| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
 Posted - 27 Jul 2003 : 11:50:47
|
Hi Sandpreacher,
The best and most up to date information is changing weekly. You need to find a group who is connected to the researchers of these matters. I feel the best material is available from Jack Smith, Barton Buhtz, and Wade and Cyndie. Rice McCleod is another good source, but lately his has been off the mark, and more and more his material only applies to people living in the Republic of Texas and under the provisional government of the Republic.
Jack Smith's group meets every monday night. Tapes of each meeting are available for $6 per set. A set being all of one meeting. Jack is, I think, the most knowledgable in relating all of this to the scriptures. He is weak on applying it, but is getting a lot better.
Barton is heavily connected to the IRS, and can give details no one else has.
Wade and Cyndie and Herb and Byron are all in Arizona. Wade and his dad Herb wrote a course called "New Beginnings". Just updated a couple of months ago. This is MUST reading. It will give you lots of answers and how to apply them.
Cracking the Code is a good reference book, but is way out of date. The 4th edition is currently being worked on, but don't wait for it. Find the other sources.
Peace to all,
Lewis |
 |
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jul 2003 : 11:51:58
|
Mike, the article below will help you in understanding Acceptance for Value.
Understanding Offer and Acceptance
Basic Contract Law! Contract Law is the Supreme Law of the Land!
1) Before the advent of commerce there were only simple private exchanges, wherein two men had a 'meeting of the minds' and decided what they would trade. No profit or gain was made on the exchange, and no regulation was possible ... as the matter was 'private'. Once this process became 'public' it was no longer just a private exchange, it was deemed to be 'commerce'.
2) The first thing that happens with contracting in the public sector is that an 'offer' is made. The one making the offer has no initial control over the contract other than what was firmly stated in his offer. Our choice is to simply 'accept' the offer or to negotiate it. If we negotiate, we give the other party control, as they could then accept our counter-offer and they also get the opportunity to materially change their original offer. This is not in our best interest. So ...
a. We should never make public offers, unless we have firmly stated the offer in terms of where we can't get hurt.
b. We should always accept their offers (for value) to prevent them from 'charging' us or to prevent the creation of a 'controversy'.
3) The minute we accept their offer, we 'own' it ... and we control it, the 'negotiation' phase of the contract is over - all that remains is the 'consideration'. We've had our meeting of the minds. (Remember; 'agree with thine adversary quickly ...') When we accept their offer for value we have basically acknowledged the fact that there is no possible way to literally 'pay' for their offer in the public sector due to the constant state of 'reorganization' of the UNITED STATES under the bankruptcy laws, and the fact that there is no actual 'money' in general circulation.
Therefore, we accept their offer for value by providing our signature on their paperwork. This action is consistent with 'Public Policy' and the 'discharge' of public debt. Remember; We (the people) are the Creditors in this bankruptcy! The corporate UNITED STATES is the Debtor.
4) When we accept their offer and they produce a 'bill', or a 'charge', we simply sign the bill "Accepted for Value" (plus signature and date) and return it to them for 'discharge' of the (public) debt consistent with Public Policy. Remember; the 'fiction' (public) doesn't acknowledge the facts ... even the man by his true name, they only deal in commerce with 'Straw Men', which are actually our 'Transmitting Utility'. We simply 'accommodate' this Straw Man with our signature.
5) When the merchant receives his acceptance he should actually just complete the contract by accepting it and depositing it with his bank, much like a credit card voucher. (Many don't understand this principal yet, but it is going to be up to us, as employers to educate our employees, isn't it?) The bank would then adjust his account and route the acceptances to the Treasury for 'adjustment of their account'. (Remember; a signature on paper with a 'functional currency' sign {$} followed by a number greater than zero, is what functions 'as money' according to the Revenue Code and the Federal Reserve's publications.) When this doesn't happen, the 'merchant' has 'dishonored' his own offer, breached the contract, and violated Public Policy. Since Contract Law and Public Policy rule this country under the 'reorganization' in bankruptcy, this allows for the public discharge of debt only, because of the removal of the ability to actually pay. Our account is Pre-Paid and Exempt from Levy, we don't need to pay twice. |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jul 2003 : 20:00:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lewish
But, as a warning to others, I am finding that the freer I get of Caesar, the harder Satan is trying against me. I am having to work hard to keep his influence out of my thoughts. So be advised.
Peace to my brothers, and may you too find your path to true freedom,
Lewis
"Your mind is a mess. Clean it! Make it a blank. The empty mind is the best mind. And those who have been telling you that the empty mind is the Devil's workshop are the Devil's agents. The empty mind is closer to God than anything. The empty mind is not the Devil's workshop. The Devil cannot do without thoughts.
With emptiness the Devil cannot do anything at all. He has no way Into emptiness.
So many thoughts in the mind, mixed up; nothing seems to be clear; you have heard so many things from so many sources -- your mind is a monster. And you are trying to remember, and you have been told to remember: Don't forget! And, naturally, the burden is so much that you cannot remember. Many things you have forgotten. Many things you have imagined and added on your own."
Osho
|
|
|
|
sandpreacher
Junior Member
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2003 : 06:54:33
|
Thanks guys... Livefree thats what I have read several places which is why I don't understand why someone would try it without their UCC1... Lewis, where can I find more Barton Buhtz on the web... when I do a search I get a few sights but they are old... and what is the best way - web or otherwise - to get info from Herb and Byron or Wade and Cyndie...
it is good to empty and then close the mind for a while every day so as to prepare it for more crud later... :)
Mike |
|
|
|
Its2Die4
Regular Member
uSA
28 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2003 : 11:15:11
|
To recieve his 75 page Property Protection Package send $20 Donation to:
Barton A. Buhtz
c/o 8050 Le Berthon St.
Sunland, California [91040] |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2003 : 16:04:08
|
I don't understand people like Larry Becrafty. He appears to be on our side, but when he says stuff like this, I don't know what to think. You are either a slave or you are not, right? You either believe in freedom or you don't-- it shouldn't matter which route you take to freedom, as long as you take it!
Subject: Al Adask writes from the Jefferson County jail in Hillsboro,
Missouri
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 09:26:10 -0500
From: becraft <becraft@hiwaay.net>
It appears to me that Al Adask has accurately described the current
arguments of the UCC/redemption crowd. These arguments are completely
BS, and I cannot help believing that the govt has some hand is getting
these arguments promoted.
-------- Original Message --------
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:50:15 -0600
Confession and Bonding Strategy
by Alfred Adask
July 24, 2003 A.D.
According to Alex Jones, writing Patriot Act II Destroys what is left
of American Liberty (May/June America's Bulletin), Patriot Act II
contains a host of provisions that will usher full-blown fascism into
the U.S.A. All of those fascist provisions are disturbing, but I find
several to be especially dangerous to those in the patriot community
who have adopted the don't argue/admit all facts; strategies for
dealing with the courts. As I understand these strategies, a defendant
admits all facts alleged by the plaintiff complainant and thereby strips the court of a controversy to adjudicate. Then, having essentially admitted/confessed their guilt (as charged), the defendant posts some sort of homemade bond which allegedly discharges whatever debt remains after pleading guilty (more or less) to the charges. The judge reportedly accepts the bond and the defendant skips out of court seemingly free from any adverse consequences from the original charge.
So far as I know, this Confess all facts strategy was first advanced
by Roger Elvick, and has since been embraced by Jack Smith at Right Way Law, and possibly Victoria Day and other patriot researchers. I don't question the competence or motives of anyone who has advanced they confess all facts strategy. They, and the strategy, may be brilliant even inspired. And I may be simply too ignorant to fully understand and appreciate this confession strategy.
Nevertheless, the idea that we can safely confess guilt to virtually any and all offenses alleged by government - even if you can beat the rap with some sort of bond - has struck me as unwise and potentially
hazardous since I first heard of the strategy.
Reading Alex Jones analysis of the Patriot Act II only heightens my
concern that confessing guilt to any offense or crime may be extremely
dangerous. According to Mr. Jones, Section 802 of Patriot Act I states
that any violation of federal or state law can result in the;enemy
combatant terrorist designation, and thus, any crime is considered domestic terrorism.
Thus, it appears that if (under the confession strategy) you were to
blithely confess all facts and charges against you for writing a check
on a closed bank account and then discharge the resulting conviction
with a homemade bond, you might be able to walk out of the court as a
seemingly free man - but you would have established, on an official
court record, that you admitted to having committed an offense and/or
crime. That admission, under Section 802 of Patriot Act I, would seem
to provide incontrovertible evidence (you confessed guilt) that you are, in fact, an enemy combatant and/or domestic terrorist.
Will government charge everyone convicted of a crime like driving
without a driver's license or writing a check on a closed account as an ;enemy combatant; or;domestic terrorist? Of course not.
But it is at least conceivable (some would say inevitable) that
government will one day use Section 802 of Patriot Act I as a pretext to charge and convict certain, troublesome, political adversaries and
critics as enemy combatant, and /or domestic terrorist based on
previous convictions or confessions to seemingly insignificant crimes
I.E., Section 802 would seen to open the door to selective prosecution
of government opponents based on previous convictions or admissions of
guilt.
This opportunity for selective prosecution might be especially likely
for a government adversary who had a history of self-admitted crimes.
That is, suppose someone had confessed guilt (and posted no me made
bonds) in several cases of writing checks on closed accounts.
Over the years, one hard reality I've observed is this: you can do
almost anything illegal in this country without attracting much
government response - except meddle with the money system. Anyone who mounts a serious challenge to our legal tender and/or system of credit is going to jail. The money is the heart of darkness of our political system and will be protected at any cost. For example, many believe John F. Kennedy was assassinated because he had planned to release U.S. Notes (rather than Federal Reserve Notes) into circulation. Unlike the Federal Reserve Notes, (which generate huge amounts of interest for U.S. Notes would have generated no interest.
Homemade bonds strike me as a fundamental challenge to the existing
money system - especially when used in conjunction with checks written
on closed bank accounts. My experience tells me that no matter how
lawful or legally correct this homemade bond and closed-account check
strategy may be, it will not be allowed to propagate. Sooner, rather
than later, the proponents of this bonding strategy may be confronted by government prosecutors every bit as implacable as the gunman on the
grassy knoll in Dallas. Right or wrong, the bonding/closed-checking
account strategies will not be allowed to succeed. Those who embrace
these strategies - especially repeatedly - are (in my opinion) courting disaster.
Patriot Act 1 Section 802 only enhances the potential for such disaster.
Enter Section 401 of Patriot Act 2 (according to the Alex Jones
article), creates no statute of limitations for anyone that engages in
terrorists actions or supports terrorists. Remember, any crime is now
considered terrorism under the first Patriot Act.
Any crime can conceivably include the (???(illegible)???) of checks on
closed bank accounts, and may even include the issuance of bonds which
the system may ultimately designed as counterfeiter or otherwise
fraudulent. If so, use of the confession strategies today might come
back to haunt an alleged defendant at any time the no statute of
limitations future.
Imagine the Brown Shirts Company coming to your door a year from now, or maybe five years from now, with a warrant for your arrest based on your conviction for writing checks on a closed bank account in A.D. 2002. Imagine the warrant alleges terrorist activities based on your
earlier, (even long forgotten) confession(s) of all the facts alleged in the seemingly trivial charges for your bogus checks in A.D. 2002 (which you seemingly discharged with a homemade bond).
What's your defense to charges of terrorism based on your previous
confession(s) to writing on or more bogus checks?
Of course, it may be possible- after you've spent several months in jail to defeat the terrorism -based - on bad-check charges as ridiculous. But what do you suppose the police will do when they first receive the warrant to arrest alleged terrorist? The strong probability is that they will assault your home in full body armor with very serious weapons drawn and cocked. If you're lucky, you (and your family) will merely be scared half to death and badly traumatized (the government, of course, being the good guys cannot actually terrorize the people). If you're not so lucky, being arrested as an alleged terrorist could be tragic rather than merely traumatic.
And then, according to Alex Jones' analysis of Section 501 of Patriot Act 2, anyone who had inferred from conduct that they weren't U.S.
citizens could be grabbed off the street and thrown into a van never to be seen again. Half the patriot community is trying to prove from
conduct and otherwise that they are not citizens of the United States as found in the 14th Amendment. So suppose your conduct indicates
you're not a 14th Amendment U.S. citizen and you've confessed to various offenses and/or crimes like writing a series of checks on closed bank accounts.
And then there's Section 322 which (according to Jones)allows officers
of Homeland Security to extradite American citizens anywhere they wish.
I don't wish to seem an alarmist, and I'm not criticizing the
closed-checking account, bonding and confession strategies or their
advocates. But it seems intuitively obvious to me that admitting guilt to any offense-especially to one you didn't actually commit- is a particularly unwise, even dangerous strategy in the best of times. But in a political climate ruled by Patriot Acts 1 and 2, such confessions and admissions may be damning and potentially even lethal in their implications and consequences.
For me, I plead guilty to nothing - not even spitting on the sidewalk. I admit no facts, which are elements of my alleged crimes (not even having two legs and ten toes). I may be a damned fool, but I'll never admit it, and anyone from government who says I am, will have to prove each and every element of their allegations with great particularity.
I suggest that in these interesting times everyone think long and hard
before they voluntarily admit guilt for any alleged offense or crime.
My Case: Bonding and Jurisdiction
As you may know, my analysis of the system focuses on the theory that
trusts and trust relationships are the primary means by which government deprives us of the unalienable rights and subjects us to oppression.
Under this theory, it's interesting to compare the nature of a lien to
the nature of a bond. I might be wrong, but from my perspective a lien is a claim filed by a creditor (beneficiary) on an alleged debtor
(trustee). A bond, on the other hand, is an admission of personal
liability and potential debt filed by a trustee (potential debtor) on
behalf of some other potential creditor-beneficiary.
Thus, to file a bond appears to be an admission of one's status as a trustee who voluntarily accepts whatever fiduciary duties (legal
obligations) are attached to that office.
If so, filing any bond is an admission that you are the defendant
(trustee) in all civil -and probably all criminal- charges. This
implies that filing any bond establishes (at least) in persona
jurisdiction over the alleged defendant. (It may be argued that filing any bond likewise constitutes a defendant's implied admission that the court also had subject matter
jurisdiction).
In my own case, I've been sitting in the Jefferson County Jail for over nine months based on charges which the Missouri Supreme Court
administrative Rule 17.23 requires be disposed of in 3 months or less in 50% of all such cases, 4 months or less for 90% of all such cases, and six months for 98% of all such cases. I am scheduled for my first
lawful hearing on September 8th - almost 11 months after I first arrived at this jail.
Why has my case fallen into the 2% that can take over six months? I
believe the answer is that I have not hired an attorney, applied for a
Public Defender, paid $500 for a $2,500 bond to be released, or accepted a plea bargain. Without attorney, Public Defender, plea or bond, I have not yet admitted the court's jurisdiction and thus the court may be so far, unable to proceed against me.
My current September 8th hearing is premised on my allegedly honorable
judge's determination to appoint a 2nd Public Defender on my behalf
-even over my objection, and despite the fact already admitted into my
case file where the first appointed Public Defender was forced to admit there is no lawful basis for his appointment without my application. In other words, everyone - the judge, the 2nd Public Defender- and me knows I'm being railroaded. But what else can they do unless I admit they have jurisdiction?
The stakes are quite high. If I don't admit they have jurisdiction (and they can't prove jurisdiction without my admission), sooner or later they are going to have to 1) release me, and 2) explain why they held me for a year or more in unlawful detention when they know or should have known that 1) they don't have jurisdiction over me in the current criminal case, and 2) the criminal charges (filed in 2002 A.D.) are based on alleged breech of fiduciary obligations found in a previous civil case (filed in A.D. 2001); and 3) the original civil case is void for lack of service, lack of personal jurisdiction, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and fraud.
So far as I can tell, unless I do something dumb enough to expressly or implicitly admit they have jurisdiction, they cannot even try me, let alone get a valid conviction. Is it possible for me to do something dumb enough to inadvertently admit jurisdiction? Yes. The judges are a sneaky, tricky bunch who has cards up their sleeves, which I may not even imagine. And while my grasp of legal theory may be substantial (or maybe not), I'm not a litigator. I can certainly be outmaneuvered and out-foxed in court (if I ever get to court).
Even so, I suppose I must be doing something right - maybe very right-
or they should have prosecuted me long ago.
I could be mistaken, but I an very confident that the key to my
success (if you can call sitting in jail for almost 10 months without
a lawful hearing a success) is my refusal to post $500 for a $2,500
bond to secure my release. Earlier, I was scheduled for a bond
Reduction Hearing (in March as I recall) and at the time, I would have
petitioned for a personal recognizance bond (no $$) because I did not
suspect the jurisdictional implications of posting any bond at that
time.
Fortunately (?), the court didn't give me a bond reduction hearing and
instead used the allotted time to hear the first Public Defender's
motion to withdraw from my case. Looking back, the court's use of my
Bond Reduction Hearing to serve the Public Defender's needs (I was
threatening to sue him and the judge for civil and criminal conspiracy
charges), may have been a great blessing. I was thereby prevented from doing something I now suspect would have been self-defeating (posting a bond which admitted the court's jurisdiction) and allowed enough extra time in jail to deduce the significance of the bond.
The Lord works in mysterious (and sometimes amusing) ways.
So here I sit, in what appears to be a Mexican stand-off with the
courts of Jefferson County, Missouri. I seemingly can't get out of jail until I agree they have jurisdiction they can't prosecute me until I admit they have jurisdiction and they don't dare free me without getting a conviction since I will doubtless sue the pants off the sobs for a year or more of unlawful detention.
So from their perspective, if I won't take a bond (and admit
jurisdiction) I must be made to take a Public Defender who is guaranteed by law (believe it or not) to give me an inadequate defense and guarantee my convicting. Once I'm convicted, I will presumably appeal. Since I may be almost guaranteed to win my case on appeal- and have all charges dismissed- you might suppose the court's insistence on convicting me (even by an obvious railroad) is irrational. But it's not.
I cannot say it's true, but I've been told for years by people who
should know what they're talking about that whenever you appeal a case
from a trial court to an appellate court, you essentially forgive the
trial court judge for any abuses he may have committed against you at
the trial. Thus, if that consequence of appeal is valid, an oppressive
judge should want an oppressed defendant to appeal, should virtually
advise and even dare the oppressed litigant to appeal.
(If anyone can give me some case law or statutes to confirm this rumored relationship between appeals and judicial immunity, I've very
appreciative).
So what would happen if -instead of appealing an egregious, contrived
and unlawful conviction- I instead accepted the conviction and sued the judges involved? IF I don't appeal, they can be sued? Maybe even charged criminally? (So I've heard.)
Then what?
Will the Powers-That-Be write a nice check to make me go away? Or would it be more cost-effective to simply have me whacked?
We shall see.
But win, lose or draw, I praise the Lord YHWH and His Son, the Christ
Yashua. They have turned the intended curse of this imprisonment into a great blessing from which I have reaped an enormous increase in my knowledge, faith and strength.
No matter how this trial ultimately works out, I shall be pleased, I
shall be grateful to the LORD, and I shall praise Him and His Son.
Alfred Adask [2006371]
c/o P.O. Box 100
Hillsboro [63050]
The State of Missouri
The United States of America
Website:
AntiShyster News Magazine
http://www.antishyster.com/
|
Edited by - Livefree on 30 Jul 2003 16:40:52 |
|
|
|
doer
Advanced Member
uSA
198 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2003 : 18:36:14
|
Good 0l' Al has some problems with spelling, as well as with thinking. It is probably no coincidence. There are just SO MANY problems with his statements --
quote:
Homemade bonds
What in HELL is he talking about? Of course HE would land in the slammer for “homemade bonds!”
quote:
crimes like writing a series of checks on closed bank accounts
These are NOT crimes -- unless you have no clue as to what you are talking about!
quote:
issuance of bonds which the system may ultimately designed as counterfeiter
Here again, who but a fool or an idiot would issue “counterfeit” bonds? I guess someone who cannot even spell the word, eh?
quote:
arrest based on your conviction for writing checks on a closed bank account
I do not plan to ever be convicted for writing such LEGAL checks, so why would I be arrested down the line?
quote:
What's your defense to charges of terrorism based on your previous confession(s) to writing on or more bogus checks?
What “bogus” checks? This is a bogus argument!
quote:
This opportunity for selective prosecution might be especially likely for a government adversary who had a history of self-admitted crimes. That is, suppose someone had confessed guilt (and posted no me made bonds) in several cases of writing checks on closed accounts.
Admitting guilt to legal activity is NOT a crime -- last I heard!
quote:
Thus, it appears that if (under the confession strategy) you were to blithely confess all facts and charges against you for writing a check on a closed bank account and then discharge the resulting conviction with a homemade bond, you might be able to walk out of the court as a seemingly free man - but you would have established, on an official court record, that you admitted to having committed an offense and/or crime. That admission, under Section 802 of Patriot Act I, would seem to provide incontrovertible evidence (you confessed guilt) that you are, in fact, an enemy combatant and/or domestic terrorist.
This guy has NO CLUE how the process works. If the “charges” are DISCHARGED, then there is NO RECORD. YOU keep the record as the CREDITOR. The lady in Solomon’s court who “confessed” to not owning the baby got to KEEP THE RECORD.
quote:
For me, I plead guilty to nothing - not even spitting on the sidewalk. I admit no facts, which are elements of my alleged crimes. I may be a damned fool, but I'll never admit it,
This is the ONLY thing this jerk got right. He IS a “damned fool” -- NO QUESTION. And yes -- he will never admit it. He will never CONFESS -- so he has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE for REDEMPTION! End of story!
Be Well,
Doer
|
Edited by - doer on 30 Jul 2003 18:41:33 |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2003 : 21:12:13
|
"This is the ONLY thing this jerk got right. He IS a “damned fool” -- NO QUESTION. And yes -- he will never admit it. He will never CONFESS -- so he has ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE for REDEMPTION! End of story!"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Well, I was thinking of sending him your post, Doer, along with some other stuff that might HELP him, Doer. ;-) |
|
|
|
sandpreacher
Junior Member
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2003 : 22:38:13
|
Hey everyone...
I am not sure if you know this man, and if you do if you agree with his phylosiphy(sp)... he is however in jail and standing for I feel is the base set of facts you all condone... this is a letter from his wife to the world that asks you to listen to his jailhouse communications to the rest of us who may not be jail but are caged none the less...
Mike
--- from Rays wife Anita ---
Hello,
Ray asked me to send the info below so that they can be posted/disseminated on web sites and by email to as many people as possible to keep the public informed of what's going on in the Josephine County Courts with Ray's cases (old and new) and so people may take action through phone calls, emails, snail mail to the "powers that
be" if they so desire. He would also like people to phone/email the court and demand that his August 11, 2003 hearing (or whatever they decide to call it) be held at the courthouse with the public in attendence.
Our server is having all sorts of problems with their Cave Junction connections. They have put in a new modem and it's malfunctioning so they are down more often than not. It's unbelievable how much trouble this is creating for me.
I try frequently to get connected, but it's rarely possible; and when I do
get on, It's usually for a very few minutes at most and more often I get cut off as soon as I do connect. They tell me they're working on it, but can't tell me when they expect it to be fixed.
Anita Karczewski
First Letter:
The following was dictated to me by my husband Ray Karczewski© during a phone call from the Josephine County Adult Jail in Grants Pass, Oregon today, July 20, 2003, 2:40PM
Anita Karczewski
On the 18th of July, 2003, at approximately 3:00PM, three Josephine County patrol cars and five (5) deputies came to my house. They arrested me and took me to the Josephine County Jail facility on an arrest warrant for "Failure to Appear," issued by Judge William Mackay.
Shortly after arrival at the jail facility, I was handed booking papers by a deputy who indicated that after I filled out the papers, I would be released to go home. This was confirmed by the Jail Supervisor, Sgt. Michaels. He indicated that after I signed the booking forms, I could go home
because they have a bed shortage.
Now, what was the purpose of the arrest to begin with? Certainly they knew the situation before they arrested me. The real reason may be found in the fact that at the present time there is a $21,600,000.00 judgment standing, and every day that I'm in this jail is another $60,000.00 per day for additional damages.
So far, the county has arranged to add $240,000.00 onto the original $21,600,000.00.
Is it the intention of the authorities in Josephine County and the Court System to bankrupt Josephine County? It seems so to me.
I have sent "Request(s) for Proof of Claim" to the Josephine County District Attorney, Clay E. Johnson, and other authorities at both the State and County level. I have sent three (3) to District Attorney Clay Johnson and two to the others; and in addition, I have had nine (9) appearances before the court, at seven of the nine appearances, I challenged the court to prove
jurisdiction over me. They have refused to do so.
In the five "Request(s) for Proof of Claim," three of them accompanied by affidavit, not one single, solitary person from the State of Oregon or from Josephine County has answered any of the questions.
They have no answers for my questions.
Is this the way we expect our government officials to behave, here in Josephine County?
Below are the twenty-three (23) questions that have been submitted to these people that they absolutely refuse to address:
Ask yourself: Why won't they answer these questions?
Below you'll also find phone numbers for Judge Gerald C. Neufeld, District Attorney Clay E. Johnson, and for Sheriff Dave Daniel.
I would like to see Josephine County citizens hold their government officials accountable.
Call these numbers and tell them what you think. Ask them to answer the questions that were submitted. Especially ask District Attorney Clay E. Johnson to either answer the questions, or remove himself from his office and put somebody in there who will answer those questions.
Enough is enough! If you don't want tyranny in Josephine County, this is the time to do something about it!
Questions submitted to the County of Josephine and State of Oregon:
1. PROOF OF CLAIM on how the Oregon Constitution operates upon me, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man.
2. PROOF OF CLAIM on how the State statutes by and through the Oregon Legislature and the DMV operate upon me, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man.
3. PROOF OF CLAIM that the name appearing on the charging instrument, in capital letters; RAYMOND RONALD KARCZEWSKI, is not a corporate fiction, but is the name of the living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man in his private capacity.
4. PROOF OF CLAIM that the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) describe any other class of license other than for commerce or for commercial trade, occupation or profession.
5. PROOF OF CLAIM that this private man is specifically named in the Oregon State Statutes and more specifically ORS cites as applied in this matter. (See the PEOPLE v. HERKIMER, 15 Am Dec 379, 4 Cowen (N.Y. 345, 348 (1825)
6. PROOF OF CLAIM that the STATE OF OREGON, in its Corporate capacity, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless consented to, and/or contracted for, by that natural person/private man.
7. PROOF OF CLAIM that the COUNTY OF JOSEPHINE, in its Corporate capacity, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless consented to, and/or contracted for, by that natural person/private man.
8. PROOF OF CLAIM that all "Officers of the Court," which include members of the JOSEPHINE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S staff, are under oath of office to support and defend both U.S. and OREGON Constitutions.
9. PROOF OF CLAIM that Deputies and/or Jail Staff, in their capacity as Agents for the CORPORATE JOSEPHINE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, are bound by their oath of office to support and defend both U.S. and OREGON Constitutions.
10. PROOF OF CLAIM that the CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR JOSEPHINE COUNTY, in its Corporate capacity, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless consented to, and/or contracted for, by that
natural person/private man.
11. PROOF OF CLAIM of the existence of the liability and how it was created.
12. PROOF OF CLAIM of what 'state' the liability came from, the de jure state ('The State') or the de-facto state ('This State'), a mere corporation.
13. PROOF OF CLAIM that the State of Oregon DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, DMV, through its Administrative Drivers Licensing process, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless consented to, and/or contracted for, by that natural person/private man.
14. PROOF OF CLAIM that in my private capacity, that I, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, is subject to Class A, B, and C commercial driver license. (see ORS 807.031)
15. PROOF OF CLAIM that the State of Oregon via the DMV sells any other ‘driver’ license.
16. PROOF OF CLAIM that the Motor Vehicle code does not operate upon all ‘drivers’ of ‘all’ vehicles owned or operated by ‘the United States,’ ‘this state,’ ‘or any county,’ ‘city,’ ‘district,’ ‘or any other political subdivision of this state’ … and thus operates upon this private man. (see ORS 801.020)
17. PROOF OF CLAIM that my ‘private' vehicle is not a ‘recreational’ vehicle that is operated solely for personal (private) use. (see ORS 801.208)
18. PROOF OF CLAIM that my ‘private' vehicle is used for the transportation of persons for compensation or profit, or designed or used primarily for the transportation of property (for hire). (see ORS 801.210)
19. PROOF OF CLAIM that Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, was a licensee at the time of the ‘stop’ to subject himself to the motor vehicle code by agreement and as a signatory. (see Vehicle Traffic Law, 1974 Rev Ed., page 238, 239)
20. PROOF OF CLAIM that, “In view of this rule a statutory provision that the supervision officials “may” exempt such persons when the transportation is not on a commercial basis means that they “must” exempt them, generally applies in this matter. (State v. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; 60 C.J.S. section 94 pg 581)
21. PROOF OF CLAIM that Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, does not have the right in light of ORS 801.305.
22. PROOF OF CLAIM that the ‘entity’ bringing forth this claim can testify on the witness-stand of the same and bring all relevant evidence.
23. PROOF OF CLAIM that the prosecutor, as an agent of the State, has established a ‘liability bond’ in this action to indemnify Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, in the event of any damnification.
Phone numbers to call and express your opinion:
Judge Gerald C. Neufeld (541) 476-2309
District Attorney Clay E. Johnson (541) 476-5200
or email to: DA@co.josephine.or.us
Sheriff Dave Daniel (541) 474-5123
or email to: jocosheriff@co.josephine.or.us
USPS (snail mail) to: Josephine County Courthouse
500 NW 6th Street
Grants Pass, OR 97526
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Second Letter: (Sent as Letter to the Editor)
DISTRICT ATTORNEY CLAY E. JOHNSON: ANSWER THE 23 QUESTIONS! JUSTICE DEMANDS IT !
Our country faces dark days ahead. We, a once free people, are heading for an inevitable economic collapse and tyranny. Nowhere is it defined more clearly than here in Josephine County. The problem lies with our judges and District Attorney Clay E Johnson. They no longer conduct their business by law, but by whim.
D.A. Johnson has defaulted in refusing to answer three documents filed with the court, one accompanied by a sworn affidavit.
By not answering the affidavit point-by-point, D.A. Johnson has bound the county to a commercial debt in the amount of $21,600,000.00. Liens have been filed and recorded at the Oregon Secretary of State's office, Corporate Division, against the corporations Josephine County and the State of Oregon.
As of (on) July 18, 2003 I was arrested for the third time in eleven months for the same bogus charges. The courts are stymied as to how to get beyond the arraignment stage.
For each passing day that I am incarcerated damages accrue at the rate of $60,000.00 a day.
On July 21st, 2003 Judge Gallagher blurted (let) "the cat out of the bag." He said there existed no one who had a claim against me. That statement alone is legal grounds for dismissal. Instead, D.A. Johnson chose strong-arm intimidation by charging one who is defending himself with
seven (7) counts of "simulation of legal process," i.e. "paper terrorism," all toward "CYA" (cover your ass).
How does it feel to know your public servants are bankrupting you?
Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, Cell 701
Josephine County Adult Jail
1901 NE F Street
Grants Pass, OR 97526
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John Taft's article from the News With Views web site:
Retired Police Sgt. Held in Jail For Constitutional Beliefs
Other Taft Articles:
Sheriff Dave Daniel Plays While The Public Pays
RETIRED POLICE SGT. FACES 35 YEARS FOR NOT PRODUCING DRIVERS LICENSE
By Investigative Reporter
John Taft
July 24, 2003
NewsWithViews.com
GRANTS PASS, OR -- The Criminal Justice System in Josephine County is like a baby’s diaper; it’s loaded and it stinks. The county’s criminal justice system is bewitched, bothered and bewildered by one Raymond Karczewski, (Kar-chess-ski) 65. The now retired Judge William
Mackay wrote a bench warrant on April 20th for the arrest of Karczewski. That was 90 days ago. Karczewski faces the charges of attempting to elude a police officer, interfering with a peace officer, and failing to carry and present an operator’s license. The charges against Karczewski sound serious on first reading, but when the case is investigated the charges appear to be concocted hyperbole. Deputy Michael Burke wrote up these charges against Karczewski. Josephine County Sheriff Dave Daniel recently fired Burke for an unspecified reason.
Deputies Take Karczewski to Jail, Taxpayers Pick up the Tab
On July 18th, five deputies arrived in three taxpayer funded patrol vehicles to take one nonviolent man to jail, thus carrying out Judge Mackay’s 90-day old warrant. Karczewski offered no resistance, yet his wife reports her husband was rammed up against the side of the house with his head slammed into the siding. If Karczewski is such a threat to society, why did the criminal justice system wait 90 days to act? In 90-days Karczewski could have been long gone but was arrested at home. Perhaps, leave town is what DA Clay Johnson was hoping he would do.
Why the Sheriff is Short on Cash
Sheriff Daniel complains he doesn’t have enough money to run the county jail. Karczewski is costing taxpayers about $65 dollars per day while he’s lodged in the county jail. That’s just under $3.00 per hour, 24 hours a day, 7-days a week, and $1,950 a month. This is where the money goes, dribbled away on a man who is not a threat to the community and has committed
no violent act against society. In Monday’s Grants Pass Daily Courier the police report listed the following incidents. 1. A drunken driver was arrested and the driver was released due to overcrowding in the jail. Drunk drivers are a threat to society. Karczewski was not arrested for drunken driving, yet he’s costing taxpayers $65 a day and drunk drivers are released. 2. A man
was arrested for criminal nonsupport but released due to jail overcrowding. Bad decision and poor management are a curse the county criminal justice system has inflicted on county taxpayers. Josephine County’s multimillion-dollar jail houses just 98 tenants today, compared to the old jail under the courthouse that was capped at 64. It all adds up to a very poor investment
for taxpayers.
Karczewski speaks From the Jail
On Tuesday evening, July 22nd, I received a phone call from Karczewski from the county jail. He said his treatment by the jail deputies was fine. He also told me a deputy brought him a paper saying that he had been charged with seven counts of simulating legal process. This is a serious class "C" felony with the maximum penalty set at 5-years for each count. Karczewski
told me, "I’m only trying to defend myself." The facts appear to lean in Karczewski’s direction. To go from the original charges to a possible 35-years in an Oregon penitentiary is breathtaking. In Karczewski’s case it would be a life sentence the DA is after. Without question this points in
the direction of a prosecutor and district attorney’s office devoid of common sense. If Karczewski received the full count on all seven charges, the cost to the taxpayers would be astronomical. The annual reported expense to house one inmate at the state level is approximately $29,000 annually including debt service. Seven counts at 5-years each totals up
to $1,015,000, if this 65 year old man were to live to be 100. This is for a nonviolent offense and doesn’t include wasted court time, jail time, and prosecutor’s time. District Attorney Clay Johnson seems to be psychologically well equipped to hunt human prey in the name of the state,
and with the ability to target selected victims. Big game hunters are not only found in Africa but also in the Twilight Zone of your local district attorney’s office.
On Monday, July 21st, Karczewski won a round in court when neither local Judge Neufeld nor Coon would touch the court hearing and brought in an unprepared outsider, Judge Gallagher. Local judges normally avoid politically hot issues. It’s reported that Judge Gallagher admitted during court that the court had no claim against Karczewski, but he refused to release him. This appears to have so flustered the DA that he came up with the 7 counts of simulating legal process, a potential $1,000,000 debt for taxpayers to pay. The DA and his alleged vulture-like prosecutors should be charged with a terrorist crime against society for their threat against its
economic stability. The reasonable and prudent man will say outrageous; the potential penalty does not fit the alleged crime.
Citizens Are Looking at the Recall Ballot
There is no question this story will make the national scene and be talked about from coast to coast, and perhaps around the globe. When a district attorney so violates the trust the voters have placed in him, there is no way to keep the accountability factor out. Both the names Raymond Karczewski and Clay Johnson will become of public interest. Enough interest could
be generated that a recall will be launched against DA Johnson a man who can cost taxpayers millions in wrongful prosecutions.
County Needs System Cleansed
Karczewski is the nemesis of a constipated criminal justice system. The longer Karczewski is held in the Josephine County Jail the more visible District Attorney Clay Johnson and Sheriff Dave Daniel will become for public scrutiny. It’s time for a change. These public employees don’t need more money; what they need is a good laxative that promotes intelligent internal movement.
DA Clay Johnson (541) 474-5200
Sheriff Dave Daniels (541) 474-5123
© 2003 John Taft - All Rights Reserved
---------------------------------------------------------------------
John Taft former president of Josephine County, OR. Taxpayers Association is presently an investigative reporter for the US-Oregon Observer and NewsWithViews.com. He has had many years of broadcasting, news writing and reporting experience. He also has written a
popular conservative newsletter for a taxpayers organization to inform the public on taxing issues. John can be reached at joconewsline@hotmail.com John's Web site:
www.Strobezone.homestead.com
"Without question this points in the direction of a prosecutor and district attorney’s office devoid
of common sense"
"District Attorney Clay Johnson seems to be psychologically well equipped to hunt human prey
in the name of the state, and with the ability to target selected victims. Big game hunters are not
only found in Africa but also in the Twilight Zone of your local district attorney’s office." |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2003 : 00:39:34
|
Ray doesn't explain his defense strategy, or how he plans to defend himself, only that he wants them to ANSWER the questions...he's going to wait a very long time for those answers.
In my opinion, he should forget about those questions (for now anyway)and concentrate on getting himself out. Here's a strategy that I heard on Truth Radio a while ago:
A man was being charged with failure to file income tax returns for the past 30 years. He had been studying Redemption and Acceptance and stood before the judge and said this:
"For the record judge, I am going to Accept case # so-in-so, and every thing in it, and I am going to Accept it as true. I have not filed in 30 years, and I’m going to return your case to you, for closure and discharge in this matter."
They said he never heard back from the prosecutor after that. Now I don't know if all that true or not, but what can they do if you "accept" (not admit) the charges against you? They want you to plead "guilty" or "not guilty", and the last thing they EVER expect to hear from you is: I "accept" the charges.
My 2sense for the day.
|
Edited by - Livefree on 31 Jul 2003 00:41:05 |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2003 : 01:18:12
|
Well, I take exception to some of the labels in the foregoing posts. But, so be it.
Now, in regards to Mr. Adask, I am afraid he has no clue as to what Roger Elvick or Jack Smith or Victoria Joy are talking about when they say they plead guilts to the facts. The facts are not the charges. The facts are carefully hidden among the charges. The charges are conclusions of law and can not be used to convict unless they are argued. By not allowing for argument, there is no where for the judge to proceed, and thus the matter is at end.
There are other things which must take place before your guilty plea, but that was covered in another post.
I find it amazing the number of people who are sitting in jail, simply because they wanted to have their point of view hear. I am afraid that this is the case of Mr. Adask.
My 2 cents worth.
Lewis |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2003 : 12:55:18
|
Lewis wrote: quote:
I find it amazing the number of people who are sitting in jail, simply because they wanted to have their point of view heard. I am afraid that this is the case of Mr. Adask."
I don't understand. What "point of view" does Al want the court to hear? That they don't have jurisdiction?
|
|
|
|
sandpreacher
Junior Member
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2003 : 22:08:56
|
OK my friends here is my first attempt at using a small peice of what I have read to remedy a situation... First to explain the bankruptcy, a couple had tried to sell us a house they did not own and the house could not appraise for the amount they offered even when appraised by their appraiser... we counter offered with a sweet deal offered through there personal mortgage person... to make a long story short they sued us for not fullfilling the contract on their terms ( had I only known what I am tring to learn now ) They won a first round with an arbitrator for reasons that would take to long to explain... our attorney explained that while we would probably win in a trial de-novo (sp)it would cost $6000 to get $12000... and it may be more after their inevitable appeal... so he advised we file bankruptcy... we reaffirmed our debts to the house and the cars essentailly cacelling only the debt from the arbitration hearing... I had in interime bought a house and was having payments automatically deducted from a account I set up soley for that purpose... I recieved yesterday 5 months after the bankruptcy became final an unsigned letter saying they are going to stop auto payments because I filed bankruptcy... This is the letter I intend on sending back to them... your coments and suggestions before I amil this would most appreciated...
---------------------------------------------------------------
July 27, 2003
Fairbanks Capitol Corp
338 South Warminster Rd.
P.O. Box 1900 Hatboro, PA 19040
RE: Loan No. xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To who it may concern,
I, , affirm that;
I am in receipt of a letter from Fairbanks Capitol Corp (see attached copy). The letter, unsigned by a representative of Fairbanks Capitol Corp., is confusing. It seems to be an attempt to dishonor a Fairbanks Capitol Corp. offer to remove automatically each month my mortgage payment from a account I provide for that purpose. I accepted the Fairbanks Capitol Corp offer, to remove automatically each month my mortgage payment from a account I provide, signed the contract to remove automatically each month my mortgage payment from a account I provide, and returned it to Fairbanks Capitol Corp. . I have abided by the rules of the contract in that there is the correct amount of funds for Fairbanks Capitol Corp to withdraw on the dates specified in the contract. The contract states that if funds are not available on the specified dates Fairbanks Capitol Corp. will rescind the contract. The contract nowhere specifies that a bankruptcy will be cause to discontinue automatically removing the amount specified on the dates specified in the contract. Fairbanks Capitol Corp was and is in complete knowledge of the bankruptcy and in fact was removing payments in accordance with the contract on dates before the bankruptcy. Fairbanks Capitol Corp continued to take payments according to the contract after being notified of the filing of bankruptcy. Fairbanks Capitol Corp continued to take payments in accordance with the contract after the bankruptcy was finalized. This fact alone leads to a precedent being set by Fairbanks Capitol Corp. to continue to abide by the contract. I offer that if Fairbanks Capitol Corp decides to not comply with the contract by not deducting the payments as per the contract I shall accept that as notice of my obligation to Fairbanks Capitol Corp for the entire remaining mortgage amount as being paid in full thereby ending any and all obligations by me to Fairbanks Capitol Corp. I expect that the August 10th payment will be deducted according to the contract. I expect all payments from this date forward will be deducted in accordance with the contract. I offer that if any payments are not taken on the dates specified in the contract it will notification to me that Fairbanks Capitol Corp forgives me the entire debt of the mortgage and releases me from any and all obligations to Fairbanks Capitol Corp .
Sincerely,
Affiant:
--------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks in advance for the assist
Mike |
Edited by - sandpreacher on 31 Jul 2003 22:20:16 |
|
|
|
sandpreacher
Junior Member
USA
24 Posts |
Posted - 04 Aug 2003 : 08:47:02
|
ok well -- thanks anyway...
is it my breath... |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 04 Aug 2003 : 20:22:34
|
Hi sandpreacher,
Ummm, no, I don't think it is your breath. I think it may be that the question you asked had nothing to do with the ongoing discussion. Or, maybe no one has a clue as to what to respond. Why not start a new topic with your question? Then, hopefully someone might think of a response.
Peace,
Lewis |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2003 : 21:09:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by sandpreacher
Hi all, I have a quick question... I am trying to learn all this and you all have been a source for me along with many others.
Can you accept something for value before filling your UCC paperwork?
I am getting conflicting information on this as well as many other parts of the process. A friend has asked me to help him learn also and this was one of the thing which we are seeing diffrerent views on.
Thanks - Mike
Rice Mcleod says you don't need a UCC-1 before you Accept for value.
Question: Do you need a UCC-1 filed first to put a bond on property taxes?
Answer: No. Nothing has to be filed to do anything with an offer of contract. In commerce everything is honor or dishonor. Honor – accept, dishonor – fight. (Tape 5/7/03)
There is a "Frequently Asked Questions" section in this website: http://beam.to/tapes
Look for the bright blue banner with a link under it - about 3/4 down the page
|
Edited by - Livefree on 05 Aug 2003 21:13:12 |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2003 : 11:58:11
|
Hi Livefree,
That is correct as far as it goes. That statement assumes a lot of other things. Also, bear in mind that Rice is mostly talking to people who are in the Republic of Texas, and his information may not apply to you.
All of the other major leaders say you must do your UCC-1 filing first. Who is right? Well you decide. Just remember that none of these guys are more than 80% correct. For example, Rice introduced the Bond of Discharge and had everyone sending them to the Sec. of the Treasury of Puerto Rico. Well, guess what. Things weren't working. Puerto Rico is sitting on 10s of thousands of these pieces of paper. John Snow has said "do not send them to Washington". So, now Rice is saying send them directly to John Snow. Most of the other teachers disagree even with that. So, what are we to do? Study and experiment.
As a final thought, you can't "Accept For Value" unless you have separated the Strawman from the living-man. And you must have activated your UCC Contract Trust Account which exists at the Treasury. How can you have that Account activated if you haven't filed your UCC-1 strawman filing?
Just my $0.02 worth for whatever value it may have to someone.
Peace to you all,
Lewis |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2003 : 16:21:47
|
Hi Lewis,
Like anything else I read, I take what I need from it and throw the rest away. I'm not recommending Rice Mcleod's material to anyone.
I've Accepted For Value on a couple of government presentments without activating a treasury account and so far so good. Not a peep out of IRS in four months. They may come back soon, but I'm prepared if they do. I also did not have an UCC-1 on file at the time either--I filed one a few months after I AFV.
Peace to you too, Lewis.
Alisa
|
Edited by - Livefree on 07 Aug 2003 16:41:39 |
|
|
|
Lewish
Advanced Member
uSA
496 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2003 : 17:37:12
|
Hi Alisa,
Sometimes it works fine. Let's see where you are at with the IRS in 3 years. In the meantime, have your alternate strategies in place. Hopefully you want need them, but the Matrix is getting more restless.
Lewis |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 07 Aug 2003 : 22:28:44
|
I recently responded to FTB's Notices of Tax Due the same way I did with IRS--Accept for Value, penalties of perjury letter, a Copyright Notice and Power of Attorney. I did not include a bond because I didn't have enough time to activate the Treasury Account.
So, we'll see what happens in the next month or two. I do know they like sending Notices of Garnishment. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
UCC "Redemption" Scheme
