1. The court is a commercial register, a
place where a contract or agreement is made.
2. Failure to respond is tacit agreement.
3. When you are trying to write an
agreement you would need to name of the second party to have and agreement in
fact. The court is acting on an
assumption not an agreement.
4. In order to get an agreement in fact
you need to name for the record.
5. If the judge tries to give his title
instead of his name: "Your offer of
communication is accepted and your dishonor is returned. Please state your name instead of your title." "Is that title registered with the
Secretary of State?"
6. If the judge still refuses to give his
name, then he waives his rights, and now you can proceed with the contract as
if he had answered.
7. "Do you have a claim against
me?" Claim: dispute of title.
8. "Do you know anyone who has
a claim against me?"
"Who" demonstrates that you asking if a man has a claim
against you, thus avoiding traversing into a legislative/fictional venue.
9. "This authorized representative
does request the "title" to please direct the prosecutor to answer
whether there are any more charges."
That removes any lingering assumed charges.
10. "This authorized representative does
request the "title" to please direct the prosecutor to answer whether
the assessment for the charges are in his possession." This eliminates the assumption of the
agreement in questionk, without the assessment there can be no charges. This primarily puts the prosecutor into
trouble, as he is now practicing law without a license and that is a felony.
11. "This authorized representative does
reuest the "title" to please direct the prosecutor to privde the
assessment for the charges along with the certified audit trail of all
transactions including the vocher and all disbursement documents and
12. "This authorized representative does
request the "title" to please direct the prosecutor to provide the
serial placement number of his bar card."
13. "This authorized representative does
request the "title" to state whether he has subject matter
jurisdiction." (If the court does
not have an assessement for the current charges, not further charges, and not
subject matter jurisdiction it is in a position of forfeiture.
14. "This authorized representative does
request an appearance bond at no cost so that he can plead to the
charges." (This places your name on
the account and serves to charge the account and thus the appearance bond is
discharged when you make an appearance in the court. This places the operators and holders of the
account into immediate involuntary bankruptcy.
If there is no assessment of the charges they will typically not issue
the appearance bond, but you can therefore issue a subrogation surety bond.)
15. Do not allow them to waive reading of the
charges. Do not understand the
charges. They are trying to get you to
verify the charges. "Your honor is
it not the duty of the one bring the charges to verify them?" Persist in having them produce the
assessement for the charges.
is the point to introduce the guilty plea.
17. Now, ask for the findings of facts and
conclusions of law. The findings of
facts is the agreement of the parties and the conclusion of law is the close of
18. "This authorized representative does
request the order of the court to be released to the debtor
immediately." There being no
charges in fact, there being no assessement in fact, etc., therefore there is
no dispute as to who is entitled to the order of the court. It has to be the property of the debtor as
the debtor has the only valid claim before the court which is a guilty plea in
fact. The sufficiency of the pleading
creates subject matter jurisdiction and the debtor becomes the plaintiff. The plaintiff is the moving party in the
case, and especially now is the judge liable to the debtor because of the
19. After asking the three questions and
requesting the order of the court you have changed it into a small claims court
where the parties themselves must bring their claims, cannot be represented by
an attorney with a title of nobility. If
there are no claims then that is a default to our appearance to
investigate. It is an inquest hearing to
appear and show cause.
20. It is basically a coroners inquest or a
probate into the matter of any claims against you in the common law.
21. It turns into what the Magna Carta calls
an ecclesiastical court of conscience.
22. And in this inquest, only those who have
first hand knowledge of a claim can testify.
If no claims can be brought in fact, then the public inquest is over,
and you are out of there.
23. Judge So and So, is not a name, and
cannot be entered onto the public registry.
It is a fiction and cannot give direct testimony.
24. The judge might say, "The STATE OF
UTAH has a claim against you." You
would say, "Is there anyone here to press a claim in any alleged name
other than their own?"
25. If the prosecutor wants to stand up and
press that claim then you demand that he be sworn in to testify under oath as
to the damage in the claim in which he is testifying...there is the inquest.
Here is a good place to demand a proof of loss.
If the attorney does take the stand to testify then he has to bond up
his testimony. Attorneys are civilly
dead and have no public liability, so if they tell a lie then there has to be a
bond to cover that possibility. If it is
the prosecutor, then you could bring in his public hazard bond that is the bond
on his oath of office. If he won't take
the stand to testify under pains and penalties of perjury, then there is not
public business to be done here, and I am leaving.
26. It's either the judge's private corporate
business going on in there, or your private rights under public law. Don't traverse into the judge's private
27. These people are all acting under the
major premise of a legislative democratic venue. They must have delegation of orders that give
them any authority to do anything they're doing and obviously, once he's gone
through the first 3 questions and there is no claim brought forth in fact, then
there is no further business.
28. There is a parallel commercial world and
universe in bookkeeping that parallels the legal judicial bookkeeping. The order of the court would have to come
from the insurance provided for the legislative democracy which is its treasury. When the court creates a security/indictment,
there has to be an appraised value on it.
That determines the value, how it is measured. Once measured it can be discharged dollar for
dollar under HJR 192. The courts like to
hide the assessment of the security and let the "bill" turn into an
accounts receivable. The accounts
receivable just sits on the books, and the gov't. agents just do an offset
against it any time they need funding, and hence draw down on the prepaid
29. When you go into court you are exercising
your rights under public international law to discover what kind of business
these people are trying to do. You can
discover if they are acting as rogues and pirates.
30. You go into the private international
courts in your public capacity, because your private rights are recognized in
the public. but as soon as you engage in
a co-business venture in their private business, you're in their court in a
business venture, you're in an agreement and everything is proceeding.
31. "I request the order of the court to
be released to the debtor immediately."
You are looking for the insurance policy of the order. You want to know who is behind the claim, the
dispute in title. With those requests
and statements he has just made a public verbal demand for a Bill of Particulars! He has removed any assumptions/presumptions
around the agreement in question. He is
trying to find out the nature and cause of the claim. Without knowing who has the liability on the
order there is no way to close the escrow.
32. There being no further public business,
withdraw. You are giving equitable
notice to the parties present.