Re: Tea - Re: [citizensoftheUSofA] all those who doubted the existence of all caps
- 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.
- 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?
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
- 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
has chosen to commence his action out of claimant's court. 2 Wilson's R.
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
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
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.
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.
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
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
3. Captors are responsible to the owners of the property for all
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
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:
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.
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
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: