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


Expand Messages
  • mobinem@aol.com
    I just spent a week in a law class studying trust law and remedies, notes and the like. Here is something I have deduced and have never heard before. Bear,
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 19, 2008
      I just spent a week in a law class studying trust law and remedies, notes and the like. Here is something I have deduced and have never heard before. Bear, please excuse the language but I must use it for the context.
      Trust are corporations that must have the word TRUST with the name;
      The new "money" that is proposed is absent a popular phrase;
      Our old silver certificates were absent the same phrase;
      In order to destroy the economy the government TRUST would first have to be collapsed;
      Ergo, I think the words: IN G-- WE TRUST is not a statement, it is the name of the foreign corporation, a TRUST, known as IN G-- WE.
      If so, and following a valid concept that G-- is the name of a  pagan deity, then the TRUST named IN G-- WE is a corporation designed to control commerce through a specific law form primarily concerning contracts.
      If my theory is correct, then said name may not lawfully be used on any new notes issued by a separate corporation.
      Again, this is just a theory.

      John-Chester of the family Stuart
      sovereign; HIDC of JCS is YHWH

      c/o postal service location
      21001 N. Tatum Blvd. Suite 1630472
      Phoenix, Arizona republic cf 85050 cf
      I am not an attorney and do not give
      legal advice, all information is for
      education purposes only.
      Read Luke 23:2 &
      Ephesians 6:12

      Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape in the new year.
    • gary
      I hope Bear allows this link as it does contain that certain word he doesn t like but the link doesn t work without it. You might want to read the article at
      Message 2 of 4 , Jan 20, 2008
        I hope Bear allows this link as it does contain that certain word he doesn't like but the link doesn't work without it.

        You might want to read the article at
        ---- Original Message -----
        Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2008 10:52 AM
        Subject: [tips_and_tricks] trust

        Trust are corporations that must have the word TRUST with the name;
        The new "money" that is proposed is absent a popular phrase;
        Our old silver certificates were absent the same phrase;
      • Pro Se
        John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to
        Message 3 of 4 , Jan 20, 2008
          John F. Kennedy vs The Federal Reserve

          On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential
          decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the
          authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank
          of its power to loan money to the United States
          Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a
          pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately
          owned Federal Reserve Bank would soon be out of
          business. The Ch--stian Law Fellowship has
          exhaustively researched this matter through the
          Federal Register and Library of Congress. We can now
          safely conclude that this Executive Order has never
          been repealed, amended, or superceded by any
          subsequent Executive Order. In simple terms, it is
          still valid.

          When President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - the author of
          Profiles in Courage -signed this Order, it returned to
          the federal government, specifically the Treasury
          Department, the Constitutional power to create and
          issue currency -money - without going through the
          privately owned Federal Reserve Bank. President
          Kennedy's Executive Order 11110 [the full text is
          displayed further below] gave the Treasury Department
          the explicit authority: "to issue silver certificates
          against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver
          dollars in the Treasury." This means that for every
          ounce of silver in the U.S. Treasury's vault, the
          government could introduce new money into circulation
          based on the silver bullion physically held there. As
          a result, more than $4 billion in United States Notes
          were brought into circulation in $2 and $5
          denominations. $10 and $20 United States Notes were
          never circulated but were being printed by the
          Treasury Department when Kennedy was assassinated. It
          appears obvious that President Kennedy knew the
          Federal Reserve Notes being used as the purported
          legal currency were contrary to the Constitution of
          the United States of America.

          "United States Notes" were issued as an interest-free
          and debt-free currency backed by silver reserves in
          the U.S. Treasury. We compared a "Federal Reserve
          Note" issued from the private central bank of the
          United States (the Federal Reserve Bank a/k/a Federal
          Reserve System), with a "United States Note" from the
          U.S. Treasury issued by President Kennedy's Executive
          Order. They almost look alike, except one says
          "Federal Reserve Note" on the top while the other says
          "United States Note". Also, the Federal Reserve Note
          has a green seal and serial number while the United
          States Note has a red seal and serial number.

          President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22,
          1963 and the United States Notes he had issued were
          immediately taken out of circulation. Federal Reserve
          Notes continued to serve as the legal currency of the
          nation. According to the United States Secret Service,
          99% of all U.S. paper "currency" circulating in 1999
          are Federal Reserve Notes.

          Kennedy knew that if the silver-backed United States
          Notes were widely circulated, they would have
          eliminated the demand for Federal Reserve Notes. This
          is a very simple matter of economics. The USN was
          backed by silver and the FRN was not backed by
          anything of intrinsic value. Executive Order 11110
          should have prevented the national debt from reaching
          its current level (virtually all of the nearly $9
          trillion in federal debt has been created since 1963)
          if LBJ or any subsequent President were to enforce it.
          It would have almost immediately given the U.S.
          Government the ability to repay its debt without going
          to the private Federal Reserve Banks and being charged
          interest to create new "money". Executive Order 11110
          gave the U.S.A. the ability to, once again, create its
          own money backed by silver and realm value worth

          Again, according to our own research, just five months
          after Kennedy was assassinated, no more of the Series
          1958 "Silver Certificates" were issued either, and
          they were subsequently removed from circulation.
          Perhaps the assassination of JFK was a warning to all
          future presidents not to interfere with the private
          Federal Reserve's control over the creation of money.
          It seems very apparent that President Kennedy
          challenged the "powers that exist behind U.S. and
          world finance". With true patriotic courage, JFK
          boldly faced the two most successful vehicles that
          have ever been used to drive up debt:
          1) war (Viet Nam); and,
          2) the creation of money by a privately owned central
          His efforts to have all U.S. troops out of Vietnam by
          1965 combined with Executive Order 11110 would have
          destroyed the profits and control of the private
          Federal Reserve Bank.

          Executive Order 11110
          the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3
          of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

          SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19,
          1951, as amended, is hereby further amended - (a) By
          adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following
          subparagraph (j): "(j) The authority vested in the
          President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of
          May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue
          silver certificates against any silver bullion,
          silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not
          then held for redemption of any outstanding silver
          certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such
          silver certificates, and to coin standard silver
          dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their
          redemption," and (b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and
          (c) of paragraph 2 thereof. SECTION 2. The amendment
          made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or
          any right accruing or accrued or any suit or
          proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal
          cause prior to the date of this Order but all such
          liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if
          said amendments had not been made.

          JOHN F. KENNEDY THE WHITE HOUSE, June 4, 1963

          Once again, Executive Order 11110 is still valid.
          According to Title 3, United States Code, Section 301
          dated January 26, 1998:

          Executive Order (EO) 10289 dated Sept. 17, 1951, 16
          F.R. 9499, was as amended by:

          Ø EO 10583, dated December 18, 1954, 19 F.R.
          Ø EO 10882 dated July 18, 1960, 25 F.R. 6869;
          Ø EO 11110 dated June 4, 1963, 28 F.R. 5605;
          Ø EO 11825 dated December 31, 1974, 40 F.R.
          Ø EO 12608 dated September 9, 1987, 52 F.R.

          The 1974 and 1987 amendments, added after Kennedy's
          1963 amendment, did not change or alter any part of
          Kennedy's EO 11110. A search of Clinton's 1998 and
          1999 EO's and Presidential Directives has also shown
          no reference to any alterations, suspensions, or
          changes to EO 11110.

          The Federal Reserve Bank, a.k.a Federal Reserve
          System, is a Private Corporation. Black's Law
          Dictionary defines the "Federal Reserve System" as:
          "Network of twelve central banks to which most
          national banks belong and to which state chartered
          banks may belong. Membership rules require investment
          of stock and minimum reserves." Privately-owned banks
          own the stock of the FED. This was explained in more
          detail in the case of Lewis v. United States, Federal
          Reporter, 2nd Series, Vol. 680, Pages 1239, 1241
          (1982), where the court said: "Each Federal Reserve
          Bank is a separate corporation owned by commercial
          banks in its region. The stock-holding commercial
          banks elect two thirds of each Bank's nine member
          board of directors".

          The Federal Reserve Banks are locally controlled by
          their member banks. Once again, according to Black's
          Law Dictionary, we find that these privately owned
          banks actually issue money:

          "Federal Reserve Act. Law which created Federal
          Reserve banks which act as agents in maintaining money
          reserves, issuing money in the form of bank notes,
          lending money to banks, and supervising banks.
          Administered by Federal Reserve Board ( q.v.)". The
          privately owned Federal Reserve (FED) banks actually
          issue (create) the "money" we use. In 1964, the House
          Committee on Banking and Currency, Subcommittee on
          Domestic Finance, at the second session of the 88th
          Congress, put out a study entitled Money Facts which
          contains a good description of what the FED is: "The
          Federal Reserve is a total money-making machine. It
          can issue money or checks. And it never has a problem
          of making its checks good because it can obtain the $5
          and $10 bills necessary to cover its check simply by
          asking the Treasury Department's Bureau of Engraving
          to print them".

          Any one person or any closely knit group who has a lot
          of money has a lot of power. Now imagine a group of
          people who have the power to create money. Imagine the
          power these people would have. This is exactly what
          the privately owned FED is!

          No man did more to expose the power of the FED than
          Louis T. McFadden, who was the Chairman of the House
          Banking Committee back in the 1930s. In describing the
          FED, he remarked in the Congressional Record, House
          pages 1295 and 1296 on June 10, 1932:

          "Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most
          corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer
          to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve
          banks. The Federal Reserve Board, a Government Board,
          has cheated the Government of the United States and he
          people of the United States out of enough money to pay
          the national debt. The depredations and the iniquities
          of the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal reserve
          banks acting together have cost this country enough
          money to pay the national debt several times over.
          This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the
          people of the United States; has bankrupted itself,
          and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has
          done this through the maladministration of that law by
          which the Federal Reserve Board, and through the
          corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control

          Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are United
          States Government institutions. They are not
          Government institutions, departments, or agencies.
          They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the
          people of the United States for the benefit of
          themselves and their foreign customers. Those 12
          private credit monopolies were deceitfully placed upon
          this country by bankers who came here from Europe and
          who repaid us for our hospitality by undermining our
          American institutions.

          The FED basically works like this: The government
          granted its power to create money to the FED banks.
          They create money, then loan it back to the government
          charging interest. The government levies income taxes
          to pay the interest on the debt. On this point, it's
          interesting to note that the Federal Reserve Act and
          the sixteenth amendment, which gave congress the power
          to collect income taxes, were both passed in 1913. The
          incredible power of the FED over the economy is
          universally admitted. Some people, especially in the
          banking and academic communities, even support it. On
          the other hand, there are those, such as President
          John Fitzgerald Kennedy, that have spoken out against
          it. His efforts were spoken about in Jim Marrs' 1990
          book Crossfire:"

          Another overlooked aspect of Kennedy's attempt to
          reform American society involves money. Kennedy
          apparently reasoned that by returning to the
          constitution, which states that only Congress shall
          coin and regulate money, the soaring national debt
          could be reduced by not paying interest to the bankers
          of the Federal Reserve System, who print paper money
          then loan it to the government at interest. He moved
          in this area on June 4, 1963, by signing Executive
          Order 11110 which called for the issuance of
          $4,292,893,815 in United States Notes through the U.S.
          Treasury rather than the traditional Federal Reserve
          System. That same day, Kennedy signed a bill changing
          the backing of one and two dollar bills from silver to
          gold, adding strength to the weakened U.S. currency.

          Kennedy's comptroller of the currency, James J. Saxon,
          had been at odds with the powerful Federal Reserve
          Board for some time, encouraging broader investment
          and lending powers for banks that were not part of the
          Federal Reserve system. Saxon also had decided that
          non-Reserve banks could underwrite state and local
          general obligation bonds, again weakening the dominant
          Federal Reserve banks".

          In a comment made to a Columbia University class on
          Nov. 12, 1963,

          Ten days before his assassination, President John
          Fitzgerald Kennedy allegedly said:

          "The high office of the President has been used to
          foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and
          before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of
          this plight."

          In this matter, John Fitzgerald Kennedy appears to be
          the subject of his own book... a true Profile of

          This research report was compiled by Anthony Wayne

          What is the Federal Reserve Bank?

          What is the Federal Reserve Bank (FED) and why do we
          have it?
          by Greg Hobbs November 1, 1999

          The FED is a central bank. Central banks are supposed
          to implement a country's fiscal policies. They monitor
          commercial banks to ensure that they maintain
          sufficient assets, like cash, so as to remain solvent
          and stable. Central banks also do business, such as
          currency exchanges and gold transactions, with other
          central banks. In theory, a central bank should be
          good for a country, and they might be if it wasn't for
          the fact that they are not owned or controlled by the
          government of the country they are serving. Private
          central banks, including our FED, operate not in the
          interest of the public good but for profit.

          There have been three central banks in our nation's
          history. The first two, while deceptive and
          fraudulent, pale in comparison to the scope and size
          of the fraud being perpetrated by our current FED.
          What they all have in common is an insidious practice
          known as "fractional banking."

          Fractional banking or fractional lending is the
          ability to create money from nothing, lend it to the
          government or someone else and charge interest to
          boot. The practice evolved before banks existed.
          Goldsmiths rented out space in their vaults to
          individuals and merchants for storage of their gold or
          silver. The goldsmiths gave these "depositors" a
          certificate that showed the amount of gold stored.
          These certificates were then used to conduct business.

          In time the goldsmiths noticed that the gold in their
          vaults was rarely withdrawn. Small amounts would move
          in and out but the large majority never moved. Sensing
          a profit opportunity, the goldsmiths issued double
          receipts for the gold, in effect creating money
          (certificates) from nothing and then lending those
          certificates (creating debt) to depositors and
          charging them interest as well.

          Since the certificates represented more gold than
          actually existed, the certificates were "fractionally"
          backed by gold. Eventually some of these vault
          operations were transformed into banks and the
          practice of fractional banking continued.

          Keep that fractional banking concept in mind as we
          examine our first central bank, the First Bank of the
          United States (BUS). It was created, after bitter
          dissent in the Congress, in 1791 and chartered for 20
          years. A scam not unlike the current FED, the BUS used
          its control of the currency to defraud the public and
          establish a legal form of usury.

          This bank practiced fractional lending at a 10:1 rate,
          ten dollars of loans for each dollar they had on
          deposit. This misuse and abuse of their public charter
          continued for the entire 20 years of their existence.
          Public outrage over these abuses was such that the
          charter was not renewed and the bank ceased to exist
          in 1811.

          The war of 1812 left the country in economic chaos,
          seen by bankers as another opportunity for easy
          profits. They influenced Congress to charter the
          second central bank, the Second Bank of the United
          States (SBUS), in 1816.

          The SBUS was more expansive than the BUS. The SBUS
          sold franchises and literally doubled the number of
          banks in a short period of time. The country began to
          boom and move westward, which required money. Using
          fractional lending at the 10:1 rate, the central bank
          and their franchisees created the debt/money for the

          Things boomed for a while, then the banks decided to
          shut off the debt/money, citing the need to control
          inflation. This action on the part of the SBUS caused
          bankruptcies and foreclosures. The banks then took
          control of the assets that were used as security
          against the loans.

          Closely examine how the SBUS engineered this cycle of
          prosperity and depression. The central bank caused
          inflation by creating debt/money for loans and credit
          and making these funds readily available. The economy
          boomed. Then they used the inflation which they
          created as an excuse to shut off the

          The resulting shortage of cash caused the economy to
          falter or slow dramatically and large numbers of
          business and personal bankruptcies resulted. The
          central bank then seized the assets used as security
          for the loans. The wealth created by the borrowers
          during the boom was then transferred to the central
          bank during the bust. And you always wondered how the
          big guys ended up with all the marbles.

          Now, who do you think is responsible for all of the
          ups and downs in our economy over the last 85 years?
          Think about the depression of the late '20s and all
          through the '30s. The FED could have pumped lots of
          debt/money into the market to stimulate the economy
          and get the country back on track, but did they? No;
          in fact, they restricted the money supply quite
          severely. We all know the results that occurred from
          that action, don't we?

          Why would the FED do this? During that period asset
          values and stocks were at rock bottom prices. Who do
          you think was buying everything at 10 cents on the
          dollar? I believe that it is referred to as
          consolidating the wealth. How many times have they
          already done this in the last 85 years?

          Do you think they will do it again?

          Just as an aside at this point, look at today's
          economy. Markets are declining. Why? Because the FED
          has been very liberal with its debt/credit/money. The
          market was hyper inflated. Who creates inflation? The
          FED. How does the FED deal with inflation? They
          restrict the debt/credit/money. What happens when they
          do that? The market collapses.

          Several months back, after certain central banks said
          they would be selling large quantities of gold, the
          price of gold fell to a 25-year low of about $260 per
          ounce. The central banks then bought gold. After
          buying at the bottom, a group of 15 central banks
          announced that they would be restricting the amount of
          gold released into the market for the next five years.
          The price of gold went up $75.00 per ounce in just a
          few days. How many hundreds of billions of dollars did
          the central banks make with those two press releases?

          Gold is generally considered to be a hedge against
          more severe economic conditions. Do you think that the
          private banking families that own the FED are buying
          or selling equities at this time? (Remember: buy low,
          sell high.) How much money do you think these FED
          owners have made since they restricted the money
          supply at the top of this last current cycle?

          Alan Greenspan has said publicly on several occasions
          that he thinks the market is overvalued, or words to
          that effect. Just a hint that he will raise interest
          rates (restrict the money supply), and equity markets
          have a negative reaction. Governments and politicians
          do not rule central banks, central banks rule
          governments and politicians. President Andrew Jackson
          won the presidency in 1828 with the promise to end the
          national debt and eliminate the SBUS. During his
          second term President Jackson withdrew all government
          funds from the bank and on January 8, 1835, paid off
          the national debt. He is the only president in history
          to have this distinction. The charter of the SBUS
          expired in 1836.

          Without a central bank to manipulate the supply of
          money, the United States experienced unprecedented
          growth for 60 or 70 years, and the resulting wealth
          was too much for bankers to endure. They had to get
          back into the game. So, in 1910 Senator Nelson
          Aldrich, then Chairman of the National Monetary
          Commission, in collusion with representatives of the
          European central banks, devised a plan to pressure and
          deceive Congress into enacting legislation that would
          covertly establish a private central bank.

          This bank would assume control over the American
          economy by controlling the issuance of its money.
          After a huge public relations campaign, engineered by
          the foreign central banks, the Federal Reserve Act of
          1913 was slipped through Congress during the Christmas
          recess, with many members of the Congress absent.
          President Woodrow Wilson, pressured by his political
          and financial backers, signed it on December 23, 1913.

          The act created the Federal Reserve System, a name
          carefully selected and designed to deceive. "Federal"
          would lead one to believe that this is a government
          organization. "Reserve" would lead one to believe that
          the currency is being backed by gold and silver.
          "System" was used in lieu of the word "bank" so that
          one would not conclude that a new central bank had
          been created.

          In reality, the act created a private, for profit,
          central banking corporation owned by a cartel of
          private banks. Who owns the FED? The Rothschilds of
          London and Berlin; Lazard Brothers of Paris; Israel
          Moses Seif of Italy; Kuhn, Loeb and Warburg of
          Germany; and the Lehman Brothers, Goldman, Sachs and
          the Rockefeller families of New York.

          Did you know that the FED is the only for-profit
          corporation in America that is exempt from both
          federal and state taxes? The FED takes in about one
          trillion dollars per year tax free! The banking
          families listed above get all that money.

          Almost everyone thinks that the money they pay in
          taxes goes to the US Treasury to pay for the expenses
          of the government. Do you want to know where your tax
          dollars really go? If you look at the back of any
          check made payable to the IRS you will see that it has
          been endorsed as "Pay Any F.R.B. Branch or Gen.
          Depository for Credit U.S. Treas. This is in Payment
          of U.S. Oblig." Yes, that's right, every dime you pay
          in income taxes is given to those private banking
          families, commonly known as the FED, tax free.

          Like many of you, I had some difficulty with the
          concept of creating money from nothing. You may have
          heard the term "monetizing the debt," which is kind of
          the same thing. As an example, if the US Government
          wants to borrow $1 million ó the government does
          borrow every dollar it spends ó they go to the FED to
          borrow the money. The FED calls the Treasury and says
          print 10,000 Federal Reserve Notes (FRN) in units of
          one hundred dollars.

          The Treasury charges the FED 2.3 cents for each note,
          for a total of $230 for the 10,000 FRNs. The FED then
          lends the $1 million to the government at face value
          plus interest. To add insult to injury, the government
          has to create a bond for $1 million as security for
          the loan. And the rich get richer. The above was just
          an example, because in reality the FED does not even
          print the money; it's just a computer entry in their
          accounting system. To put this on a more personal
          level, let's use another example.

          Today's banks are members of the Federal Reserve
          Banking System. This membership makes it legal for
          them to create money from nothing and lend it to you.
          Today's banks, like the goldsmiths of old, realize
          that only a small fraction of the money deposited in
          their banks is ever actually withdrawn in the form of
          cash. Only about 4 percent of all the money that
          exists is in the form of currency. The rest of it is
          simply a computer entry.

          Let's say you're approved to borrow $10,000 to do some
          home improvements. You know that the bank didn't
          actually take $10,000 from its pile of cash and put it
          into your pile? They simply went to their computer and
          input an entry of $10,000 into your account. They
          created, from thin air, a debt which you have to
          secure with an asset and repay with interest. The bank
          is allowed to create and lend as much debt as they
          want as long as they do not exceed the 10:1 ratio
          imposed by the FED.

          It sort of puts a new slant on how you view your
          friendly bank, doesn't it? How about those loan
          committees that scrutinize you with a microscope
          before approving the loan they created from thin air.
          What a hoot! They make it complex for a reason. They
          don't want you to understand what they are doing.
          People fear what they do not understand. You are
          easier to delude and control when you are ignorant and

          Now to put the frosting on this cake. When was the
          income tax created? If you guessed 1913, the same year
          that the FED was created, you get a gold star.
          Coincidence? What are the odds? If you are going to
          use the FED to create debt, who is going to repay that
          debt? The income tax was created to complete the
          illusion that real money had been lent and therefore
          real money had to be repaid. And you thought Houdini
          was good.

          So, what can be done? My father taught me that you
          should always stand up for what is right, even if you
          have to stand up alone.

          If "We the People" don't take some action now, there
          may come a time when "We the People" are no more. You
          should write a letter or send an email to each of your
          elected representatives. Many of our elected
          representatives do not understand the FED. Once
          informed they will not be able to plead ignorance and
          remain silent.

          Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution
          specifically says that Congress is the only body that
          can "coin money and regulate the value thereof." The
          US Constitution has never been amended to allow anyone
          other than Congress to coin and regulate currency.

          Ask your representative, in light of that information,
          how it is possible for the Federal Reserve Act of
          1913, and the Federal Reserve Bank that it created, to
          be constitutional. Ask them why this private banking
          cartel is allowed to reap trillions of dollars in
          profits without paying taxes. Insist on an answer.

          Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever
          allow private banks to control the issuance of their
          currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation,
          the banks and corporations that will grow up around
          them will deprive the people of all their prosperity
          until their children will wake up homeless on the
          continent their fathers conquered."

          Jefferson saw it coming 150 years ago. The question
          is, "Can you now see what is in store for us if we
          allow the FED to continue controlling our country?"
          "The condition upon which [the Creator] hath given liberty to
          man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he
          breaks, servitude is at once the consequence of his
          crime, and the punishment of his guilt."
        • Email41@aol.com
          Bear - This is a responsive post I made to the writer in blue text ( B in another group), but after reviewing it I thought it might be beneficial for those on
          Message 4 of 4 , Jan 29, 2008
            Bear - This is a responsive post I made to the writer in blue text ('B' in another group), but after reviewing it I thought it might be beneficial for those on tips and tricks.

            For Newbies:  The most significant lesson I got hard-wired into me (which we all know but sometimes forget we know it) applies to any and all charges:  they make a “charge” against you but  for “traffic charges” it’s typically not a sworn, formal compliant with witness signature. They keep wanting you to “plea” something but you cannot plea unless you have a sworn, formal compliant which also shows the SPECIFIC LAW you alledgedly trespassed. How on earth can one plea anything when you have no idea of the specific law you’re being charged with trespassing, signed by the witness? IMHO that’s one worth remembering....I didn’t remember it...my friend did and that’s why I was indeed lucky in this case.

            B- and Newbies. Get this in your head!!!

            In Texas, if you plead without the disclosure of a sworn complaint
            and a properly filed information into the proper court of jurisdiction,
            You are committing a crime!


            Without the presentment of a lawful complaint or lawful information, it is legally impossible to enter a plea of not guilty. The CCRP defines the plea of not guilty as:

            "The plea of not guilty shall be construed to be a denial of every material allegation in the indictment or information. Under this plea, evidence to establish the insanity of defendant, and every fact whatever tending to acquit him of the accusation may be introduced, except such facts as are proper for a special plea under Article 27.05." CCRP Art. 27.17 PLEA OF NOT GUILTY CONSTRUED.

            Notice is given that without the presentment of a lawful complaint or lawful information, it would be an act of perjury to enter a plea of not guilty in that a plea of not guilty is to be construed to be a denial of every material allegation in the information. The facts of the issue show in the Court record and in your Correspondence that no information has been properly filed in the above stated cases.

            Without the presentment of a lawful complaint or lawful information, it is legally impossible to enter a plea of nolo contendere. CCRP defines the plea of nolo contendere as:

            "(5) A plea of nolo contendere, the legal effect of which shall be the same as that of a plea of guilty, except that such plea may not be used against the defendant as an admission in any civil suit based upon the growing out of the act upon which the criminal prosecution is based." CCRP Article 27.02 DEFENDANT'S PLEADINGS.

            Notice is given that without the presentment of a lawful complaint or a lawful information, it would be an act of perjury to enter a plea of nolo contendere in that a plea of nolo contendere shall be the same as that of a plea of guilty. The facts of the issue show in the Court record and in your Correspondence that no information has been properly filed in the above stated cases. It is therefore legally impossible to determine if a plea of nolo contendere is proper or an act of perjury.

            Without the presentment of a lawful complaint or lawful information, it is impossible to determine if a plea of guilty is proper or an act of perjury.

            "Impossiblium nulla obligatiio est." 
            [There is no obligation to perform impossible things. Black's Law Dictionary 7th ed., Appendix A: Legal Maxims, Pg 1642]

            To be forced to enter a plea under these circumstances would constitute an act of aggravated perjury which is a third degree felony in violation of the Texas PENAL CODE Art. 37.03 and/or a class A misdemeanor in violation of Art. 37.02, towit:

            PENAL CODE Art. 37.02. PERJURY.

            "(a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to deceive and with knowledge of the statement's

            he makes a false statement under oath or swears to the truth of a false statement previously made and the statement is required or authorized by law to be made under oath;  or
            (2)  he makes a false unsworn declaration under Chapter 132, Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
            (b) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor."

            PENAL CODE Art. 37.03. AGGRAVATED PERJURY.

            "(a) A person commits an offense

            if he commits perjury as defined in Section 37.02, and the false statement:
            (1)  is made during or in connection with an official proceeding;
            (2)  is material.                                                            
            An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree."

            The insistence (usually badgering) by the magistrate to force you to plead is an enticement for you to commit a felony. This is a insistence on behalf of the magistrate is called "tampering with witness" (which also is a felony) and constitutes an act of "official opression" (which is a misdemeanor) and should be sufficient charges to attack their official bond.

            (a) A person commits an offense if, with intent to influence the witness, he offers, confers, or agrees to confer any benefit on a witness or prospective witness in an official proceeding or coerces a witness or prospective witness in an official proceeding:
            (1)  to testify falsely;                                                     

            (2)  to withhold any testimony, information, document, or thing;           
            (3)  to elude legal process summoning him to testify or supply evidence;   
            (4)  to absent himself from an official proceeding to which he has been legally summoned;  or
            (5)  to abstain from, discontinue, or delay the prosecution of another.    
            (b)  A witness or prospective witness in an official proceeding commits an offense if he knowingly solicits, accepts, or agrees to accept any benefit on the representation or understanding that he will do any of the things specified in Subsection (a).
            (c)  It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(5) that the benefit received was:
            (1)  reasonable restitution for damages suffered by the complaining witness as a result of the offense;  and
            (2)  a result of an agreement negotiated with the assistance or acquiescence of an attorney for the state who represented the state in the case.
            An offense under this section is a state jail felony.                    
            Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.  Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994;  Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 721, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997.

            (a) A public servant acting under color of his office or employment commits an offense if he:
            (1)  intentionally subjects another to mistreatment
            or to arrest, detention, search, seizure, dispossession, assessment, or lien that he knows is unlawful;
            (2)  intentionally denies or impedes another in the exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, knowing his conduct is unlawful;  or [my note - See: Tex. Const. Art. 1 Sec. 10; ...He shall have the right to demand the nature and cause of the accusation against him, and to have a copy thereof...."]
            (3)  intentionally subjects another to sexual harassment.                  
            (b)  For purposes of this section, a public servant acts under color of his office or employment if he acts or purports to act in an official capacity or takes advantage of such actual or purported capacity.
            (c)  In this section, "sexual harassment" means unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, submission to which is made a term or condition of a person's exercise or enjoyment of any right, privilege, power, or immunity, either explicitly or implicitly.
              An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.                  

            Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974.  Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1217, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1989;  Acts 1991, 72nd Leg., ch. 16, § 19.01(34), eff. Aug. 26, 1991.  Renumbered from V.T.C.A., Penal Code § 39.02 by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.

            You should report that magistrate immediately to the nearest peace officer, then swear out a formal complaint and give it to the District Attorney or present it to the next impanelled Grand Jury of the county where the felony occurred.

            TEXAS PENAL CODE § 38.171. FAILURE TO REPORT FELONY.  (a) A person commits an offense if the person:
            (1)  observes the commission of a felony under circumstances in which a reasonable person would believe that an offense had been committed in which serious bodily injury or death may have resulted;  and
            (2)  fails to immediately report the commission of the offense to a peace officer or law enforcement agency under circumstances in which:
            (A)  a reasonable person would believe that the commission of the offense had not been reported;  and
            (B)  the person could immediately report the commission of the offense without placing himself or herself in danger of suffering serious bodily injury or death. (b)  An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.                  
            Added by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1009, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.

            Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape.
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.