Get Your Free 150 MB Website Now!
   
 


















 

Legal Need to Know

WHEN GOOD MEN DO NOTHING, EVIL MEN PROSPER!

 

We Do Not Give or Sell "Legal Advice"
For that, one must have a "Licensed Attorney" (if such be found)

 

  "There is no law making you liable to pay income tax" (Congressman John Ensign of Nevada answering a constituents question.)

  "THE LAW" "Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfully makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both. (Title 18 section 1001)

  Here's what the Supreme Court said in 1906 when they were figuring out how to set this whole shell game up (IRS) so it would be rejoin-able to the constitution and other laws of our republic,

__ __ "An
individual may be under no obligation to do a particular thing and his failure to act creates no liability, but ( and, oh, is that a big but) , if he voluntarily attempts to act and do the particular thing (i.e. sign "certain" forms in a "certain" way) , he comes under an implied obligation in respect to the manner in which he does it"
( S. ct. 186 , pg. 188)

  A federal judge ruled yesterday (3-27-00) that the Census Bureau has no automatic right to ask questions felt to be personal or intrusive and that it cannot threaten or prosecute citizens who refuse to answer such questions. U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon granted attorney Mark Brewer, of the Houston-based firm of <http://www.bplaw.com/ Brewer and Pritchard, a temporary restraining order in a Census suit filed by five Houston, Texas, residents. Attorneys for the government conceded that none of the five plaintiffs will be subject to actual or threatened prosecution during this litigation which is expected to go to the U.S. Supreme Court. The ruling is especially far-reaching. "For the moment, this will prevent prosecution against any American who chooses not to answer questions other than the number of people living at their address -- that's all that's required by the Constitution," Brewer told WorldNetDaily. "It's a huge victory for the Constitution and for privacy-loving Americans, because we now have a ruling in a federal court case. (By Sarah Foster www.worldnetdaily.com 2000 WorldNetDaily.com 3-28-00)

  Any attempt to learn to cope with our modern judicial system must be tempered with the sure and certain knowledge that modern "law" is always a crapshoot. That is, nothing -- not even brown paper bags filled with hundred dollar bills and handed to the judge -- will absolutely guarantee your victory in a judicial trial or administrative hearing. The most you can ever hope for is to improve the probability that you may win. Therefore, do not depend on the articles, links or advertisements within the AntiShyster News Magazine or (Wake Up America) or on this web site to illustrate anything more than the opinions or experiences of others trying to escape, survive, improve, attack, or even make sense of "the best judicial system in the world". But don't be discouraged; there's not another foolproof publication on law in the entire U.S.A. -- except the Bible. (AntiShyster News Magazine http://www.antishyster.com/

  What happens if the proper name, i.e. John Doe, answers for or assumes the legal fiction, i.e. JOHN DOE? They become one and the same. This is the crux for the use of the full caps legal fictions by the U.S. Government and the States. It is the way that they can bring someone into their fictional venue and jurisdiction that they have created. By implication of definition, this also is for the purpose of some manner of assumed debt. http://209.103.164.54/nbn/ALLCAPS.html

  When they called his case, - What our Man should have said is "Which one? The real man or the fiction? . And repeated that phrase over and over, regardless how many times and different ways they tried to call him.

  Enjoying the "Title of Nobility" as "Person" and/or "subject" is a privilege granted from government and makes you liable and subject to to' government "Code of Conduct" for "subjects". The lawyers presume that everyone is enjoying the benefit of corporate fiction subject" (14th Amendment, "slave on government plantation") status and therefore owes a debt back to government (excise Tax) in return for the privilege/Benefit being enjoyed.

  When one returns or "rejects" all government papers, refuses to enter a "Plea", and refuses to "Post Bail or Bond" (for 48 hours Riverside County vs. McLaughlin), and Denies by WRITTEN AFFIDAVIT that he is NOT the fiction Defendant, they can NOT proceed and can NOT hold you, beyond that 48 hours. And, yes, you can sue for false imprisonment, (later) for the 48 hour "unlawful detention" of a Non-fiction Subject. http://www.peoples-rights.com/doc4.htm

  "One who interferes with another's liberty does so at his peril" (University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 75, p491, April 1927)

  If you're facing foreclosure problems, this e-book may be helpful. Common Law Liens

  Having the Gold, they were in deed privileged to make the rules. And THAT they finally did with the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Reserve Bank. This was long after the Militia became such a little known concept that People forgot about their POWER, and the day that they protected themselves from the plundering of the Creditor Class. Since that time there is a continued record of the efforts of the Creditor Class to control the flow of Arms in this land. To prove it, look at the Second Amendment. The Word "infringed" means to hinder. Yet the Federal Government has hindered the creation and sale (spread) of arms in this land, despite the Second Amendment. And who is in charge of overseeing this hindrance of the People being armed with the only types of weapons that they are allowed to possess pursuant to Miller v. U.S.? The Creditor Class; through their own Branch of Government called the Treasury Department. IRS Garnishment Turns Peaceful Worker Into Killer

  You can not be charged with failure to identify, until you have been charged with a crime. (see KOLENDER v. Lawson, 461 U.S. 352 (1983) http://www.iff-ifoundfreedom.com/laws/textrafficlaws.html

 

 

Links

 

 Bit of Humor

  A New York man was forced to take a day off from work to appear for a minor traffic summons. He grew increasingly restless as he waited hour after endless hour for his case to be heard. When his name was called late in the afternoon, he stood before the judge only to hear that court would be adjourned for the next day and he would have to return. "What for?" he snapped at the judge. His Honor, equally irked by a tedious day and the sharp query, roared, "Twenty dollars contempt of court. That's what for!" Then, noticing the man checking his wallet, the judge said,
"It's all right. You don't have to pay now."
The young man replied, "I'm just seeing if I have enough for two more words!"

 A big-city lawyer was representing the railroad in a lawsuit filed by an old rancher. The rancher's prize bull was missing from the section through which the railroad passed. The rancher claimed that the bull must have been hit by the train, and wanted to be paid the fair value of the bull. The case was scheduled to be tried before the justice of the peace in the back room of the general store. As soon as the rancher showed up, the attorney for the railroad pulled him aside and tried to get him to settle out of court. The lawyer did his best selling job, and finally the rancher agreed to take half of what he was asking. After the rancher had signed the release and took the check, the young lawyer couldn't resist gloating a little over his success, telling the rancher, "You know, I hate to tell you this, old man,
but I put one over on you in there. I couldn't have won the case. The engineer was asleep and the fireman was in the caboose when the train went through your ranch that morning. I didn't have one witness to put on the stand. I bluffed you!"
The old rancher replied, "Well, I'll tell you, young feller, I was a little worried about winning that case myself, because that darned bull came home this morning."


 

Please Vote For Us. Click The Below Banner