That is when a judge does a dismissal and has nothing to do with using
"Without Prejudice" elsewhere, like when signing an affidavit
Best Regards,
Win
On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 11:20 AM Don Mashak <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Sorry, thats what I get for multitasking
????
"Without prejudice" means the matter *CAN *be brought back before a court
again;
"With Prejudice" means the matter *CAN NOT* 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, 11:03:28 AM CST, Don Mashak <
donmashak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
????
"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
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Faka.ms%2Fghei36&data=04%7C01%7C%7C327e3424d07b46c8286408d8d98c4971%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637498543832947358%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=s2YUtl6I%2BelOQFx3REc8gqr%2BQib%2FsYNH9AOK2j9eaTg%3D&reserved=0>
------------------------------
*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
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https:%2F%2Fdefinitions.uslegal.com%2Fc%2Fcapias%2F%23:~:text%3DA%2520capias%2520is%2520a%2520warrant%2520or%2520order%2520for%2Cissued%2520for%2520a%2520failure%2520to%2520appear%2520in%2520court&data=04%7C01%7C%7C327e3424d07b46c8286408d8d98c4971%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637498543832957355%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=L9QeY8vTX4bYIwgMOeT24S9Xu3G%2B6dqHLx7bX%2FEGVcI%3D&reserved=0>.
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. Its *their*
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
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fgroup%2Fadministrating-your-public-servants%3Fhl%3Den%3Fhl%3Den&data=04%7C01%7C%7C327e3424d07b46c8286408d8d98c4971%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637498543832957355%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=tDp%2FiGwezwC54Us8TsVXki4P2JRQF0g6yKInlxfp7W4%3D&reserved=0>
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 to administrating-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
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgroups.google.com%2Fd%2Fmsgid%2Fadministrating-your-public-servants%2F80644bb3-6fc5-4cec-ba57-637ee8d77356%2540Spark%3Futm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dfooter&data=04%7C01%7C%7C327e3424d07b46c8286408d8d98c4971%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C637498543832967353%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=rUQ1OA3Pth%2BYGgFcJus4rO7sqow3vPWRGo4k7Yg4OxM%3D&reserved=0>
.
