DelegatedAuthority #TrustLaw #FiduciaryDuty #Consent #ProofOfAuthority #DueProcess #Accountability #EvidencePreservation #DocumentIntegrity #Transparency
I was reading through my Facebook news feed today and saw the meme shown above, posted by Peter Vodicka on 26 January at 21:07. I’m republishing the accompanying text because it may be relevant to anyone navigating estate, trust, or delegated-authority issues.
For clarity: the text below is Peter’s original message, shared verbatim and unedited.·
Did You Know?
Anyone acting as a trustee without consent, without verified appointment, and without lawful delegation exposes themselves to personal liability under equity, commercial, and fiduciary law, and to serious compliance and enforcement risk under international financial and anti-corruption frameworks.
This includes:
• Lawyers
• Administrators
• Court officers
• Financial managers
• School or agency executives
• Any individual or entity interfacing with protected trusts or private estate interests
Title: Blocking the Property of Persons Involved in Serious Human Rights Abuse or Corruption
Signed: 20 December 2017
Based on: The Global Magnitsky Act
This framework empowers authorities to:
• Seize assets
• Freeze accounts
• Restrict international access and indemnity
• Designate and blacklist individuals who benefit from:
• Unlawful government or court processes
• Deprivation of family connection
• Trust abuse, including estate interference or coercion
• Legal processes used to harm or silence
Its effects extend beyond the U.S. through international banking, compliance, and sanctions systems, particularly where unlawful authority is assumed rather than proven.
Title: Core Principles for Regulating the Financial System
Signed: 3 February 2017
This order reinforces that:
• Financial systems must verify lawful delegation and authority
• Private rights and asset security cannot be overridden by assumption
• Any system, banking, court, or government — that fails to verify delegation operates outside financial integrity principles
Together, these frameworks expose financial actions taken without proper authority to nullification, loss of indemnity, and serious accountability consequences.
• Any person or institution attempting to access or interfere with assets they do not lawfully control
• Any actor benefiting from an unrebutted assumption of authority
• Any process proceeding without verified delegation, standing, or consent
A court ruling is not required to create risk, exposure, or a compliance breach, the absence of lawful authority alone is sufficient.
• Demand evidence of trustee appointment or legal delegation
• Require wet-ink signatures and certified proof of standing
• Record and timestamp all notices and responses
• Preserve evidence using hash verification (e.g. SHA-3) or ledger timestamps
• Understand that silence after opportunity to rebut is not protection, it is risk
Authority is not assumed, it must be granted.
Title is not ownership, it must be proven.
Silence after notice is not safety, it is liability.
If you are acting on someone else’s estate, trust, or property without proof of authority, you are already exposed.
Comment thread (formatted) as of January 29, 2026 to read the original post on Facebook use this link: https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=10162391038627647&set=a.463985732646
Peter Vodicka (Author)
https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1FmXohAMZt/?mibextid=wwXIfr
Peter Vodicka (Author)
This includes faith-based donations linked to seized estates.
Peter Vodicka (Author)
https://x.com/prometheanactn/status/2015886133536710773?s=46
Promethean Action (@PrometheanActn) on X
X.COM
Promethean Action (@PrometheanActn) on X
Promethean Action (@PrometheanActn) on X
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Wait until the children and their parents find out about school-state trust abuse.
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Now, they must prove they were never impersonating a trustee.
And they can’t.
Peter Vodicka (Author)
If any party involved continues to act without wet-ink delegation, they facing full personal iability.
Celia Blomfield
Peter Vodicka is that for any contract with corporation’s (ie council)?
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Celia Blomfield yes under trust law
Jodie Hay
Celia Blomfield do you have a contract directly with council though?
Celia Blomfield
Peter Vodicka ok thanks, still learning about all these different laws
Celia Blomfield
Jodie Hay no, not that I’m aware of 🤔
Jodie Hay
Celia Blomfield no love , none of us do. We buy a house or get a mortgage and then council start sending charges so no we don’t have a ‘contract’ so yeah, who delegates their authority ?
Celia Blomfield
Jodie Hay aah ok thanks, are you challenging your rates?
Jodie Hay
Celia we have for several years though through different common law notices ect. Which were ineffective , generated no response , but it also pissed then off because as an ex employee on work comp ( dont ever do that) with legal stuff ( also don’t ever do that) over my injury …. The legal case is now over after 41/2 years of pshycological abuse . Insurers are a mafia of their own!
But it took seven years of bringing it to their attention of why we are not paying rates , to receive their court ‘threat’ I didn’t have peters info at that time and don’t believe we were at the right time to attempt what we tried but we are now and I am about to ‘ask ‘ them the questions
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Every administrative act proceeding without my consent = fraud on title under international financial law (reinforced via EO13772).
Peter Vodicka (Author)
EO13772 is the system’s own mirror. The moment they act without verified delegation, they operate outside financial law.
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Assumptions of delegated control are no longer defensible.
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Dear authorities don’t you think it’s time to trigger a DAP – Delegation Audit Protocol?
Peter Vodicka (Author)
CID + SHA3 + PPSR = the new evidentiary triangle for lawful record supremacy.
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Insurance doesn’t protect impersonators or fraud under trust exclusion
Peter Vodicka (Author)
(Blank comment — no text shown)
Jeremy Clendenen
One important distinction to make, EXECUTIVE orders ONLY apply to the EXECUTIVE branch due to the separation of powers doctrine. However, and this is where it gets good, even if a constitutional judge is administering State statutes in administrative proceedings brought to courts through agency actions, like traffic courts, or family courts, or even State department of Justice courts, they are not operating in a judicial capacity. When administering statutes in an administrative/ministerial capacity, judges are treated as purely executive in nature, as such having no judicial immunity. This applies to the prosecutor too since he is an executive officer. As well as the law enforcement officers in the executive branch that undoubtedly unlawfully deprived someone of their Liberty with no lawfully issued judicial warrant.
Jeramy Ryan Rocchi
This is the administrative Modus of Operandi..
And these EO are an implied “mirror imaging” to flip the script onto the people whom are waking up to the Administrative frauds and making moves to establish a proper person position with what is their property.. the Givers want to renig on the Gift and anticipated the Bab they stole from to never become aware of the trespasses…
The Den of Thieves is becoming Exposed.
Anthony Molenaar
Humanity has been conditioned to believe that Legal is the same as Lawful, but this is not true.
Legal (fiction/temporal) = man-made rules, which do not apply to living men/women.
Lawful (Truth/Eternal) = Universal Law which governs all living entities without exception.
Suggest to be aware of the ongoing deception imposed upon the people by the fictional corporation acting as government, whereby they have no Rights or authority to become politically charged in terms of their control over the masses of living men/women.
For more information and a way people may choose to undo the deception visit MyLivingID dot org
Suggest to be aware that man-made rules called law in the form of Acts, Bills, Codes, Orders etc do not apply to Living Men/Women, but only to a legal artificial person created by the registered birth certificate.
Visit MyLivingID dot org
Ian Maccabee
just an observation- Because our Public-servants are our paid Trustees, does that not make them PERSONALLY liable for bringing charges against our Trust?….even though we and our Trusts are in-the-private….?
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Ian Maccabee Yes it does
Ian Maccabee
thanks for reply Peter….so why do we not hear their name (Politicians/DPPs/ Attorney Generals/Chief Commissioners etc., in more Court cases?
Soaring Eagle
Which country is this for?
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Soaring Eagle every country
Soaring Eagle
Peter Vodicka and how do I go about it
Peter Vodicka (Author)
Soaring Eagle ask for delegations and authority if they can’t provide it then you know
Soaring Eagle
Peter Vodicka then I know but how do I move it forward to having the case dismissed?
Peggy Ann Creagh Morey
So are we entitled to get all our money back???
Raymond Oneofthepeople
Our constitutions are Trust . All public officials are trustees . What happens with them when they act in Maladministration?
Jordan Lee
Contra proferentem
Suren Puerpous
What you’re doing’s incredible bro 💯💯💯
Lyn Bale
Handy to know
Samuel Bruce O’Connor
Yes can you check with fiji public trusty under my name.
Troy Lovetinsky
Maritime courts do it all the time. Your birth certificate is a trust the government never told you about. You’re the trust, they exploit it by indentured servitude, fraud, purgery, and extortion
Gary Cain
None of this works in our treasonous corrupt courts I’m in court today and there’s no help from anyone
GW Trust
👏👏👏
Abiola Opeyemi
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ASUgSucyB0s&list=PLEQ6dHAxhtAKVExY2KNqfkWHilsqrannv&index=5&pp=iAQB
David John Sarah Turvey Jodie Hay
David Sarah Turvey? Fancy seeing you pop up here angel! It’s been a very long time x
Sarah Turvey Jodie Hay hello gorgeous! Way too long! 
David John Hi Jodie, I apologise and retract the comment I posted in response to yours last night, Sarah let me know she knows you and the comment was meant for her. I misinterpreted it the way it was written and thought you were someone trying to stir trouble.
Dave
Jordan Lee
Jordan Lee
Mark Sanchez
Curious thoughts…
‘How does protect as their own’
‘pre consented relief’
‘Non-retaliation’
tolling due to covert adverse actions
‘Discovered years later due to parties failing their obligations to report ‘
Has anyone actually lived through this?
Miguel Loma
Executive order 13772 was Revoked by President Biden’s EO 14018
Sophia-Taniah love
EO 13772 (Feb 3, 2017) was explicitly revoked by EO 14018 (Feb 24, 2021). EO 14018 is also listed among the executive actions revoked on Jan 20, 2025 (“Initial Rescissions of Harmful Executive Orders and Actions”). I don’t see anything in that Jan 20, 2025 rescissions order that expressly reinstates EO 13772—it appears to revoke EO 14018, but doesn’t re-issue EO 13772.
Freedom Dove 
Leave a comment