial enterprise that relates to transportation;

(c)grant franchises and licences, and enter into agreements, to operate any ferry services on terms and conditions set by the minister, including, without limitation,

(i)terms and conditions respecting fares or rates that may be charged for those services, and

(ii)authorizing one or more providers of ferry services to charge and retain fares or rates;

(d)make grants and contributions;

(e)enter into arrangements or agreements, including, without limitation, arrangements or agreements for the exchange of information, or for the payment or sharing of the cost of anything related to provincial public undertakings or to transportation, with any person, including, without limitation, any of the following:

(i)the government of Canada, the government of a province or territory within Canada or the government of a jurisdiction outside of Canada, or an agent, agency, department or official of any of those governments;

(ii)a local government body, educational body or health care body, as those terms are defined in the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act;

(iii)a first nation;

(iv)any other body prescribed by regulation as a public authority for the purposes of one or more provisions of this Act;

(f)name and rename provincial public highways.

(2)If the minister changes the name of a provincial public highway, the minister must publish notice of the change in the prescribed manner.

20 CFR § 422.402 – What special definitions apply to this subpart?

prev | next§ 422.402 What special definitions apply to this subpart?

(a) Administrative wage garnishment is a process whereby we order your employer to withhold a certain amount from your disposable pay and send the withheld amount to us. The law requires your employer to comply with our garnishment order.

(b) Debt means any amount of money or property that we determine is owed to the United States and that arises from a program that we administer or an activity that we perform. These debts include program overpayments made under title II or title XVI of the Social Security Act and any other debt that meets the definition of “claim” or “debt” at 31 U.S.C. 3701(b).

(c) Disposable pay means that part of your total compensation (including, but not limited to, salary or wages, bonuses, commissions, and vacation pay) from your employer after deduction of health insurance premiums and amounts withheld as required by law. Amounts withheld as required by law include such things as Federal, State and local taxes but do not include amounts withheld under court order.

(d) We, our, or us means the Social Security Administration.

(e) You means an individual who owes a debt to the United States within the scope of this subpart. [can someone show us how we “owe” a debt to the United States]

28 U.S. Code § 1631 – Transfer to cure want of jurisdiction

Whenever a civil action is filed in a court as defined in section 610 of this title or an appeal, including a petition for review of administrative action, is noticed for or filed with such a court and that court finds that there is a want of jurisdiction, the court shall, if it is in the interest of justice, transfer such action or appeal to any other such court (or, for cases within the jurisdiction of the United States Tax Court, to that court) in which the action or appeal could have been brought at the time it was filed or noticed, and the action or appeal shall proceed as if it had been filed in or noticed for the court to which it is transferred on the date upon which it was actually filed in or noticed for the court from which it is transferred.
(Added Pub. L. 97–164, title III, § 301(a), Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 55; amended Pub. L. 115–332, § 2, Dec. 19, 2018, 132 Stat. 4487.)


[SBC 2007] CHAPTER 10


3   (1)For the purposes of this Act, a person has notice of a fact if

(a)the person has knowledge of it,

(b)the person has received a notice of it, or

(c)information comes to the person’s attention under circumstances in which a reasonable person would take cognizance of it.

(2)A person gives a notice to another person by taking such steps as may be reasonably required to inform the other person in the ordinary course, whether or not the other person comes to know of it.

(3)A person receives a notice when

(a)the notice comes to the person’s attention,

(b)in the case of a notice under a contract, the notice is duly delivered to the place of business through which the contract was made, or

(c)the notice is duly delivered to any other place held out by that person as the place for receipt of those notices.

(4)Notice, knowledge or a notice received by an organization is effective for a particular transaction from the time when it is brought to the attention of the individual conducting the transaction and, in any event, from the time when it would have been brought to the attention of that individual if the organization had exercised due diligence.

(5)For the purpose of subsection (4), an organization exercises due diligence if it maintains reasonable routines for communicating significant information to the individual conducting the transaction and there is reasonable compliance with those routines.

(6)For the purpose of subsection (4), due diligence does not require an individual acting for the organization to communicate information unless

(a)that communication is part of the individual’s regular duties, or

(b)the individual has reason to know of the transaction and that the transaction would be materially affected by the information.

Obligation of good faith

4   (1)Every contract to which this Act applies and every duty imposed by this Act imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance or enforcement.

(2)In this section, “good faith” means honesty in fact and the observance of reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing.

“person” means

(a) an individual, including an individual in his or her capacity as trustee, executor, administrator or other representative,

(b) a sole proprietorship,

(c) a partnership,

(d) an unincorporated association,

(e) an unincorporated syndicate,

(f) an unincorporated organization,

(g) a trust, including a business trust,

(h) a corporation,

(i) a government or agency of it, or

(j) any other legal or commercial entity;

“property” includes any right, title, interest, estate or claim to or in property; [Expressions defined 29  In an enactment]

Province” means the Province of British Columbia or Her Majesty in right of British Columbia as the context requires; [Expressions defined 29  In an enactment:]

“province”, when used as meaning a part of Canada, includes the Northwest Territories, Yukon and Nunavut; [Expressions defined 29  In an enactment:]

“shall” Blacks-Law-Dictionary defines the meaning of the word shall as 26 USC Rule 221 states that petitioner for a disclosure action “shall include the telephone number of the petitioner of the petitioner’s counsel” 26 USC §6104 states that certain exempt organizations “shall state the address and the telephone number of the private foundation’s principal office and the name of its principal manager”. Shall as used in statues, contracts, or the like, this word is generally imperative or mandatory. The word in ordinary usage means “must” and is inconsistent with a concept of discretion…. but it may be construed as merely permissive or directory (as equivalent to “may”)… what does that mean xi the word “shall” is a key word in many statutes, leading many readers to assume that it has a similar meaning to the word “must”. However, based upon the above “telephone logic”, most of readers are probably thinking that the word “shall” might actually be similar to the word, “may” or the word, “should” “shall” formal, –used to say that something is expected to happen in the fu”U.S”:.ture. -used to ask for someone’s opinion. -used to give a command or to say that you will or will not allow something to happen.

The UCC is the Code of The District Of Columbia

§ 28–2501. Definitions.

A bond, when required by or referred to in this Code, means an obligation in a certain sum or penalty, subject to a condition, on breach of which it is to become absolute and enforceable by action.

An undertaking means an agreement entered into by a party to a suit or proceeding, with or without sureties, upon which a judgment or decree may be rendered in the same suit or proceeding against the party and his sureties, if any, the party and sureties submitting themselves to the jurisdiction of the court for that purpose.

5 U.S. Code § 301 – Departmental regulations

The head of an Executive department or military department may prescribe regulations for the government of his department, the conduct of its employees, the distribution and performance of its business, and the custody, use, and preservation of its records, papers, and property. This section does not authorize withholding information from the public or limiting the availability of records to the public.

(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 379.)

45 CFR § 681.10 – What happens if a defendant fails to file an answer?

§ 681.10 What happens if a defendant fails to file an answer?

(a) If a defendant does not file any answer within 30 days after service of the complaint, the reviewing official may refer the complaint to the ALJ.

(b) Once the complaint is referred, the ALJ will promptly serve on the defendant a notice that an initial decision will be issued.

(c)  The ALJ will assume the facts alleged in the complaint to be true and, if such facts establish liability under the statute, the ALJ will issue an initial decision imposing the maximum amount of penalties and assessments allowed under PFCRA.

Basic principles of Canadian criminal law

The criminal justice system is built on a few important principles. B.C. shares these basic principles with all common law criminal justice systems around the world.

Presumption of Innocence – Every criminal case begins with the presumption that the accused person is innocent. It is up to Crown counsel, representing the community, to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime.

Due Process – Due process is related to the presumption of innocence. It involves a thorough examination of the facts of each case – and recognition of the importance of protecting the legal rights of those charged with criminal offences.

Independent Judiciary – Anyone accused of a crime has the right to have their case decided by fair and impartial judges, without interference of any kind, from any source. This is the concept of judicial independence. While judicial decisions may not result in everyone being happy, the justice system is founded on public confidence that decisions – whether popular or not – are made after a full and fair hearing and without outside influence.

Openness and Accessibility of Court – Only through an open and public process can the public have confidence in the justice system and be satisfied that parties are treated fairly.

Equality Before the Law – All people in Canada are equal under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms



International Affairs; Constitutional Law;


Constitutional Law;

O.L.R. Research Report

January 28, 1998 98-R-0143


FROM: Sandra Norman-Eady, Senior Attorney

RE: Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

You asked for a summary and a copy of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. You also wanted to know if the charter is similar to our Bill of Rights.


The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which was adopted in 1982, guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject to reasonable limits prescribed by law. The charter guarantees such rights as the right to equality, democracy, and mobility. The freedoms include those of conscience, religion, and peaceful assembly.

The charter applies to (1) the Parliament and Canadian government in respect to all matters within the Parliament’s authority, including all matters relating to the Yukon and Northwest Territories and (2) provincial legislatures and governments in respect to all matters within the legislature’s authority. But Parliament or a province’s legislature may expressly declare in an act that the act may operate despite a provision in the Charter regarding fundamental freedoms or legal rights. An act with such a declaration is effective for five years or the date specified within the declaration, whichever is sooner.

Anyone whose Charter rights or freedoms have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain whatever remedy the court considers appropriate and just. A court must exclude any evidence that was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms under the charter if it is established, after reviewing all of the evidence, that the admission would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The first 10 amendments to the federal constitution, all of which were adopted in 1791, are generally referred to as the Bill of Rights. The Canadian Charter or Rights and Freedoms is the equivalent to our Bill of Rights. Both guarantee the right to freedom of speech and the press, peaceably assemble, travel, due process, privacy, an attorney and speedy trial in criminal cases, and trial by jury in certain cases. Two very obvious differences between the two documents are that the Canadian charter does not guarantee citizens the right to bear arms and the federal constitution does not declare any language as the official language of the United States.

Canadian Charter Of Rights And Freedoms

The charter guarantees rights equally to males and females. It must be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians and not construed to abrogate or derogate from any (1) aboriginal, treaty, or other rights or freedoms that pertain to the aboriginal people of Canada or (2) rights or privileges guaranteed by or under the Canadian Constitution with respect to denominational, separate, or dissentient schools.

Fundamental Freedoms

The charter guarantees everyone the freedom of conscience and religion; thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of the press and other means of communication; peaceful assembly; and association.

Democratic Rights

Every Canadian citizen has the right to elect members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.

Mobility Rights

Every Canadian citizen has the right to enter, remain in, and leave Canada. These citizens and every permanent resident of Canada has the right to move to, take up residence in, and pursue a livelihood in any province. The latter right is subject to (1) any laws or practices of general application in force in the province other than those that discriminate on the basis of present or previous residence and (2) any laws that establish reasonable residency requirements as a condition for receiving social services. The right to pursue a life in any province does not preclude any law, program, or activity designed to ameliorate social or economic disadvantages facing individuals in a province if the rate of employment is below that in Canada.

Legal Rights

Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security. No one can be deprived of these rights except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. Additionally, everyone has the right:

1. to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure;

2. not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned;

3. not to be subjected to any cruel or unusual treatment or punishment;

4. on arrest or detention, to (a) be informed promptly of the reason; (b) be informed of the right to retain, and to actually retain and instruct counsel without delay; and (c) to have the validity of the detention determined by habeas corpus and released if the detention is unlawful.

Anyone charged with an offence has the right:

1. to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offense;

2. to be tried within a reasonable time;

3. not to be compelled to be a witness against himself;

4. to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal;

5. not to be denied reasonable bail without cause;

6. except in a military case tried before a military tribunal, to trial by jury where the maximum punishment for the offense is at least five years imprisonment;

7. not to be found guilty of any act or omission, which at the time of commission was

8. neither an offense under Canadian or International law nor a crime under the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations;

9. if finally acquitted of the offense, not to be tried again and if finally found guilty and punished for the offense, not to be tried or punished for it again; and

10. to be subjected to the most lenient punishment if the possible sentence changes between the commission of an offense and the date of sentencing.

A witness who testifies has the right not to have any evidence that he gives used to incriminate him, except in a prosecution for perjury or for giving contradictory evidence. A party or witness who neither understands nor speaks the language in which the proceedings are conducted or who is deaf has the right to be assisted by an interpreter.

Equality Rights

Everyone is equal and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination, especially discrimination based on race, national or ethic origin, color, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability. This right does not preclude laws designed to ameliorate disadvantageous conditions that exist because of these factors.


Section 7 of the Charter requires that laws or state actions that interfere with life, liberty and security of the person conform to the principles of fundamental justice — the basic principles that underlie our notions of justice and fair process (Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), [2007] 1 SCR 350 at paragraph 19).


Section 7 involves a two-step analysis:

  1. Is there an infringement of one of the three (3) protected interests, that is to say a deprivation of life, liberty or security of the person?
  2. Is the deprivation in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice?

This second step may be broken down into two steps, where it is necessary a) to identify the relevant principle or principles of fundamental justice and then b) to determine whether the deprivation has occurred in accordance with such principles. (R. v. Malmo-Levine[2003] 3 S.C.R. 571 at paragraph 83;  R. v. White[1999] 2 S.C.R. 417 at paragraph 38; R. v. S.(R.J.)[1995] 1 S.C.R. 451 at page 479).

There is no independent right to fundamental justice. Accordingly there will be no violation of section 7 if there is no deprivation of life, liberty or security of the person (R. v. Pontes[1995] 3 SCR 44, at paragraph 47). 1. Everyone

All individuals physically present in Canada will benefit from the protection of section 7 (Singh v. Minister of Employment and Immigration[1985] 1 S.C.R. 177 at page 202; Charkaoui (2007), supra, at paragraphs 17-18). Where individuals are affected by a Canadian or foreign government action that took place outside Canada, the extent to which they may rely upon section 7 will depend on the circumstances, and may require the claimant to establish Canadian government “participation in activities of a foreign state or its agents that are contrary to Canada’s international obligations or fundamental human rights norms” (R. v. Hape[2007] 2 S.C.R. 292Canada (Justice) v. Khadr[2008] 2 S.C.R. 125Canada (Prime Minister) v. Khadr[2010] 1 S.C.R. 44 at paragraph 14; see also: R. v. Harrer[1995] 3 S.C.R. 562R. v. Terry[1996] 2 S.C.R. 207Schreiber v. Canada (Attorney General)[1998] 1 S.C.R. 841). In extradition and deportation cases, where the government’s participation is a necessary precondition for the deprivation of the rights to life, liberty or security of the person by another state, and the deprivation is an entirely foreseeable consequence of the participation, deportations or extraditions must accord with the principles of fundamental justice (United States v. Burns[2001] 1 S.C.R. 283, at paragraphs 59-60, 124; Suresh v. Canada (M.C.I.)[2002] 1 S.C.R. 3, at paragraph 54; Application under section 83.28 of the Criminal Code (Re)[2004] 2 S.C.R. 248, at paragraphs 75-76). For the extra-territorial application of the Charter more generally, see discussion under section 32.

Corporations do not have individual rights protected under section 7 and therefore cannot claim the benefit of section 7 in the same way that individuals can (Irwin Toy Ltd. v. Quebec (Attorney General), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927 at pages 1002-3; British Columbia Securities Commission v. Branch, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 3 at pages 28 and 30). However, a corporation that is accused of a criminal offence, or that is a defendant in a civil proceeding initiated by the state, may raise the Charter in its defence whether or not it enjoys the particular right or freedom in question (R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295 at pages 313-14; R. v. Wholesale Travel Group Inc., [1991] 3 S.C.R. 154). See discussion under section 52 for more on the circumstances in which corporations may invoke Charter rights as a basis for invalidating legislation..

Life, liberty and security of the person General

The guarantees under section 7 typically arise in connection with the administration of justice, which has in turn been defined as “the state’s conduct in the course of enforcing and securing compliance with the law” (Gosselin v. Québec (Attorney General)[2002] 4 S.C.R. 429 at paragraph 77; New Brunswick (Minister of Health and Community Services) v. G. (J.)[1999] 3 S.C.R. 46 at paragraph 65; Prostitution Reference – Reference re: Criminal Code, section 193, paragraph 195.1(1)(c) (Man. C.A.)[1990] 1 S.C.R. 1123B. (R.) v. Children’s Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto[1995] 1 S.C.R. 315;  Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Commission)[2000] 2 S.C.R. 307). The administration of justice includes processes operating in the criminal law (Gosselin at paragraphs 77-78), as well as a variety of other circumstances including child protection proceedings and immigration proceedings where section 7-protected rights are at stake (Blencoe; G.(J.); B.(R.); Winnipeg Child and Family Services v. K.L.W.[2000] 2 S.C.R. 519Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)[2007] 1 S.C.R. 350, 2007 SCC 9; Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Harkat2014 SCC 37, at paragraph 40). In addition, the Court has recognized that section 7 may apply to legislation or government action “entirely unrelated to adjudicative or administrative proceedings”, provided that it impacts on the right to life, liberty and security of the persone.g., a legislative prohibition on obtaining private medical insurance that impacts on the right to life and security of the person — see Chaoulli v. Quebec (A.G.)2005 SCC 35 at paragraphs 124 and 194-199). To date, section 7 has not been interpreted as imposing a positive obligation on the state to ensure the enjoyment of life, liberty and security of the person, but the Court has not foreclosed this possibility (Gosselin at paragraphs 82-83).

A claimant must establish a “sufficient causal connection” between the impugned government action or law and the limit on life, liberty or security of the person. Although the government action need not be the only or the dominant cause of the limit, there must be a real, as opposed to a speculative, link. This standard is satisfied by a reasonable inference, drawn on a balance of probabilities (Bedford v. Canada (A.G.)[2013] 3 S.C.R. 1101 at paragraph 76).

(i) Right to life

The right to life is engaged where the law or state action imposes death or an increased risk of death, either directly or indirectly (Carter v. Canada (Attorney General)2015 SCC 5 at paragraph 62; Chaoulli at paragraphs 112-124 and 200). Concerns about autonomy and quality of life are properly treated as liberty and security interests (Carter at paragraph 62). Although the sanctity of life is a fundamental societal value, the right to life does not give rise to a duty to live. Like other rights, the right to life can be waived (Carter at paragraph 63; Rodriguez v. British Columbia (Attorney General)[1993] 3 S.C.R. 519). (ii) Right to liberty

The liberty interest protected under section 7 has at least two aspects. The first aspect is directed to the protection of persons in a physical sense and is engaged when there is physical restraint such as imprisonment or the threat of imprisonment (R. v. Vaillancourt[1987] 2 S.C.R. 636 at 652), custodial or non-custodial detention (R. v. Swain[1991] 1 S.C.R. 933Winko v. British Columbia (Forensic Psychiatric Institute)[1999] 2 S.C.R. 625 at paragraph 64; R. v. Demers[2004] 2 S.C.R. 489 at paragraph 30), transfer to a more restrictive institutional setting (May v. Ferndale Institution[2005] 3 S.C.R. 809, at paragraph 76), extradition (Kindler v. Canada (Minister of Justice)[1991] 2 S.C.R. 779 at 831; United States v. Burns[2001] 1 S.C.R. 283 at paragraph 59), parole conditions (Cunningham v. Canada[1993] 2 S.C.R. 143 at 148-151), or state compulsions or prohibitions affecting one’s ability to move freely (R. v. Heywood[1994] 3 S.C.R. 761 at 789). The physical restraint can be quite minor to engage the liberty component, such that compelling a person to give oral testimony constitutes a deprivation of liberty (Thomson Newspapers Ltd. v. Canada[1990] 1 S.C.R. 425 at 536; R. v. S.(R.J.)[1995] 1 S.C.R. 451 at 479; Branch, supra at 26; Re: Application under section 83.28 of the Criminal Code[2004] 2 S.C.R. 248 at paragraph 67), as does compelling them to give fingerprints (R. v. Beare[1988] 2 S.C.R. 387 at 402). Deportation per se will not engage the right to liberty (Charkaoui (2007), supra, at 17; Medovarski v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)[2005] 2 S.C.R. 539 at paragraph 46), but deportation to a substantial risk of torture will (Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)[2002] 1 S.C.R. 3 at paragraph 44).

Section 7 also protects a sphere of personal autonomy involving “inherently private choices” that go to the “core of what it means to enjoy individual dignity and independence” (Godbout v. Longueuil (City)[1997] 3 S.C.R. 844 at paragraph 66; Association of Justice Counsel v. Canada (Attorney General)2017 SCC 55 at paragraph 49). Where state compulsions or prohibitions affect such choices, s. 7 may be engaged (A.C. v. Manitoba (Director of Child and Family Services)2009 SCC 30, at paragraphs 100-102; Blencoe, supra at paragraphs 49-54; Siemens v. Manitoba (Attorney General)[2003] 1 S.C.R. 6 at paragraph 45) This aspect of liberty includes the right to refuse medical treatment (A.C.supra, at paragraphs 100-102, 136) and the right to make “reasonable medical choices” without threat of criminal prosecution: R. v. Smith2015 SCC 34 at paragraph 18. It may also include the ability to choose where one intends to live (Godbout, supra), as well as a protected sphere of parental decision-making for parents to ensure their children’s well-being, e.g., a right to make decisions concerning a child’s education and health (B.(R.), supra, at paragraph 80). It does not, however, encompass lifestyle choices such as the smoking of marihuana (R. v. Malmo-LevineR. v. Caine[2003] 3 SCR 571 at paragraphs 86-87; R. v. Clay[2003] 3 S.C.R. 735 at paragraph 32). Conditions of employment requiring employees to be on standby duty, and therefore less available to their families for several weeks a year, do not engage the s. 7 liberty interest (Association of Justice Counselsupra at paragraph 51).

While some lower court decisions have held that liberty in this context includes the right to work or do business (Wilson v. British Columbia (Medical Services Commission), [1988] B.C.J. No. 1566 (C.A.) (QL)), the Supreme Court has said that section 7 does not protect freedom to transact business whenever one wishes (R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd.[1986] 2 S.C.R. 713 at page 786). Nor does it protect the right to exercise one’s chosen profession: Prostitution Reference, supra at pages 1179. (See also Walker v. Prince Edward Island[1995] 2 S.C.R. 407). The Supreme Court has also ruled that the ability to generate business revenue by one’s chosen means cannot be characterized as a fundamental life choice and is not a right protected under section 7 (Siemens, supra at paragraph 46). Similarly, liberty under section 7 does not appear to protect freedom to contract or the freedom to choose a particular career (Chaoulli, supra, at paragraphs 201-202).

Privacy is constitutionally protected primarily under section 8 but it is generally understood that section 7 can offer a residual protection. The Supreme Court has not yet fully explored or developed the contours of a distinct privacy protection under section 7, other than to accept that privacy can be a protected component of the “liberty” and “security of the person” interests. Although there may be scope for potentially distinct privacy protection under section 7, courts have typically performed the requisite privacy analysis under section 8 (see e.g.R. v. Rodgers[2006] 1 S.C.R. 554, at paragraph 23; Ruby v. Canada[2002] 4 S.C.R. 3, at paragraphs 32-33; R. v. Mills[1999] 3 S.C.R. 668, at paragraph 88; R. v. O’Connor[1995] 4 S.C.R. 411, at paragraphs 110-119; B.(R.) v. Children’s Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto[1995] 1 S.C.R. 315, at 369; R. v. Beare[1988] 2 S.C.R. 387). A right to privacy under section 7 has, however, been directly applied in lower court jurisprudence (See: Cheskes v. Ontario (Attorney General) (2007), 87 O.R. (3d) 581 (Ont. Sup. Ct.)).

Individuals cannot enforce collective rights, such as the right to strike, through “liberty”, as the right to liberty is an individual right (I.L.W.U. v. A.G. of Quebec[1994] 1 S.C.R. 150).

(iii) Right to security of the person

Security of the person is generally given a broad interpretation and has both a physical and psychological aspect. The right encompasses freedom from the threat of physical punishment or suffering (e.g., deportation to a substantial risk of torture) as well as freedom from such punishment itself (Singh, supra at 207; Suresh, supra, at paragraphs 53-55). It is not engaged, however, by the determination of exclusion from refugee protection because the potential risks to health and safety are too remote given the availability of further proceedings prior to removal in which section 7 interests will be considered (Febles v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2014 SCC 68, [2014] 3 S.C.R. 431 at paragraph 67; B010 v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)2015 SCC 58 at paragraph 75).

Security of the person includes a person’s right to control his/her own bodily integrity. It will be engaged where the state interferes with personal autonomy and a person’s ability to control his or her own physical or psychological integrity, for example by prohibiting assisted suicide or regulating abortion or imposing unwanted medical treatment (R. v. Morgentaler[1988] 1 S.C.R. 30 at 56CartersupraRodriguez, supra; Blencoe, supra at paragraph 55; A.C., supra, at paragraphs 100-102). Where a criminal prohibition forces a person to choose between a legal but inadequate treatment and an illegal but more effective choice, the law will infringe security of the person (Smithsupra, at paragraph 18).

Security of the person will be engaged where state action has the likely effect of seriously impairing a person’s physical or mental health (R. v. Monney[1999] 1 S.C.R. 652 at paragraph 55; Chaoulli, supra at paragraphs 111-124 and 200; R. v. Parker, 49 O.R. (3d) 481 (C.A.)). State action that prevents people engaged in risky but legal activity from taking steps to protect themselves from the risks can also implicate security of the person (Bedfordsupra, at paragraphs 59-60, 64, 67, 71).

In addition, the right is engaged when state action causes severe psychological harm to the individual (G.(J.), supra at paragraph 59; Blencoe, supra at paragraph 58; K.L.W., supra, at paragraphs 85-87). To constitute a breach of one’s psychological security of the person, the impugned action must have a serious and profound effect on the person’s psychological integrity and the harm must result from the state action (Blencoe, supra at paragraphs 60-61; G.(J.), supra; K.L.W., supra. The psychological harm need not necessarily rise to the level of nervous shock or psychiatric illness, but it must be greater than ordinary stress or anxiety. The effects of the state interference must be assessed objectively, with a view to their impact on the psychological integrity of a person of reasonable sensibility (G.(J.), supra). Although not all state interference with the parent-child relationship will engage the parent’s security of the person, the state removal of a child from parental custody constitutes a serious interference with the psychological integrity of the parent qua parent and engages s.7 protection (G.(J.), supra, at paragraphs 63-64; K.L.W., supra, at paragraphs 85-87). The prohibition of marihuana does not generate a level of stress which engages section 7 (Malmo-Levine, supra at paragraph 88). The Court has signaled the possibility that victims of torture and their next of kin have an interest in finding closure that may, if impeded, be sufficient to cause such serious psychological harm so as to engage the security of the person (Kazemi Estate v. Islamic Republic of Iran2014 SCC 62 at paragraphs 130, 133-34).

It is unclear whether security of the person encompasses the right to privacy comprising a corollary right of access to personal information (Ruby, supra).


Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46)


380 (1) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, defrauds the public or any person, whether ascertained or not, of any property, money or valuable security or any service,

(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a term of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years, where the subject-matter of the offence is a testamentary instrument or the value of the subject-matter of the offence exceeds five thousand dollars; or

(b) is guilty

(i) of an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or

(ii) of an offence punishable on summary conviction,

where the value of the subject-matter of the offence does not exceed five thousand dollars.

Marginal note:Minimum punishment

(1.1) When a person is prosecuted on indictment and convicted of one or more offences referred to in subsection (1), the court that imposes the sentence shall impose a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of two years if the total value of the subject-matter of the offences exceeds one million dollars.

Marginal note:Affecting public market

(2) Every one who, by deceit, falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether or not it is a false pretence within the meaning of this Act, with intent to defraud, affects the public market price of stocks, shares, merchandise or anything that is offered for sale to the public is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

Browse the Constitution Annotated

Article I

Section 8

Clause 1

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;


RCW 2.44.010 Authority of attorney. An attorney and counselor has authority: (1) To bind his or her client in any of the proceedings in an action or special proceeding by his or her agreement duly made, or entered upon the minutes of the court; but the court shall disregard all agreements and stipulations in relation to the conduct of, or any of the proceedings in, an action or special proceeding unless such agreement or stipulation be made in open court, or in presence of the clerk, and entered in the minutes by him or her, or signed by the party against whom the same is alleged, or his or her attorney; (2) To receive money claimed by his or her client in an action or special proceeding, during the pendency thereof, or after judgment upon the payment thereof, and not otherwise, to discharge the same or acknowledge satisfaction of the judgment; RCW 2.44.020 Appearance without authority — Procedure. If it be alleged by a party for whom an attorney appears, that he or she does so without authority, the court may, **at any stage of the proceedings**, relieve the party for whom the attorney has assumed to appear from the consequences of his or her act; it may also summarily, upon motion, compel the attorney to repair the injury to either party consequent upon his or her assumption of authority RCW 2.44.030 Production of authority to act. The court, or a judge, may, on motion of either party, and on showing reasonable grounds therefor, require the attorney for the adverse party, or for any one of several adverse parties, to produce or prove the authority under which he or she appears, and until he or she does so, may stay all proceedings by him or her on behalf of the party for whom he or she assumes to appear. {let’s find the equivalent of this in each state!! lol where do they get authority to act??]

Other Real Estate Owned #REO #OREO
A ‘ #house has #tenants? Really? And a “ #rentalagreement ” includes “a non-rental agreement’?
One could not pull this off in a third world country. (Page 13)

“When a bank takes “title” to a “house” after foreclosure, it must honor any existing rental agreement with a bona fide tenant and must provide 90 days’ notice to the tenant before eviction, whether or not the tenant has a rental agreement (after taking title through #foreclosure).
But then again, the #FederalHousingFinanceAgency, lists the authority for “ #housinglenders ” as 12 U.S.C. 1432(b), so let consult that authority, with any relevant amendments:

12 U.S. Code § 1432 – Incorporation of banks; corporate powers; #housingprojectloans

(b) Subject to such regulations as may be prescribed by the Director, one or more Federal home loan banks may acquire, hold, or dispose of, in whole or in part, or facilitate such acquisition, holding, or disposition by members of any such bank of, “housing project loans”, or interests therein, having the benefit of any guaranty under section 2181 of title 22, as now or hereafter in effect, or loans, or interests therein, having the benefit of any guaranty under section 2184 of title 22 or any commitment or agreement with respect to such loans, or interests therein, made pursuant to either of such sections. This authority extends to the acquisition, holding, and disposition of loans, or interests therein, having the benefit of any guaranty under section 2181 or 2182 of title 22 or such sections as hereafter amended or extended, or of any commitment or agreement for any such guaranty.
So a “housing project loan” is “ #guaranteed” under Title 22 U.S.C. #FOREIGNRELATIONS, and section 2186 lists the “ #Overseas #PrivateInvestment Company” as the guarantor, created by the “World Bank”. If that’s not ridiculous enough, we’re going to search any amendments to the provision, for a definition of the term “ #house”, so we open NOTES:

Section 2184 of title 22, referred to in subsec. (b), which related to housing projects in “Latin American countries”, was omitted in the general amendment made by section 105 of Pub. L. 91–175, Dec. 30, 1969, 83 Stat. 807. See section 2182 of Title 22, Foreign Relations and Intercourse.
Pub. L. 106–102, § 606(d)(1), struck out “, but, except with the prior approval of the Board, no” #bankbuilding ” shall be bought or erected to “house” any such bank, or leased by such bank under any lease for such purpose which has a term of more than ten years” after “convenient for the transaction of its business”, struck out “subject to the approval of the #Board” after “necessary for the transaction of its business” #carlcollicott


The Office of Hearings and Appeals(OHA) of the United States Department of Agriculture is comprised of three offices: the National Appeals Division(NAD), the Office of Administrative Law Judges(OALJ), and the Office of the Judicial Officer(OJO).

OHA’s mission is to plan, coordinate, and provide administrative support for NAD, OALJ, and OJO. OHA promotes fairness, transparency, and consistency in NAD,OALJ, and OJO proceedings through the planning, coordination, and administration of office-wide activities and initiatives.

The Hearing Clerk’s Office is responsible for maintaining and archiving the formal record in cases brought before the Office of Administrative Law Judges (OALJ). The Hearing Clerk’s Office serves pleadings, submissions, and decisions and orders upon parties and certifies the formal record of proceedings to federal courts upon appeal.

Office of the Hearing Clerk
United States Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., SW
Stop 9203, Room 1031, South Building
Washington, DC 20250-9203

Phone: (202) 720-4443
Fax: (202) 720-9776


People should realize the borders are for the regulation of business and does not apply to a man or woman traveling through life. The “Border Agents” have gotten away with gross misconduct as a result of their training.

19 U.S. Code § 1604 – Seizure; prosecution 11 See Codification note below.

It shall be the duty of the Attorney General of the United States immediately to inquire into the facts of cases reported to him by customs officers and the laws applicable thereto, and if it appears probable that any fine, penalty, or forfeiture has been incurred by reason of such 1 violation, for the recovery of which the institution of proceedings in the United States district court or the Court of International Trade is necessary, forthwith to cause the proper proceedings to be commenced and prosecuted, without delay, for the recovery of such fine, penalty, or forfeiture in such case provided, unless, upon inquiry and examination, the Attorney General decides that such proceedings can not probably be sustained or that the ends of public justice do not require that they should be instituted or prosecuted, in which case he shall report the facts to the Secretary of the Treasury for his direction in the premises.


Memorandum of Obligations:

By these presents I hereby exercise right of subrogation by surrendering to you my estate in the above-described matter in usufruct with any interests in reversion assigned to the Treasury of the United States: to and for the account of the United States, for you to convey to the United States via the enclosed assignment/transfer order of release of funds/credits in exchange for a full acquittance and discharge for all purposes of the obligation of the person making the same pursuant to Section 7, Trading with the Enemy Act (“TWEA”), 40 Stat.411 [50 USC 4305(b)(2)]

Respectfully, _____________________


19 U.S. Code § 1600.Application of the customs laws to other seizures by customs officers

19 U.S. Code §§ 1601, 1601a.Repealed. June 25, 1948, ch. 645, § 21, 62 Stat. 862, eff. Sept. 1, 1948

Section 1601, act June 17, 1930, ch. 497, title IV, § 601, 46 Stat. 753, related to bribery.
Section 1601a, act Aug. 5, 1935, ch. 438, title III, § 309, 49 Stat. 528, related to wearing of uniform or badge of Coast Guard or Customs Service while violating revenue laws. See sections 702, 703, and 912 of Title 18.

U.S. Code § 1602.Seizure; report to customs officer

19 U.S. Code § 1603.Seizure; warrants and reports
19 U.S. Code § 1604 – Seizure; prosecution 11 See Codification note below.
19 U.S. Code § 1605.Seizure; custody; storage
19 U.S. Code § 1606.Seizure; appraisement
19 U.S. Code § 1607 – Seizure; value $500,000 or less, prohibited merchandise, transporting conveyances
19 U.S. Code § 1608.Seizure; claims; judicial condemnation
19 U.S. Code § 1609.Seizure; summary forfeiture and sale
19 U.S. Code § 1610.Seizure; judicial forfeiture proceedings
19 U.S. Code § 1611.Seizure; sale unlawful
19 U.S. Code § 1612.Seizure; summary sale
19 U.S. Code § 1613 – Disposition of proceeds of forfeited property
19 U.S. Code § 1613b – Customs Forfeiture Fund
19 U.S. Code § 1614.Release of seized property
19 U.S. Code § 1615 – Burden of proof in forfeiture proceedings
19 U.S. Code § 1616a – Disposition of forfeited property
19 U.S. Code § 1617.Compromise of Government claims by Secretary of the Treasury
19 U.S. Code § 1618.Remission or mitigation of penalties
19 U.S. Code § 1619 – Award of compensation to informers
19 U.S. Code § 1620 – Acceptance of money by United States officers 11 See Codification note below.
19 U.S. Code § 1621.Limitation of actions
19 U.S. Code § 1622.Foreign landing certificates
19 U.S. Code § 1623 – Bonds and other security
19 U.S. Code § 4013 – Implementing actions in anticipation of entry into force and initial regulations
19 U.S. Code § 4012 – Relationship of the Agreement to United States and State law
19 U.S. Code § 4011 – Approval and entry into force of the Agreement
19 U.S. Code § 4015.Administration of dispute settlement proceedings
19 U.S. Code § 4016.Arbitration of claims
19 U.S. Code § 1592 – Penalties for fraud, gross negligence, and negligence


The following information was obtained from the Vatican Archives and translated using online bing translator

2051 The infallibility of the Magisterium of pastors extends to all elements of doctrine, including morality, without which the saving truths of faith cannot be guarded, exposed or observed.



“Master, what should I do…?”

2052 ” Master, what should I do good to obtain eternal life?” To the young person who asks him this question, Jesus responds first of all by recalling the need to recognize God as “the only Good”, as the Good par excellence and as the source of all good. Then Jesus says to him: “If you want to enter life, he will follow the commandments”. And he lists to his interlocutor the commandments concerning the love of one’s neighbour: “Do not kill, do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not testify to the false, honor your father and your mother”. Finally, Jesus summarizes these commandments in a positive formulation: “Love your neighbour as yourself” (Mt 19:16-19).

2053 To this first answer is immediately added a second one: “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you own, give it to the poor, and you will have a treasure in heaven; then come and follow me” (Mt 19:21). It does not cancel the first. The following of Jesus implies the observance of the commandments. The Law is not abolished,1 but man is invited to find it in the person of his Master, who is its perfect fulfilment. In the three synoptic Gospels, Jesus’ appeal to the rich young man to follow him in the disciple’s obedience and in the observance of the commandments is juxtaposed with the exhortation to poverty and chastity.2 Evangelical counsels are inseparable from the commandments.

2054 Jesus resumed the Ten Commandments, but manifested the power of the Spirit at work in their letter. He preached justice that surpasses that of scribes and Pharisees3, as well as that of pagans.4 He highlighted all the demands of the commandments. “You understood that the ancients were told: Do not kill … But I say unto you: whoever fights against his brother will be brought to trial” (Mt 5:21-22).

2055 When asked the question: “What is the greatest commandment of the Law?” (Mt 22:36), Jesus replies: “You will love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the largest and the first of the commandments. And the second is similar to the first: You will love your neighbor as yourself. The whole Law and the Prophets depend on these two commandments” (Mt 22:37-40).5 The Decalogue must be interpreted in the light of this twofold and unique commandment of charity, fullness of the Law:

“The precept: Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not desire and any other commandment, is summed up in these words: You will love your neighbour as yourself. Love does no harm to one’s neighbour: the full fulfilment of the law is love” (Rm 13:9-10).

The Decalogue in Sacred Scripture

2056 The word ‘Decalogue’ means ‘ten words’ (Ex 34:28; Dt 4.13; 10:4). These “ten words” God has revealed them to his people on the holy mountain. He wrote them with his “finger”, 6 unlike the other precepts written by Moses.7 They are words of God par excellence. They are transmitted to us in the Book of Exodus8 and the Book of Deuteronomy.9 Since the Old Testament, the Holy Books refer to the “ten words.”

2057 The Decalogue is understood first of all in the context of the Exodus which is the great liberating event of God at the center of the Old Covenant. Whether they are formulated as negative precepts, prohibitions, or as positive commandments (such as: “Honor your father and mother”), the “ten words” indicate the conditions of a life freed from the slavery of sin. The Decalogue is a journey of life:

“I command you to love the Lord your God, to walk through his ways, to observe his commands, laws, and norms, so that you may live and multiply” (Dt 30:16). [we are told to love this idea of “god” yet not to love life, or to honor and cherish the mother (womb of life), or how to create a support environment fo the developing fetus]

This liberating force of the Decalogue appears, for example, in the Commandment on Saturday Rest, also intended for foreigners and slaves:

“Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt and that the Lord your God brought you out there with a powerful hand and outstretched arm” (Dt 5:15).

2058 The “ten words” summarize and proclaim the Law of God: “These words spoke the Lord, speaking to all your assembly, on the mountain, by fire, cloud, and darkness, in a powerful voice, and added nothing else. He wrote them on two stone plates and gave them to me ” (Dt 5:22). Thus these two plates are called “The Witness” (Ex 25:16). They contain the clauses of the Covenant concluded between God and his people. These “tables of Witness” (Ex 31:18; E.g. 32.15; Ex 34:29) must be placed in the ‘ark’ (Ex 25:16; 40.1-3).

2059 The “ten words” are spoken by God during a theophany (“The Lord spoke to you face to face on the mountain from the fire”: Dt 5:4). They belong to God’s revelation of himself and his glory. The gift of commandments is a gift from God himself and his holy will. By making his will known, God reveals himself to his people.

2060 The gift of commandments and the Law is part of the Covenant concluded by God with his own. According to the Book of Exodus, the revelation of the “ten words” is granted between the Covenant’s proposal11 and its stipulation,12 after the people have undertaken to “do” all that the Lord had said and to “obey” you.13 The Decalogue is never transmitted until after the re-enactment of the Covenant (” The Lord our God has established with us an Alliance on the Oreb” : Dt 5.2).

2061 The Commandments receive their full meaning within the Covenant. According to Scripture, man’s moral action takes its all meaning in the Covenant and for it. The first of the “ten words” recalls God’s initiative of love for his people:

“For man, through the chastisement of sin, had come from the paradise of freedom to the slavery of this world, for this reason the first word of the Decalogue, that is, the first voice of God’s commandments, deals with freedom by saying: “I am the Lord, your God, that I have brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the condition of slavery” (Ex 20:2; Dt 5,6) ‘.14

What does an Imaculate Conception meanto you?

The original conception was an act of love and everything is a miracle, life is a miracle. You are the breath of life!!!

Two loving and open hearts commint together as one to conscieve of life!

Love is a frequency!

How intimate are you with this frequenct?

The more intimate you are with this frequency the more intimate you ar with the cosmos

and with all life!!

Think in terms of energy expressing as sound, vibrations, harmonic resonance, frequency, and density!

Planets emit sound! Do you have the capacity to hear your sould song?

Your body energy field is a torus as earth!! We suggest aligning your unique energy frequency torus field with the earth!!

A ‘Glimpse’ of God › glimpse

FACT:…you must love your neighbor as your self. I am The LORD. – Leviticus 19:18. FACT: No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us 

What you do to your neighbor you are doing to yourself!

Can you love the virus as yourself?

Why do we know so little about frequency under the law?
Ecclesiastical Law

Ecclesiastical Law is the body of law derived from canon and civil law and administered by the ecclesiastical courts.  Ecclesiastical law governs the doctrine of a specific church, usually, Anglican canon law.  Ecclesiastical law is also termed as jus ecclesisasticum or law spiritual.

Ecclesiastical courts were established to hear matters concerning the religion.  The jurisdiction exercised by ecclesiastical courts played a major role in the development of the English legal system.  Their duties and work were not limited to the controlling of clergies and doctrines of the Church.  Before the Reformation, the ecclesiastical courts had significant jurisdiction.  In matters relating to matrimonial causes and testate and intestate succession, the law remained significant and relevant until the mid of the nineteenth century.

Since ecclesiastical courts were not established in the United States, the code of laws enforced in such courts could not be considered part of the common law that existed in the colonies.  It has also been stated that the canon and civil laws administered by the ecclesiastical courts of England should be grouped along with the unwritten laws of England which were adopted and used in certain jurisdiction.  Therefore, it is argued  that such laws should be employed where the rule of the ecclesiastical courts is deemed to be better law than the rule announced by a common law court.


Origins Of Common Law

The Common law is a body of law based on custom and general principles embodied in case law which serve as precedent and is applied to situations not covered by statute.  In other words, common law includes those principles, usages and rules of action applicable to the government and security of person and property, which do not rest for their authority upon any express and positive declaration of the will of the legislature[i].  The Common law applies only to civil cases.

England is the origin of the common law that exists in the U.S..  The English common law originated in the early middle ages in the King’s Court (Curia Regis) and eventually led to the formulation of various viable principles through which it continues to operate.  The common law has its roots in the U.S continent with the first English colonists who claimed the common law system as their birthright.

After the American Revolution, this Common Law was adopted by each of the states as well as the national government of the new nation.  When new states were formed, they also adopted the common law system either by an express provision or by a judicial decision.  However, if states were formed from acquired territory where other systems of law prevail, then the question of which system prevailed was determined by legislative enactment or judicial decision.

However, the U.S courts do not solely depend upon the expositions of the courts of England.  In order to ascertain the principles and rules of the common law, the courts may look to the decisions of other states of the Union, as well as to those of the English courts.  Moreover, the U.S. courts are not required to adhere to the decisions of the English common law courts, regardless of whether they were rendered before or after the American Revolution.  Similarly, the English statutes passed subsequent to the adoption of the common law in the U.S. are not part of common law in the U.S..

The principles of equity are regarded as a part of the common law adopted in the U.S.  The term “common law” includes those doctrines of equity jurisprudence not mentioned in the legislative enactments[ii]. Similarly, a law merchant is recognized as part of the common law.  It is defined as the system of rules and customs and usages generally recognized and adopted by traders as the law for the regulation of their commercial transactions.  However, the law merchant cannot override the local laws and commercial usages of any state[iii].

Christianity is part of the origin of the common law.  Although Christianity is considered part of the origin of the common law, the courts did not regard it as controlling or imposing in nature while discussing a religious duty of any narrow view or things related to morality and decency.  It was observed that even if Christianity is not a part of the law of the land, if it is the popular religion of the country, then an insult to it can disturb the public peace[iv].

Ecclesiastical laws are English laws pertaining to matters concerning the church.  These laws were administered by ecclesiastical courts and are considered a branch of English common law.  There is a difference in opinion about the adoption of Ecclesiastical laws in the U.S.  On one hand, since ecclesiastical courts were not established in the U.S., the code of laws enforced in ecclesiastical courts cannot be considered part of the common law.

On the other hand, the canon and civil laws administered by the ecclesiastical courts come under the unwritten laws of England.  And by custom, these laws are adopted and used in a certain jurisdiction.  It is maintained that such laws must be used in the U.S. if the tribunal has jurisdiction especially if the rule of the ecclesiastical courts is considered to be better law than the one in the common law court.

Therefore, the origin of common law in the U.S. can be traced back to various sources such as the common law principles of England, the equity principles, Christianity and ecclesiastical courts.

[i] Western Union Tel. Co. v. Call Publishing Co., 181 U.S. 92 (U.S. 1901)

[ii] Vidal v. Phila., 43 U.S. 127 (U.S. 1844)

[iii] Donegan & Tabor v. Wood, 49 Ala. 242 (Ala. 1873)

[iv] Zeisweiss v. James, 63 Pa. 465, 471 (Pa. 1870)












Lest We Forget: The Earth Was Created WIthout Borders
and Without Corporations and Without Slavery
Cheers to, ” A War Free Zone”
Public Notice
Pronouncement and Announcement
Decree The Living Will

This day being the 18th day of April in the imposed Gregorian Earth Year of 2021 make it known the following: Amended on the 14th day of May of the same year and amended again on the 25th day of May at 10 am PST

Maxims of Law

Maxims of Law for the Expression of Life in and with the Right Use of Will and in and with Grace

Whereas a “Notification of Liability” is the first essential element of due process of law. As silence is acquiescence under the law, silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a lawful or moral duty to speak, or where an inquiry left unanswered would be misleading, whether intentionally or not. and,

Whereas every man (male and female) has the innate, intrinsic, inherent, and inalienable right by Natural Law the Law of One the Law of Love to be supported in- Life, Freedom, Security of Personal Property. Security of Spirit, in the Pursuit of Happiness and Meaning in Life, Experiencing Life on Purpose and With Purpose; and

Whereas our offspring being the baby’s we bring forth are not our property. let us explain, even though they are the fruits of their father’s seed and their mother’s egg and of the flesh and blood of their mother they are intelligent, sovereign, and autonomous beings onto themselves as the manifestation of their spirit and of life force energy of the source of all life; and,

Whereas life is simple those that choose to react in fear and do evil make life complicated.

To do good works it is essential that we follow a couple of the “Gold Rules”:

1. Cause no loss or injury to the spirit, or to the property in use by another man or woman or other sentient being

 2. Do onto others as you would have others do onto you;

3. With any contractual agreement the element of a proper contract must be established

4. There shall be no corrupt, misleading, and/or unusual business practices in one’s endeavors

5. Possession of another

Possession of another is strictly forbidden all must come to the comprehension that we are to be in right use of in and by the right use of will of our unique energy signature in all space time and non-space time

Whereas everyone shall now intend to take full responsibility for the life expressed through their unique energy expression called “a body”; and

Whereas we each have the obligation, duty, and responsibility to acknowledge and support all life, we are eternal life; and

Whereas any man or woman acting for any one of the many Crown Service Corporation(s) world wide working at a municipal level, provincial/state level, federal level, this “Notice Of Trespass And Notice Of Liability” is given; and

Whereas it is my duty to inform you that trafficking in man is illegal, forcing the man to believe he must “work” for a “wage” or get a job in order to make a living is forcing a man into servitude. “Human Trafficking” is the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labor, sexual slavery, or commercial sexual exploitation, for the benefit of the trafficker/tax collector or others; and

Whereas when we are born into the world it should not be forced upon us the established society such as that of the Crown with its British Laws being called a “Society” especially when they are detrimental to the experience of life and or diminishing to the spirit; and,

Whereas no baby’s being born into this world shall be forced to conform to the constitutions, morality or lack thereof, and ethics or lack thereof of the creators of said Society; and,

Whereas when the mother and or father and or sibling(s), parent(s) and or sibling(s)) give a calling to this baby for the purpose of communication it shall not ever be given away or through the use of word magick stolen to be used with malicious intent or to be used to infringe upon their life essence and or infringe upon the will of the infant, adolescent child, adult, etc.; and,

Whereas the unlawful conversion of this calling given by the mother and or father and or sibling(s) to that of a “Legal Name” whereby creating a “Legal Person” on paper is a fiction and therefore is invalid as it was created without knowledge and does not actually exist in spoken word or the world of form; and

Whereas we now dispel all presumption and assumptions by those that created this “Legal Person” or created the idea of a “Legal Entity”; and,

Whereas we dispel the label of “Laborer” where a man has been forced into being a “Commerce Instrument” and or a “resource” for the benefit of others; and,

Whereas we make it known for the Public Record on the Public Record, ie/I declare as the source of creation expressing as a man, all man is the king/queen of his/her dominion and not a “citizen, or a “citizen of”, no man is can be made without their conscious consent a “lieutenant of”, a “resident of,” an “inhabitant of,” a “franchise of,” a “subject of,” a “ward of,” the “property of,” the “chattel of”, or “subject to the jurisdiction of” any “army”, any “monarch” or any corporate “commonwealth,” “federal,” “state,” “territory,” “county,” “council,” “city,” “municipal body politic,” or other “government” allegedly “created” under the “authority” of a “constitution” or other “enactment.” we are not subject to any “legislation,” department, or agency created by such “authorities,” nor to the “jurisdiction” of any “employees”, “officers”, or “agents” deriving their “authority” therefrom. Nor do any of the “statutes” or “regulations” of such “authorities” apply to a man that has not given informed written and verbal consent or has never actually taken an “oath of office” with full expressed knowledge of what they are agreeing to; and,

Whereas no man has “jurisdiction” or “power of attorney” over another man without prior written and verbal consent; and,

Whereas an expression of source energy called, “a man” is not a subject of any “Legal Society” and their “B.A.R. Courts” or bound by “precedents” of any member of the “Legal Society” or what has been determined in their “B.A.R. Courts,” deriving their “jurisdiction” from assumed “authorities.”; and,

Whereas from this day forth make it known and notice that we hereby cancel and make void from the beginning of the beginning, ab initio, any such “instrument” or any presumed “election” made by any “government” or any “agency” or “department” thereof, that this sentient and living being called “a man” ever has voluntarily elected to be treated as an “alien”, a “civilian”, “tenant”, a “lieutenant”, “subject” of any “monarch” or a “citizen,” or a “resident” of any “commonwealth,” “state,” “territory,” “possession,” “instrumentality,” “enclave,” “division,” “district,” or “province,” subject to their “jurisdiction(s); and

Whereas we do not accept being forced or coerced with lies and deceit to participate in “war games” those that have been lied and coerced into participating in the military are hereby absolved, they cannot be held guilty of a crime they are unaware of and therefore not subject to military tribunals; and

Whereas choosing for oneself to ingest a substance that is a known poison to the body or act in a way that is detrimental to one’s psychological, emotional, mental, and biological well-being is one thing, being forced to choose at the hands of those initiating covert and the overt military action is a completely different matter and quite another thing. Not having the capacity as a result of incompetency, mental illness, lack of education, being lied to, illiteracy, insanity, or the lacking awareness, renders one that of invalid and incapable of choosing for oneself. In the event that these states are present for the inhabitants of earth then poisoning and murdering is a crime of colossal proportion. in the response thus void of prosecution; and

Whereas those that know and allow these crimes to continue are beyond redemption for they are choosing to destroy all life; and,

Whereas those that have been by their own volition chosen to remain in lower states of consciousness polarized in their thinking and perceiving, whether unconsciously or consciously choosing to remain in an imbalanced emotional state and that may be incapable of perceiving the harmful effect their lack of awareness and state of consciousness has on creation are violating my right for self-determination as a unique energy signature at a specific state of knowledge; and

Whereas each baby born to earth is of their own “authority”, the author of my reality; and

The Law of Mercy

For at one time, we too were foolish, disobedient, misled and enslaved to all sorts of desires and pleasures—living in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. 4But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, 5He saved us, not by the righteous deeds we had done, but according to His mercy, through the washing of new birth and renewal by the Holy Spirit.…

Whereas this term “God” is ill-defined and misused in many cases giving way to many incongruent thoughts being injected into the collective unconscious that have interfered with rationality, such as “the strongest survive”, take away the pollinators, and witness just how long life will continue and just how long one will survive on earth as we know it; and,

Whereas this idea of a hierarchy; arranged in order of rank, “the hierarchical bureaucracy of a local authority” was manufactured as is the “fight’ between “good” and “evil”; the men and women that have freed themselves of religious rhetoric and pardoned themself from dogma as taught in “Mainstream Christian Churches” and who have sought and thus have experienced greater comprehension of the human condition and of creation and know the transformational ability of their light abstain from “fighting” and are absolved; and

Whereas those entities that have the capacity to transverse time and space and which chose to remain in ignorance whereby choosing to interfere with another’s unique energy signature are violating free will and must be stopped of this violation; and

Whereas we would like to remind you that the general definition of Judicial Notices is a rule in the Law of Evidence. In the Rules of Law, the Law of Evidence allows a fact to be introduced into evidence if the truth of the fact is so notorious, or well known, or so authoritative, authority, authoritatively attested, that it cannot be reasonably doubted. This is done upon request of the party seeking to rely on the fact at issue, and

Whereas once a (wo)man who sometimes is acting as a Law Enforcement Officer, Governor, Commissioner, Administer, and or Minister in Office, etc. makes an offensive order and is made known in the conjuring of a thought resulting in the enactment of an order resulting in a trespass then a crime has been committed they shall then be held liable for said crime, and all shall be held responsible for conspiring, and ordering and orchestrating the said “trespass”. being a Criminal Act; and

Whereas those that have chosen to give orders that infringe upon the rights of others that have and do violate another’s reason for being and/or infringe upon their life, liberty, inherent freedom as creator while in their pursuit of happiness for the purpose of the fulfillment of life are violating free will; and in this Free Will Universe this is seen as a trespass, this is a criminal action; and

Whereas, if we have ever acted in a way that was incriminating, we are now absolved and forgiven for the aforementioned reasons, with this in mind true love does not condemn. Those with eyes to see and ears to hear now have the capacity to recognise when someone is reacting from their pain body and from past hurts. So, why would we need to forgive someone that is reacting from their traumas? When we are operating from a state of separation and judgment we lack insight and foresight to see the fact that when we ask for “forgiveness” in these instances we are causing confusion to the one that is reacting from their wounds (shadow self). It is for us to recognise our contradiction that have been form of our lack of spiritual insight and it is for each of us to remember that we all are love and loved beyond measure; and

Whereas, let me make it perfectly clear once we have restored competency in our interactions and engagements we now inform every man or woman or other acting as a “Court Clerk”, as a “Judge/Magistrate”, as a Lawyer/Attorney, as a “Police Officer/Policy Enforcer/Revenue Generators, Glorified Tax Collector”, as a “Sheriff”, as a “Bailiff”, as well as the bureaucrat, and/or every man or women acting as an employee of the government, and the “de facto” court system, and all other parties that may inquire, we are not a “citizen/Citizen” or a “citizen/Citizen of”, we are none of the labels imposed upon us upon entry into this world. From this time forth we break free from this “lords” curse for we shall forevermore monitor our own coming in and going out, so be it, by the power of 3x3x3 we now make it so; and

Whereas having a “Birthday” is not “informing on oneself” and is not cause for incrimination and any fanciful ideas around the blowing out of candles is hereby absolved and made obsolete, furthermore, we do not accept any of the fanciful and absurd man-made or draconian ideas designed to discredit the Natural Intelligence of man and diminish the life of man in any way; and

Whereas the use of a postal code/zip code on any document online or not online, whether government created or not government created does not and has never and will never bind the user to any “hidden” presumptions or assumptions by those that created this system designed by entities that do not respect life and have control and anger issues making them into warmongers; and

Whereas if anyone has ever reacted or acted in a way that has been incriminating and or damaging to this expression of life in any they are now by Divine Grace absolved, all are love and loved beyond measure. So it is and so shall it be

It is thought written, it is conjured and spoken with loving intent for all life incarnated and diincarnate, so shall it be!!

Warning: this notification can change without warning

Only you can determine the lightnes of your heart!
Ask yourself, “is my heart as light as a feather?
Public Notice
Pronouncement and Announcement

Amended on the 14th day of May in the imposed Gregorian Earth year of 2021 @1 pm PST

Amended again on the 25th day of May @10:10 am PST

On this day the 21st day of March in the Gregorian earth of 2021 at 8 pm PST (ie/I, We, Us Our): Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Libellant(s) #1 and #2 respectively, king-zalen-godfather-queen-sophia-taniah-goddessmother enlightened and spiritually evolved beings hereby claiming all rights reserved nunc pro trunc. hereinafter Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Libellant(s), come in peace and pursuant to the Laws of the land, air, water, oil, and nature; hereby decree and proclaim Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Libellant(s) are bound as one heart in Holy Union as husband and wife make this announcement and pronouncement: Decree the Living Will is not complete without the Maxims of Law created on this day; and,

Note: [king-zelan was born raymond-dale of the father’s family hamblin and the mother’s family hyatt adopted into the father’s family shackelford in 1980and queen-sophia-tania was born redeemer lorna-lynne of the father’s family borgeson and the mother’s family ross]

Make it known for the public record on the public record, declare and decree, as the source of creation expressing as a man and a woman bound as one heart expressing as the seed with the womb of life together bound as one in heart/mind coherance:

Whereas  Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Libellant(s) #1 and #2won the gift of life when each of their respective bodies was conceived through an act of love and by the miracle of life, this body was promised the gift of life the day his mother nellie delivered him and he took his first breath on the 14 day in the 9<sup>th</sup> month September in the imposed Gregorian Earth year 1970. <a>The unholy registrars attempted to rob him of his right to life when he was issued a “Legal Name” representing a “Legal Person” and given a piece of paper called, “Certificate of Live Birth”; and,

Whereas sophia [born lorna lynne of the father’s family borgeson and the mother’s family ross] won the gift of life when her body was conceived through an act of love and by the miracle of life, her body was promised the gift of life the day her mother donna delivered this body into the world and she breathed her 1<sup>st</sup> breath and became the breath of life on the 29th day of the 7 month July in the imposed Gregorian Earth Year of 1959. unholy registrars attempted to rob her of her right to life when she was issued a “Legal Name” representing a “Legal Person” and her mother was given a piece of paper called, “Birth Certificate; and

Whereas we have discovered this piece of fanciful paper is “considered a Birth Bond” and supposedly represents a “Stock Certificate”, yet there is no verifiable proof that such a thing can be created just because someone says so. And is why we retroactively rescind, rebuke, revoke, and rebut such a claim; and</strong

Whereas just because someone has gotten away with labelling us does not make it so; and

Whereas there is no verifiable proof that we are a “citizen.”, or a “citizen of”, are not a “lieutenant of”, a “resident of,” an “inhabitant of”, a “franchise of,” a “subject of,” a “ward of,” the “property of,” the “chattel of”, or “subject to the jurisdiction of” any army, any “monarch” or any corporate “commonwealth,” “federal,” “state,” “territory,” “county,” “council,” “city,” “municipal body politic,” or other “government” allegedly “created” under the “authority” of a “constitution” or other “enactment.” we are not subject to any “legislation,” department, or agency created by such “authorities,” nor to the “jurisdiction” of any “employees”, “officers”, or “agents” deriving their “authority” therefrom. Nor do any of the “statutes” or “regulations” of such “authorities” apply to us or have any “jurisdiction” over us, we are our own “authority”, the author of our reality

Whereas if someone will step forward with bonified and verified proof that Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Libellant(s) #1 and #2 and our offspring are anyone of these labels we stand corrected, if not then you shall for ever from this day forward correct the record for each of us and forever hold your piece; and

Whereas these expressions of source energy known as a man and a woman is not a subject of the Laws conjured up by the High Priests of the “Legal Society” and not subject to any “B.A.R. courts” or bound by “precedents” of any “B.A.R. courts,” deriving their “jurisdiction” from an assumed “authority.” Take notice that Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Libellant(s) hereby cancel and make void from the beginning any such “instrument” or any presumed “election” made by any “government” or any “agency” or “department” thereof, that Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Libellant(s) #1 and #2 ever has voluntarily elected to be treated as an “alien”, a “civilian”, “tenant”, a “lieutenant”, “subject” of any “monarch” or a “citizen,” or a “citizen of” or a “resident” of any “commonwealth,” “state,” “territory,” “possession,” “instrumentality,” “enclave,” “division,” “district,” or “province,” subject to their “jurisdiction(s)”. We do not accept being forced to participate in “commerce” as a “commercial instrument” or this expression of life force used as “a human resource”, played out through “war games”. Am not in the military so not subject to “Military Tribunals”, and we do not support anyone being subjected to “Court Marshall” and treated with violence; and,

Whereas we are not liable for those “bereft of spirit” or for the “ignorance of” or lack of knowledge of the laws by “any Officer” acting under the “Color of Office”; and,

Whereas, with regard to the “Constitution”: this document supposedly setting forth the foundations of a “country” and “its” “government,” has no inherent authority, or obligation except to the writers of it and those that have taken an “Oath of Office” or “stand under it” as a registered member of the “cult”. In other words, a “constitution” written and signed by someone else has no authority and we have no obligation at all as a result of its creation, unless as a contract between two or more individuals, and then it is limited only to those individuals who have specifically entered into it with full comprehension as to the ramifications of such an agreement. At most, such a document could be a contract between the existing people at the time of its creation, but no one has the right, authority, or power to bind their posterity; and

Have it known that we have not knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally entered any such “constitution” contract to oblige us thereby, therefore such a document is inapplicable to us, and anyone claiming to derive their “authority” from such a document has no “jurisdiction” over us, our life force, or how we chose to experience life; and,

Whereas upon reading case law it is clear that the men and women called, “Judges” have made their judgments and have written these judgments from a specific mindset obtaining their thoughts from an extremely low state of consciousness, and from a low state of mental and spiritual intelligence by which they conceive their ideas and make their “judgments” as such it is our duty to expose them and expose from which they derive their presumptions and assumptions; and of which we as enlightened beings are not party to; and

Whereas we will not be forced to participate in wearing a face covering (put on a mask) or be forced to do anything under the “presumption” or “assumptions” of any “Public Health Authority”. We are not the “class of persons” as defined by the “Legal Society” that wrote the 22 U.S. Code § 1621 – Definitions or any other statutes, codes, ordinances, bills, or corporate policy; and

Whereas, as a member of the “Holy Church of Gaia” or by Pamela’s aka queen ariah’s calling “the Holy Church of Woodliness” choose to experience life in a state of harmlessness, harmlessness to self, and harmlessness to others. The “Holy Church of Gaia” is not engaged in a financial endeavor, we are not a “for-profit” nor a “non-profit” organization we are not subject to the “Legal Society”. We are not involved in “commercial” endeavors, our prime directive is to raise awareness, evolved thinking, restore the “human genome” to its original template of “unconditional/ullu love” and take steps towards higher states of consciousness: and

Whereas the members of The Holy Church of Gaia now realize that we were conditioned and hypnotised to ignore when we are committing crimes in the “carriers” we have been trained with this newly awakened knowledge the members of the “Holy Church of Gaia” stand and act by the Golden Rule(s)”to do no harm “in other words,“harmlessness to self and harmless to all others”, and “do onto others as you would have them do onto you”. The members are not involved in the “selling” of “buying” of the earth’s resources or “marketing of”, or “selling of”, or “sexploitation of”, the inhabitants of the earth. With eyes and hearts wide open the members consciously choose to acknowledge their contradictions, and absolve and abstain from pedophilia and any and all forms of “blood sacrifice” and “satanic ritual abuse and sacrifice”; and

Whereas. the members make a commitment to be open-hearted, honest, and mindful in their interactions in this orchestra and dance of life: and

Whereas we will not be coerced into participating in any activity that violates the sovereignty, constitution, ethics, or morality of the members all are on equal footing; and

Whereas anyone willfully participating in the production of, the selling of, and the use of vaccines or any injectable material or technologies that is invasive to the biology under the “Public Health Authority” is participating in the corrupting of man’s genome and participating in genocide!! These activities are a violation of the man’s physical vessel and the natural intelligence of this vessel and disrespectful to the source of its creation; and,

Whereas anyone participating in the marketing of” COVID!9″ or anything involving the “Coronavirus” is participating in fraud and is violating the rights of the innocent and subject to the removal of all rights to freedom; and

Whereas, ie/I call back all property rights from the beginning of the beginning before Genesis and stand as a steward of the air, the water, the oil, the ethers, the land; and,

Whereas, ie/i stand as the voice of Gaia declares the Right Us of Will; and,

Whereas, the time has arrived to lift the veil of illusion, dissolve the “false light” matrix, take off the blinders, break-free from the hypnotic trance; and,

Whereas we require a full forensic audit through all dimensions, all realities, all space-time and non-space time, forthwith; and

Whereas let it be known that anyone deliberately creating technology intended to infringe on the expression and functioning of this electromagnetic, mental, emotional, and biological expression known as a man is infringing on my Divine Right and Free Will and thus is committing a trespass; and

You are now knowing

Done in good faith, given with patent intent of original fiat source

Anyone that believes themselves to have a superior right to the properties must step forward within 30 days of the date of this “Public Notice” or forever hold their peace. Send claim by sending an email to and to email

The truth the whole truth nothing but the truth

   And as much as we despise labels we shall say, “we are law abiding, non-combative,

non-militant, non-resident, non-subject, non-citizen, non-alien,

Superior beings of light and love with respect for all life.

Restoring the supremacy of love and restoring abundance for all sui juris”,

it is written, it is spoken, so shall it be

as pursuant to 28 U.S. Code § 1746 – Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury                                              

“We the Affirmant(s)/Claimant(s)/Liabelant(s)  declare and verify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on this day the 21st  day of March in the imposed Gregorian Earth Year of 2021 and amended on the 25th day of May @1 pm PST of the same year

 without recourse, respect   

/s/ king-zelan-godfather-queen-sophia-taniah-godmother [shackelford-borgeson]

      responsible parties and holders in due course, beneficiaries

without dishonor, without prejudice, ill will, or frivolity, 

all rights retained and reserved, non-assumpsit,

errors and omissions expected and accepted



/s/witnessed byqueen-gurine-godmother [richard]

/s/witnessed by queen-ariah-godmother [kachowski]

Definitions for all documents created by and for us king-raymond-dale-queen-sophia-taniah in alignment with the “higher self” for the “Holy Church of Gaia

Holy Church of Gaia Definitions:

“being born” the term “being born” refers to the natural delivery of a baby or the extraction via c-section of the baby from the uterus.    

“hu” the word “hu” refers to light (to be knowledgeable) it is a love song to God/the cosmos/the Earth/Higher Self, singing ‘hu” carries with it a specific vibrational harmonic resonance. It is meant to assist the speaker to experience divine love, ullu love, heal a broken heart and offer solace during times of grief as it brings peace and calm.

            “When your day is hard, remember to sing “hu” as it will put the singer in line with the Holy Spirit” harold Klemp      

“human beings” we are not just “human beings “we are hu man holy sacred and when balance harmonically we are in a safe place no other way only two path to life and  two paths to love .one book of the dead and that of “love n light” Source Divine Unconditional Love. All activities that put in resonance with the “book of the dead” and which separates us from our true essence highest level spiritual life and in alignment with the “freedom of Love”, free from tyranny. So, what is said to the letter seriously is that there is no charge in love. Love has no remorse; love does not condemn so those that know love do not need forgiveness. Those that are in the frequency of love are balanced and in harmonic resonance with the “higher self” they are in a “safe place “free from fear, in the “holy sacred heart” with “inner child” in vibrational alignment with the “adult”, this realignment is the only true way. It is up to each unique energy signature to recognise when they are acting or reacting from their “wounded inner child “so that they can take the steps towards integration and in mind/heart coherence.

“human” refers to a man of light; a man knowledgeable and embody in the light of truth; a god/goddess; a human is holy sacred balanced in harmony and grace and is always in a safe place being consciously aware and attuned to the moment of now in the flow of “ullu love” is synonymous with “unconditional-love love love unconditional-love” [created by chief white buffalo (bison)]

a human has no remorse, where once the inner child felt separate and lost in darkness it is brought back into the sacred heart of its truth with all attachments to the painful story integrated releasing the body from pain and misery and in this expression, it realizes it is in a safe place in harmony and balance in the holy sacred heart.

 “humanoid” refers to a man that has acquired an alter ego, the mind of a humanoid is programmed to separation consciousness therefore they are void of the remembrance of the oneness of all life, and is operating from the resonant disharmonic frequency of fear in all its expression (anger, resentment, shame, blame, guilt, resentment, jealousy, abandonment, etc.) whereby moving the unique energy signature and expression of source out of hear-mind coherence

A humanoid is spiritually bereft, and emotionally and mentally deranged, exhibiting narcissistic and/or psychopathic tendencies,

A humanoid lacks reasonability, and are void of conscience, ethics, and morality.

A humanoid is disempowered as they are driven by their addictions.

A “humanoid” can be a man like creature that operates from fear or has been created from fear and follows the path of the “Book of The Dead”, its actions are driven by fear as it has lost all the attributes that make it a human. These attributes are empathy, insight, compassion, and “love”

A “humanoid’ can be an entity that “is following the path of death as it has lost its relationship with it’s source of life and seeks out the “human” as an energy source; all “humanoid” are out of vibrational harmonic resonance with its source of life; either by acquiring fear or being born of fear it has no concept of “love” and “is void of “ullu love” (the expressed physical vessel  is not sensitised to feel the subtle harmonic resonance of “ullu “, unconditional-love, love, love, “unconditional love”:

The resonant frequencies of anger, resentment, shame, blame, guilt, jealousy, abandonment, etc. keep humanoids connected to the “Book of the Dead” as their spirit is resonating at these lower frequency states which separates them from their true essence and keeping them from attaining their highest level of spiritual life expression as “the freedom of love”. These people are keeping themselves from being written eternally in the “Book of Life”           

“ie/I” is a compound word and is synonymous with and interchangeable with (we, us, our)                                   ie is a personal pronoun referring to the biological electromagnetic sentient being, mind, spirit, complex,                                     I for all intensive purposes shall refer to the eternal soul, source, infinite awareness, I am that I am.

“ie/I,we, us, our” refers to king-zelan-god-father-queen-sophia-taniah goddess-mother all of our offspring separately and jointly from the beginning, and this sentient being known as Gaia aka Earth. All is in the one and the one is in the all.

The use of any one of these word(s) “ie/I, we, us, our” in this or any other document created by us is to include all aspects of this expression known as a human including yet not exclusively the “higher self” also known as “the inner being”, the offspring of with all family members past, present, and future associated,

Note: The use of these word(s) “ie/I, we, us, our” does not refer to the “Legal Name” or “Legal Person” or anything that is not organic or aligned with the balance of the Natural World conjured up by the “Papacy”       

 “light of truth” this refers to a man encompassing the knowledge of creation as a result of direct experience, “the light of truth” this statement is not something that can be taught, it must be experienced      

 “man” the word “man” can be used to refer to a male (having a penis)and when healthy is able of being a father, it can also be used to refer to a female (having a womb)and when healthy is able of being a mother           

“natural born” the term “natural born” refers to the process of insemination of an egg, fetal development in utero, followed with the process of being born from the womb (the uterus)                 

 “people” the word “people” is specific to include natural men and women and their offspring       

 “Sacred Marriage” the term “Sacred Marriage” refers to a man and women coming together in “Holy Matrimony” as an act of being married to one another. They are gifting their bodies to each other, as the come together as one in spirit, each heart beating as one, committed to each one in “ullu love” with the promise to care for one another in harmlessness to self and harmlessness to the other.              

“ullu love” the term “ullu love” is a love without conditions as the mind has full insight in the moment while in interaction with self and others, in this state of being the ego personality/mind is free of conditions, this refers to a mind free of misery as it has experienced the “unconditional love” of its source of expression, the physical body of those that are embodied as “ullu love” have released all attachment to the “intellectual mind” are thus free of pain and misery, in this detached state there is no longer resistance between the various aspects of the expression all expressions are in harmonic resonant frequency alignment.  

 “world” refers to ‘man’s existence and all expressions of existence here as life on earth


The following videos are useful if we are interested in holding the “Public Servants” accountable

Q&A With Rod Class #1

Alphonse is another man that is making head way in court!

The 6 Step Process

How to Deal with Debt Collectors

Staying Out Of Their Courts

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.