Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Tea - Re: [citizensoftheUSofA] all those who doubted the existence of all caps

Expand Messages
  • one
    It is a maxim of law that things similar cannot differ. Unless you know that you are in fact the same person as the person ROYCE, you are lying and accepting
    Message 1 of 3 , Aug 31, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      It is a maxim of law that things similar cannot differ. Unless you know
      that you are in fact the same person as the person ROYCE, you are lying
      and accepting a lie just because you don't know how to argue
      successfully for truth as you know it. So, your position on the matter
      reflects on your character and capacity. You are willing to bear false
      witness because you have seen so many who argued for truth as they knew
      it defeated. Lawyers are only interested in profitable cases and causes
      which won't cost them time without returning money.

      You see, the nub of the matter is character and capacity. As a
      professional species, lawyers are hired to argue, twist, etc. For them
      winning is all. The only character to which they aspire as a
      professional species is the character of winner in court in the capacity
      of attorney. The law is just a field of business and profit for them.

      But the rest of us have our own skin in the game. And there is no more
      important issue than what is the character and capacity of the accused.

      When a State departs from the common law rule of decision, it violates
      the right to due process of law from Magna Carta, as it has been
      conceded by all the judges that this phrase means the same as "by the
      law of the land".

      Now in the French style of collective or communist republic, the
      Legislature is like gods. It's more correctly a democratic
      legislature. This is wholly incompatible with a form of republic in
      which the rights of man have been declared and in which all men are
      equally free and independent.

      We have the right to a forum in which our rights are recognized. It has
      been recognized even under 14th amendment jurisprudence:

      if the protection of fundamental rights by equal laws equally
      administered is enjoyed, the Constitution does not forbid allowing one
      person to seek a forum from which another in the same class is excluded.
      Holmes for the court

      But the right to forum, like any other right, can be waived.

      You can waive your rights and your clients, but when you presume to
      advise me to waive mine, you go too far by half. You cannot be in the
      character and capacity of a common law posterity citizen if you are at
      that time addressed with an all caps name. I think it's that simple.

      It's that simple unless you are a lawyer who wants to deny the common
      rules of written language are not part of the rules of evidence for
      common law rule of decision. For a class which does not need to ever
      mean personally what it says professionally, this could be yet another
      argument to be tested for profitability.
    • Michael Noonan
      I have little experience in going into court for myself, although I know a little bit about being there, how to write motions, etc. If I were summoned to
      Message 2 of 3 , Aug 31, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        I have little experience in going into court for
        myself, although I know a little bit about being
        there, how to write motions, etc.

        If I were summoned to appear, and all Complaints
        are in all Caps for name, it seems if I announce
        that I am, mn, domiciled as a citizen of the state
        Rpublic, Illinois, [if that is how to properly
        phrase it], and not a fictional person as identified
        in the Complaint, does that stop the proceeding
        because the court cannot deal with anything other
        than another fiction?

        TIA

        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        http://mail.yahoo.com
      • one
        In these evil days, all of the so called courts of the State that I know of are administrative forums of limited jurisdiction given by statute. If you have and
        Message 3 of 3 , Aug 31, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          In these evil days, all of the so called courts of the State that I know
          of are administrative forums of limited jurisdiction given by statute.

          If you have and can prove the character and capacity which you claim,
          then you have a right to a forum in which fundamental rights have
          standing and will be recognized by the process.

          It is not enough that you announce your character and capacity. You
          must also bring your law with you, law which will be foreign to the
          State courts of today. That is to say, the Constitution for the United
          States of America and the Rights and Constitutions of the State under
          which you claim character and capacity. You must prove them according
          to their rules of evidence.

          We must consider what did a freeman do who was summoned by name to a
          borough court in a false character and capacity, as a villein, for
          instance. And with the evidence mentioned above in the record, you are
          in position to claim conusance in order to change the forum. Cognitio
          placitorum, when the plea is commenced in one court, of which conusance
          belongs to another.

          Your fundamental rights and constituted rights are due hearing in a
          forum bound to take cognizance of them. On the authority of Holmes
          writing for the court. It may be the matter ought to be remanded to the
          clerk for assignment to the constitutional county court, rather than
          dismissed. But that is conjecture on my part. If there is no
          constituted forum bound to have cognizance of your fundamental and
          constituted rights, that's the plaintiff's misfortune. It may be a
          forum convened by the sheriff is his proper forum.

          I have appended some additional entries relation to caption, just
          f.y.i., as some fashion of a state of belligerence or war seems to be a
          permanent thing since the days of Lincoln. Particularly in matters
          involving vehicles, there is no question there is an arrest and
          detention very like a capture of a vessel, if not precisely so.

          CONUSANCE, CLAIM OF, English law. This is defined to be an intervention
          by a third person, demanding judicature in the cause against the
          plaintiff, who
          has chosen to commence his action out of claimant's court. 2 Wilson's R.
          409.
          2. It is a question of jurisdiction between the two courts Fortesc. R.
          157; 5 Vin. Abr. 588; and not between the plaintiff and defendant, as in
          the
          case of plea to the jurisdiction, and therefore it must be demanded by the
          party entitled to conusance, or by his representative, and not by the
          defendant or his attorney. Id. ibid. A plea to the jurisdiction must be
          pleaded in person, but a claim of conusance may be made by attorney. 1
          Chit.
          Pl. 403.
          3. There are three sorts of conusance. 1. Tentere placita, which does
          not oust another court of its jurisdiction, but only creates a concurrent
          one. 2. Cognitio placitorum, when the plea is commenced in one court, of
          which conusance belongs to another. 3. A conusance of exclusive
          jurisdiction; as that no other court shall hold plea, &c. Hard. 509 Bac.
          Ab.
          Courts, D.

          CONUSANT. One who knows as if a party knowing of an agreement in which
          he has an interest, makes no objection to it, he is said to be conusant.
          Co.
          Litt. 157.


          CAPTION, practice. That part of a legal instrument, as a 'Commission,
          indictment, &c., which shows where, when, and by what authority it was
          taken, found or executed. As to the forms and requisites of captions, see 1
          Murph. 281; 8 Yerg. 514; 4 Iredell, 113; 6 Miss,. 469; 1 Scam. 456; 5 How.
          Mis. 20; 6 Blackf. 299; 1 Hawks, 354; 1 Brev. 169.
          2. In the English practice, when an inferior court in obedience to the
          writ of certiorari, returns an indictment into the K. B., it is annexed to
          the caption, then called a schedule, and the caption concludes with
          stating,
          that "it is presented in manner and form as appears in a certain indictment
          thereto annexed," and the caption and indictment are returned on separate
          parchments. 1 Saund. 309, n. 2. Vide Dane's Ab. Index, h.t.
          3. Caption is another name for arrest. CAPTIVE. By this term is
          understood one who has been taken; it is usually applied to prisoners of
          war. (q.v.) Although he has lost his liberty, a captive does not by his
          captivity lose his civil rights.

          CAPTOR, war. One who has taken property from an enemy; this term is also
          employed to designate one who has taken an enemy.
          2. Formerly, goods taken in war were adjudged to belong to the captor;
          they are now considered to vest primarily, in the state or sovereign, and
          belong to the individual captors only to the extent that the municipal laws
          provide.
          3. Captors are responsible to the owners of the property for all
          losses
          and damages, when the capture is tortious and without reasonable cause in
          the exercise of belligerent rights. But if the capture is originally
          justifiable, the captors will not be responsible, unless by subsequent
          misconduct they become trespassers ab initio. i Rob. R. 93, 96. See 2 Gall.
          374; 1 Gall. 274; 1 Pet. Adm. Dee. 116; 1 Mason, R. 14.

          CAPTURE, war. The taking of property by one belligerent from another.
          2. To make a good capture of a ship, it must be subdued and taken
          by an
          enemy in open war, or by way of reprisals, or by a pirate, and with intent
          to deprive the owner of it.
          3. Capture may be with intent to possess both ship and cargo, or only
          to seize the goods of the enemy, or contraband goods which are on board:
          The
          former is the capture of the ship in the proper sense of the word; the
          latter is only an arrest and detention, without any design to deprive the
          owner of it. Capture is deemed lawful, when made by a declared enemy,
          lawfully commissioned and according to the laws of war; and unlawful, when
          it is against the rules established by the law of nations. Marsh. Ins.
          B. 1,
          c. 12, s. 4.See, generally, Lee on Captures, passim; 1 Chitty's Com. Law,
          377 to 512; 2 Woddes. 435 to 457; 2 Caines' C. Err 158; 7 Johns. R. 449; 3
          Caines' R. 155; 11 Johns. R. 241; 13 Johns. R.161; 14 Johns. R. 227; 3
          Wheat. 183; 4 Cranch, 436 Mass. 197; Bouv. Inst. Index, h.t.


          CAPIAS AD RESPONDENDUM, practice. A writ commanding the sheriff, or
          other proper officer, to "take the body of the defendant and to keep the
          same to answer, ad respondendum, the plaintiff in a plea," &c. The
          amount of bail
          demanded ought to, be indorsed on the writ.
          2. A defendant arrested upon this writ must be committed to prison,
          unless he give a bail bond (q.v.) to the sheriff. In some states, (as,
          until lately, in Pennsylvania,) it is the practice, when the defendant is
          liable to this process, to indorse on the writ, No bail required in which
          case he need only give the sheriff, in writing, an authority to the
          prothonotary to enter his appearance to the action, to be discharged from
          the arrest. If the writ has been served, and the defendant have not given
          bail, but remains in custody, it is returned C. C., cepi corpus; if he have
          given bail, it is returned C. C. B. B., cepi corpus, bail bond; if the
          defendant's appearance have been accepted, the return is, "C. C. and
          defendant's appearance accepted." According to the course of the
          practice at
          common law, the writ bears teste, in the name of the chief justice, or
          presiding judge of the court, on some day in term time, when the judge is
          supposed to be present, not being Sunday, and is made returnable on a
          regular return day. 1 Penna. Pr. 36; 1 Arch. Pr. 67.



          Michael Noonan wrote:
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.