????
"Without prejudice" means the matter cannot be brought back before a court
again;"With Prejudice" means the matter can be brought before a court again
Those were my thoughts.
Thank you for your time.
In Liberty,
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot
Rt 1 Box 231
Albertville MN 55301
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission is intended only
for the use of the person or entity named above and is privileged and
confidential. Any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication
other than to the person or entity named above is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender
by phone and by replying to this message and then delete the message and any
attachments from your system.
On Friday, February 26, 2021, 4:15:07 AM CST, Me
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The ONLY time you should use "Without prejudice UCC 1-308" is when they are
forcing you to sign something because it nullifies your signature.
Best Regards, Glenn
On Thursday, February 25, 2021, 02:10:05 PM CST, jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx
<jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
i dont think... UCC- 308 because thats theirs.. . if you are a state
national you are not in their jurisdiction..so i say no to that..
i wouldn't put that ...
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:34 PM Jb <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Question was to you Jon. Since it said your were going to send a letter/writ
about article 1 aka state national which if they were to follow that your case
or so called warrants should be invalid on premises of jurisdiction. As for me
signing it probably just ucc 1-308 without prejudice
On Feb 25, 2021, at 1:18 PM, jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx <jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
yes, awesome info thanks..
J_B is that your final letter (Notice) to the court? clerk? i suppose? with
reference to the case #'s included.
and how are you going to sign it?
By:________________
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 6:04 AM NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
awesome, thanks
From: administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Me
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2021 7:43 AM
To: administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [Administrating:23587] Re:
Re: Traffic tickets won under common court law instead? It is still color of
law. If you read the requirements of a warrant it has to be on paper and it has
to be signed by a Judge and a capias is electronic ONLY.
If they do not have a warrant you can resist arrest.
"ANY ARREST, made without a PROPER warrant, Signed by a judge and backed up by
an affidavit from two persons that states, under penalty of perjury, you have
broken a contract or hurt somebody, if challenged by the defendant( person), is
presumptively invalid...the burden is upon the state" to justify it as
authorized by statute, and does not violate the constitutional
provisions(privileges)and Or( human rights.) State v. Mastrian, 171 N.W.2d 695
(1969); Butler v. State, 212 So.2d 577 (Miss 1968)
"As in the case of illegal arrests, the officer(cop) ... must keep within the
law at his peril." Thiede v. Scandia, 217 Minn. 231, 14 N.W.2d 400 (1944).
"If demanded, he must produce the warrant and read it to the accused, that he
may know by what authority and for what cause he is deprived of his liberty."
State v. Shaw, 89 S.E. 322 (1916).
"An accused person(the straw man), IF he demands it, is entitled to have the
warrant for his arrest shown to him at the TIME OF ARREST." 42 L.R.A. 682, 51
L.R.A. 211, Crosswhite v. Barnes, 124 S.E. 242, 245 (1924).
"A SPECIAL deputy is bound to show his warrant IF requested to do so, and if he
omits( does not), the party against whom the warrant issues may resist an
arrest( not advisable ), and the warrant under such circumstances,; is no
protection against an action for an assault, battery and false imprisonment."
Frost v. Thomas, 24 Wendell's Rep. (N.Y.) 418, 419 (1840).
“It is doubtless the duty of an officer who executes a warrant of arrest to
state the nature, substance,and CAUSE of the CHARGING process which gives him
the authority he professes(claims to have ) to exercise, and, if it is
demanded, to exhibit(show) his warrant, that the party arrested may have no
excuse for resistance A LAWFUL WARRANT !.” Shovlon v. Com., 106 Pa. 369, 5 Am.
Crim. Rep. 41 (1884)
“It was the DUTY of an officer(cop) who attempts to make an arrest to
exhibit(show) the warrant IF, he has one.” Jones v. State, 114 Ga. 79, 39 S.E.
861 (1901)
Best Regards, Glenn
On Thursday, February 25, 2021, 06:07:08 AM CST, NELSON DICE
<nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Glenn,
“A capias is NOT a “Warrant of Arrest,”….”Knox v State, 586 S.W. 2d 504, 506
(Tex.Crim.App 1979)
It is actually a debt instrument
“CAPIAS AD SATISFACIENDUM (shortly termed a CA. SA.) A judicial writ of
execution which issues out on the record of a Judgment, where there is a
recovery in the courts…, of debt, damages, &c. And by this writ the sheriff is
commanded to take the body of the defendant in execution, and him safely to
keep, so that he have his body in court at the return of the writ,to satisfy
the plaintiff his debt and damages. Vide 1 Litt Abr. 249.”Tomlins Law
Dictionary, 1835 Edition, Volume 1[emphasis added]
The above indicates to me a sheriff is commanded to take the body......(1835)
how is that result different than a warrant for arrest?
From: administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of
Winningham Fearn <winfearn@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 9:16 PM
To: administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
Administrating-Your-Public-Servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<Administrating-Your-Public-Servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [Administrating:23587] Re:
Re: Traffic tickets won under common court law instead? 18 USC 242 violating
rights and immunities under color of law, 18 USC 241, conspiracy to threaten,
injure, coerce, and intimidate you in the free exercise of your right to ignore
their color of law warrants, 18 USC 247, subjecting you to their satanic
religious ceremony, and state felonies
Best Regards, Win
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 7:15 PM NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Glenn, can u please name the felony of a seizure by capias for me?
Get Outlook for Android
From:administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Charley
Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2021 7:44:58 PM
To: Administrating-Your-Public-Servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: [Administrating:23587] Re:
Re: Traffic tickets won under common court law instead? The point is your going
by force to the court house.On Feb 24, 2021, 5:43 PM -0700, Me
<dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
They call a capias a warrant but i t is NOT
“A capias is NOT a “Warrant of Arrest,”….”Knox v State, 586 S.W. 2d 504, 506
(Tex.Crim.App 1979)
It is actually a debt instrument
“CAPIAS AD SATISFACIENDUM (shortly termed a CA. SA.) A judicial writ of
execution which issues out on the record of a Judgment, where there is a
recovery in the courts…, of debt, damages, &c. And by this writ the sheriff is
commanded to take the body of the defendant in execution, and him safely to
keep, so that he have his body in court at the return of the writ,to satisfy
the plaintiff his debt and damages. Vide 1 Litt Abr. 249.”Tomlins Law
Dictionary, 1835 Edition, Volume 1[emphasis added]
Best Regards, Glenn
On Wednesday, February 24, 2021, 06:29:03 PM CST, Huey Campbell
<hueycamp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Found This ... here >>>>>>
https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/capias/#:~:text=A%20capias%20is%20a%20warrant%20or%20order%20for,issued%20for%20a%20failure%20to%20appear%20in%20court.
A capias is a warrant or order for arrest of a person, typically issued by the
judge or magistrate in a case. A capias may be issued in different forms. A
capias is commonly issued for a failure to appear in court. A capias may be
based upon an affidavit alleging personal knowledge of the offense. It must
state:
1. The name of the accused, if known, and if not known, must give some
reasonably definite description of him.
2. It must show that the accused has committed some offense against the laws of
the state, either directly or that the affiant has good reason to believe, and
does believe, that the accused has committed such offense.
3. It must state the time and place of the commission of the offense, as
definitely as can be done by the affiant.
4. It must be signed by the affiant by writing his name or affixing his mark.
The following is an example of a state statute dealing with capias:
"The process for arrest on an indictment shall be a capias, which shall be
issued immediately on the return of the indictment into court, and made
returnable instanter, unless otherwise ordered by the court, and if the capias
be not returned executed, the clerk shall issue an alias, returnable to the
next term, without an order for that purpose."
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 5:50 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Warrant is bringing one in for prosecution as a suspect and capias is bringing
you in for failing to follow the orders of the court. Color of law? Strictly
depends if the officer used the law in a crooked manner. Could be an off duty
officer at an sporting event but trying to flex his authority by using the
codes. Or color of law can be because your in the wrong jurisdiction. So the
wrong laws are being used against you.Either way it must be proven by you in
court which could be just exchange of papers filled with the clerk of that
court. On Feb 24, 2021, 4:32 PM -0700, Winningham Fearn <winfearn@xxxxxxxxx>,
wrote:
I guarantee you that their statutes will say that a Warrant is a paper in
writing that is signed by a Judge, therefore what they are telling you is that
it is a capias and they are calling it a warrant.
That is a color of law warrant, and that is a felony for them to violate your
rights under the color of law
Best Regards, Win
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 5:25 PM jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx <jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Oh yeah..thanks soo much! !! I asked for a copy of the warrants and court
said there is no paper copy in existance. this was long ago.. i was going to
see if they were legally done....(anyway).. but there is a Warrant list. on
the City website.... I can check there and see if they disappear.. I doubt
they will write me....in the ALL CAPS NAME...which i have returned that
mail.... in the past. All i have tried before has failed....and its been
alot. I'll let you all know...
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 3:53 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jonbondo
Recently a fellow had the same situation. That is outstanding traffic warrants
in Colorado and new Mexico. He sent to the court clerk where they were created
"article 1, section 8, clause 17 I'm not an United States Citizen and I (your
name) a state national. They disappeared. After sending letter one can wait a
few weeks and usually the court will tell you if there is a warrant exists. The
reason for this is that your stating the jurisdiction your in. Jurisdiction can
be challenged at anytime. Even after conviction. On Feb 24, 2021, 3:38 PM
-0700, jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx <jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
after i posted i got this same .... message from tiajoli@phillipshq
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 3:09 PM jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx <jonbondo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charley
what can one do about old tickets..in which the the judgements were guilty and
there have been warrants out for several years..?? i do not want to pay..
(thousands) Is there any recourse?crooked judge and got sandbagged and
steamrolled .. they want no one off the plantation... and their hands on
that cash. Itstheir court.. but i would very much like these cleared off the
record... all at the same municipal court.
On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 9:12 AM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Vinner
The passport jurisdiction of Canada, and other places would apply in that
jurisdiction and agreements they have with United States jurisdicton. We know
diplomats of other jurisdictions give leniency or revised rules. Most are
required a driver's license. So I doubt it would work.
Mike, Fred, Roy, and J_B
To understand judges watch other sovereign you tuners in court. One of my
favorites are Marc Stevens. His approach is show me the constitution applies to
his client. The answer from judge is this is an administrative court and
constitution does not apply. The judge goes on to state. Give me the evidence.
To which Stevens always tells the judge the prosecutor must prove. To me this
is an circular argument and one will lose because it's the prosecutor holding a
administrative court before the judge.
Your sent a notice and demand (citation) to come to their administrative court.
That administrative court is for legislative law and their government courts.
Municipal court to supreme court are administrative to settle Government
issues.
We all can read the bill of rights and realize and know there is common law,
admirality law, maritime law and some speciality laws as military law.
To me the question is how to switch the admirality administrative court to
common law court. Can we switch the court? I believe one can and as I study
this more and more or all points to article 1, section 8, clause17 as it shows
the limitations of that admirality legislative court. It does not state what
court your in but that your not in theirs. That is all that really matters
anyhow.
Someone posted this on this forum which I believe is When National
constitutionality comes before the judge. He must honor due process of law or
lose his bonding. This is handled by the internal functions of the corporation
and bonding company.
5.4 - Bonding of Judges
A judge shall lose his bonding, shall not be bonded, and shall be deemed
unbondable:
1. if he fails to protect the U.S, national constitutionally guaranteed
remedies of due process and the equal protection of the laws of any citizen
appearing in his court of law, or of any citizen appearing in any court of the
county in which he works whose case may come to his attention by any means.
Without a bond. One cannot hold a valid court. Will say this is what I'm
finding that works. Just more information keeps coming forth that seems to
validate the idea.
Again if one uses their court cases. They are still in their administrative
court. I'm going to keep using article 1817 and that I'm not an United Stars
Citizen but a state national. I'm trying to find a way to settle compensation
outside the court. A friend was given a document that comes from state
battorney general in Colorado with a different address to settle claims against
officers or employees that have caused harm. I assume every state has this.
The attorney general sends it to insurance to review and settle. That sounds
more common law to me. We settle with individual or their insurance. Will
see.On Feb 23, 2021, 10:09 PM -0700, Roy Vinner <littlefilbert@xxxxxxxxx>,
wrote:
Charley,
I wonder whether a foreign passport will work as well instead of a State
national passport? A Canadian or a European passport, perhaps?
On 2/21/2021 9:26 PM, Charley Dan wrote:
J_B
Proof? Well I've told close to eighteen now and Worked perfectly. So they say.
When I got stopped here is my experience. I gave my normal passport. He gave me
a ticket.
I sent to the court as I told you. Two days after court hearing the judges
personal clerk sent me a note saying a live warrant was issued and then offered
me two court dates a month away. I sent back the same note of article 1817 and
I'm a national. Four business days later I called the court and no warrant to
be found.
I'm filing with the court for recompense. I've not had luck with remedy though.
Proof beyond that? "If you cannot take a man's word. Then it's not worth
listening to him." The Constitution is the SupRene law (article 6) of the land
and article 1, section 8, clause 17 states the limited jurisdicton of the
United States.
--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Administrating Your Public Servants" group.
To post to this group, send email to
administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
administrating-your-public-servants+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/administrating-your-public-servants?hl=en?hl=en
This is a private communication between living souls who are not fictitious
entities in any way. All communications in this group are strictly
confidential. If you have received this message and you are not a member of the
group, then you agree to keep it confidential, or delete the message and let
the owner of the group know. Your retention of this private communication is
your tacit agreement to these terms and conditions.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Administrating Your Public Servants" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
toadministrating-your-public-servants+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/administrating-your-public-servants/80644bb3-6fc5-4cec-ba57-637ee8d77356%40Spark.
