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

Effect of "signed under duress" on Govern. Docs

Expand Messages
  • Legalbear
    https://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/19 99/htm/jc0153.htm Big thanks to Hobot for this amazing link. No wonder the jailers told me when
    Message 1 of 9 , Apr 1, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      https://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/1999/htm/jc0153.htm

       

      Big thanks to Hobot for this amazing link. No wonder the jailers told me when asking for a signature said, “Just sign it, don’t put anything else on there.”

       

      Call me at: 720-675-7230

      On Skype: legalbear

      Best times to call: 8:30 am to 9:00 pm MST

      Join my Yahoo Group Tips & Tricks for Court by sending an email to:

      tips_and_tricks-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

      My blog: legalbearsblog.com

      Tax sites: IRSTerminator.com IRSLienThumper.com IRSLevyThumper.com

      (formatted like this so this email doesn't end up in your spam folder)

       

    • David Toppin
      That is great! More evidence the [government] NEEDs us to contract with them. Sign everything under protest . In my case, I told the judge I would do
      Message 2 of 9 , Apr 1, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        That is great! More evidence the [government] NEEDs us to contract with them.
        Sign everything "under protest". In my case, I told the judge I would do
        whatever he wanted me to "under threat, duress, and fear of going to jail"
        and he said, you MUST agree to appear VOLUNTARILY as if there is anything
        voluntary about ANY court process where you are the defendant





        Dave
      • jay hawk
        It doesn t often seem that way, but the courts are essentially based on mutual consent. They use words to trick you into thinking otherwise. Several ago one of
        Message 3 of 9 , Apr 1, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          It doesn't often seem that way, but the courts are essentially based on mutual consent. They use words to trick you into thinking otherwise. Several ago one of the Supreme Court justices (sorry I can't recall which one right now) got a little attention (at least from a few folks that aren't sound asleep) by saying that everyone in jail is there voluntarily. I'm sure some folks on this list have a better memory than I and may recall who said it.


          --- On Mon, 4/1/13, David Toppin <dave@...> wrote:

          From: David Toppin <dave@...>
          Subject: [tips_and_tricks] Effect of "signed under duress" on Govern. Docs
          To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Monday, April 1, 2013, 1:34 PM

           

          That is great! More evidence the [government] NEEDs us to contract with them.
          Sign everything "under protest". In my case, I told the judge I would do
          whatever he wanted me to "under threat, duress, and fear of going to jail"
          and he said, you MUST agree to appear VOLUNTARILY as if there is anything
          voluntary about ANY court process where you are the defendant

          Dave


        • David Toppin
          That was allegedly Robert Bork as I heard it, but that could be wrong. I couldn t find that actual quote when I looked From: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
          Message 4 of 9 , Apr 1, 2013
          • 0 Attachment

            That was allegedly Robert Bork as I heard it, but that could be wrong.  I couldn't find that actual quote when I looked

             

             

            From: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com [mailto:tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of jay hawk
            Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 3:49 PM
            To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] Effect of "signed under duress" on Govern. Docs

             

              Snipped, so Barry doesn't get mad……

          • BOB GREGORY
            *Attorney General Cornyn s letter is a classic example of high-level weasel wording. He gives no examples whatever of a document annotated with Signed under
            Message 5 of 9 , Apr 1, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              *Attorney General Cornyn's letter is a classic example of high-level weasel
              wording. He gives no examples whatever of a document annotated with
              "Signed under duress and coersion" but sticks to examples that were "Signed
              under protest." Then in the summary he uses the term "may indicate." So
              what do you have? More or less nothing.

              Moderator/Bear: Yes, plus, beneath the signature is the wrong place to put it. Your signature is at the end of the agreement indicating an agreement with what preceded it. What you put under the signature, to my take, is not part of everything preceding your signature. Research on the phrase "ambiguous signature" will give more information.

              LEGAL DEFINITION:*
              du·ress [doo-res, dyoo-, door-is, dyoor-] Show IPA
              noun
              1.
              compulsion by threat or force <http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/force>;
              coercion; constraint.
              2. Law. such constraint or coercion as
              will<http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/will>
              render void a contract or other legal act entered or performed under its
              influence
              *

              >
              >
            • Levi Philos
              Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork (recently deceased): http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/ChallJurisdiction/Definitions/freemaninvestigation.htm ...That is,
              Message 6 of 9 , Apr 1, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork (recently deceased):
                http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/ChallJurisdiction/Definitions/freemaninvestigation.htm
                ...That is, legally being able to act for him/herself namely, having the legal capacity, ability, and power to manage his/her own affairs, as opposed to someone having relinquished his/her power of judicial action, by giving up his/her power of attorney, and becoming, thereby, a ward of the court. That is, someone considered of unsound mind and under the care of a guardian.

                Truly unbelievable! One is reminded of a remark by Judge Bork, to the effect that 90% of those in prison are there voluntarily i.e., by consent and permission! (You notice that he was not confirmed as a Supreme Court Justice!) Which brings to mind a Supreme Court case, in 1794, where one reads that:

                The only reason, I believe, that a free man is bound by human law, is, that he binds himself. Chisholm v, Georgia, 2, Dall 440, 455.




                On 4/1/2013 1:48 PM, jay hawk wrote:
                It doesn't often seem that way, but the courts are essentially based on mutual consent. They use words to trick you into thinking otherwise. Several ago one of the Supreme Court justices (sorry I can't recall which one right now) got a little attention (at least from a few folks that aren't sound asleep) by saying that everyone in jail is there voluntarily. I'm sure some folks on this list have a better memory than I and may recall who said it.

                -- 
                This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s)
                and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any
                unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If
                you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply
                email and delete the original message.
              • hobot
                ...
                Message 7 of 9 , Apr 1, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  > Once in custody the jailers will want you to sign various
                  > things and if you decline saying you do not understand and
                  > need counsel first, they may charge you with Disorderly
                  > Conduct-failure to sign, with its own trial date to deal with.

                  > We need some feedback and examples on how to handle being
                  > forced to sign things while in custody. If you sign you may
                  < appear to some right or some defense.
                  > hobot
                  > >
                  > > https://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/1999/htm/jc0153.htm
                  > >
                  > > No wonder the jailers told
                  > > me when asking for a signature said, "Just sign it, don't put anything
                  > > else on there."
                  > >
                • Chuck East
                  What about using V.C. or Vi Coactus, meaning signed under constraint. Wikipedia definition follows: Vi coactus From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to:
                  Message 8 of 9 , Apr 4, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    What about using V.C. or Vi Coactus, meaning signed under constraint.
                    Wikipedia definition follows:

                    Vi coactus

                    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
                    Jump to: navigation, search

                    Vi coactus is a Latin term, abbreviated as V.C., and means: 'under constraint'. It is used to indicate an agreement made under duress.

                    An example of its usage is that of the Dutch 17th century statesman Cornelius de Witt, who was forced to sign the act for restoration of Stadholderate. After all the entreaties by his wife, though he signed the contract but only before adding V.C. to his signature. [1][dead link]



                    --- On Mon, 4/1/13, Legalbear <bear@...> wrote:

                    From: Legalbear <bear@...>
                    Subject: [tips_and_tricks] Effect of "signed under duress" on Govern. Docs
                    To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
                    Date: Monday, April 1, 2013, 4:16 PM

                     

                    https://www.oag.state.tx.us/opinions/opinions/49cornyn/op/1999/htm/jc0153.htm

                     

                    Big thanks to Hobot for this amazing link. No wonder the jailers told me when asking for a signature said, “Just sign it, don’t put anything else on there.”

                     

                    Call me at: 720-675-7230

                    On Skype: legalbear

                    Best times to call: 8:30 am to 9:00 pm MST

                    Join my Yahoo Group Tips & Tricks for Court by sending an email to:

                    tips_and_tricks-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    My blog: legalbearsblog.com

                    Tax sites: IRSTerminator.com IRSLienThumper.com IRSLevyThumper.com

                    (formatted like this so this email doesn't end up in your spam folder)

                     

                  • originalfrogfrmr
                    ... I ve been saying it for years, based upon my years of experience in California where I have yet to see a proper arraignment, even in my own cases, even
                    Message 9 of 9 , Apr 5, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                      > It doesn't often seem that way, but the courts are essentially based on
                      > mutual consent. They use words to trick you into thinking otherwise.
                      > Several ago one of the Supreme Court justices (sorry I can't recall which
                      > one right now) got a little attention (at least from a few folks that
                      > aren't sound asleep) by saying that everyone in jail is there voluntarily.
                      > I'm sure some folks on this list have a better memory than I and may
                      > recall who said it.

                      I've been saying it for years, based upon my years of experience in
                      California where I have yet to see a proper arraignment, even in my own
                      cases, even when the judge has said,, "Oh, you want a PROPER
                      ARRAIGNMENT?", and then he goes on to fake one, and gets told, "close, but
                      no cigar!" and then they put it off for another two weeks, until 9
                      attempts (their seemingly maximum number) and then they dismiss for the
                      speedy trial rule or otherwise "dispose" of the problem case.

                      It's weird that in the nation in the world with the most prisoners, in the
                      state with the most prisoners, all those prisoners are there because they
                      were too lazy to read and think a little bit. They failed to have the
                      curiosity necessary to find out what steps their opponents had to take to
                      incarcerate or fine them, by reading the state constitution and Penal
                      Code. They failed to notice and act appropriately when their opponents
                      were unqualified to even speak in their presence in the courtroom! They
                      made admissions and confessions (the source of 90+% of convictions.) They
                      waive rights most times when asked to do so (beginning at the scene of the
                      "crime"). Mostly, they're morons, as Mark Dice so frequently proves in his
                      You-Tube videos.

                      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7usCHnZ-8c

                      Regards,

                      FF
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.