Charley,
Every your screenshot or attachment can't be opened.
How so? What app?
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 10:56, Charley Dan<charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To all this Declaration of status fuss by different methods is a waste of time.
Unless I decide to fraudulently profit from selling it. I've seen no benefit
from ding it yet.
When I get a citation I notify of my status with the article 1817 statement on
jurisdictIon and done it for many others to be set free. Usually once and
sometimes twice encounters and they get the message to leave one alone.
Especially for those who got out of jail.
On Nov 2, 2021, 10:20 AM -0600, Rick Miller <ricky520057@xxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
Thanks JB. I am sending you a private email on this issue. Thanks for your
input.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 8:29 AM J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rick-
Dont use Anna'S way of correction. You have to give notice to the Secretary of
state of the uSA. This is the legal way to give notice according to their own
writings. Whether you like or not, thats the way to do it. Of course make it a
proper court of record. Witht that. Next time you go to court and you challenge
Juris Diction in human capacity by special devine appearance. The judge has no
choice but to throw it out and cant adjudicate something that has been made a
court of record. By doing it their way you have you I's dotted and T's
crossed. They cant presume a damn thing at this point when it comes to your
Status as a man/woman.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 11:24 AM Rick Miller <ricky520057@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Charley, what is your position on filing all this status correction paperwork?
Anna von Ritzcracker and even David Straight seem to think you have to give the
corporate agents formal, written notice of who you are rather than you just
knowing who you are and when necessary, expressing who you are. Your thoughts?
On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 6:18 AM veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
i share charleys surprise here. infants are wards of the court, theyre
(municipal courts) are pushing unconstitutional presumptions on people. this is
my opinion but i dont think they will take you seriously after stating your an
infant as you just admitted jurisdiction instead of challenging it. with what
you stated it seems more productive to go the path of simply plaintiff in
error, but as charley does i advocate for obliterating their feigned
presumption of jurisdiction.
On Mon, Nov 1, 2021, 8:39 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Really?
Another "element" that proves you are applicable to al cods, ordances, ules and
statutes is that you accepted or requested a "DRIVER LICENSE" and through that
nexus You are considered to be "Operating a State Agency" and must follow all
the same statutes etc. which are for "RESIDENTS" DEF. "EMPLOYEES" or "OFFICERS"
Article 1, section,8, clause 17 defines jurisdiction of the United States an
I'm not in it.
I can habe a driver's license and it means nothing. Use it to rent a car.
Marriage license means nothing. Because United States does not have
jurisdicton. Read court cases and it is quite clear citizens is a fancy word
for employee oath taker. On Nov 1, 2021, 7:12 PM -0600, Stephen Schwika
<dmarc-noreply-outsider@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
IS HOW THEY CONTROL THE MASSES - Possible Cestua Que Vie Trust Acct. ACCESS
Brad,I wish to TALK not TYPE too much. SEE TH BELOW LINKS
Listen to THIS SHIT regarding "No INFANT can be prosecuted" . Once
the/their GUARDIANSHIP is removed one then is FREE. It's [the infancy status
- that continues until "NONAGE" (correcttion of an error, nonage is a proper
legal term in FL, in another state: possibly called emancipation) is achived]
a parent child corporation - a self-powering municipal corporation .
The solution is RULE 19 . I am still listinng to the first one. Kindly
discuss this with me upon listening to and understanding same.
The "PLEA OF INFANCY" stops all prosecution efforts, istruction how to revert
control back to "you" since you , "did not intend to give ypyour "rights" by
accepting the mere "privledge" involving The "INFANT" status that was "without
your knowledge or approval" through BAR Association trickery and deception
"legally" (but not lawfully) labeled upon you by your mother accepting and
"signing" the (infant "delivery" - into "commerce" making you (One part of you
- not the other "living" man or woman portion, a owned corporation and
"corporate" property undr a concervancy or guadianship of your other
contractual (by mother signing at "delivery") fictitious corporate daddy - the
State ) with the delivery receipt "receipt" enabling same called the "birth
certificate" where afterwards (if father fails to claim the property before e
years od - TITLE goes up for "salvage" and is purchasd by The Roman Catholic
Church, Mormon Church, etc.) THEY (through a contract with the U.S. gov. -
their "human trafficing" business associates) unless properly corrected buy
your or a parent's proper and timely "administrative" NOTICE - and request for
a "NONAGE" Claim/petition for "correction" to be achieved using RULE 19 _ OR
"POSSIBLY" ANOTHER unknown to me METHOD) otherwise THEY have total control
(plus "legal" jurisdiction) of you and ALL your "spendthrift trust" assets,
and you are left as the bankrupt surety for ALL BILLS, EXPENCES, LIABILITIS,
MALACIOUS FO-PROFIT PROSECUTION ATTEMPTS, ETC. ...when otherwise THEY should b
paying everything due (monthly, etc.) out of the Cestue que vie trust account's
(your) availabl assets. Go figure...
Can listen to everything explained yourself - do NOT let your ens legis HEAR
this inportant info.... it OWES you tens of millions of dollars for you
serving as the "receiver of srvice and process" for IT since you were about 2
weeks old. Must send the alleged Birth Certificate "owner" (of the ens legis)
a (notary Public "receiver" sent and "timely" 21 day response received) Notice
(by affidavit) to respond, and then (after their non-response based
"failure-to-respond") a bill for $50 per hour since back then for unpaid
"monthly" services and money due to you.
Another "element" that proves you are applicable to al cods, ordances, ules and
statutes is that you accepted or requested a "DRIVER LICENSE" and through that
nexus You are considered to be "Operating a State Agency" and must follow all
the same statutes etc. which are for "RESIDENTS" DEF. "EMPLOYEES" or "OFFICERS"
of the government... Threfore, must dump the (if/when actually unneeded)
proof of State Agency operation Driver License, unless you actually are a
(tuck, bus, ambulance,towtruck, limo, or other "commercial" and "for-profit"
employed as same "driver". Then things get easier, otherwise simply claim
(non-prosecutable) "infant" status for everything, stopping everything in its
tracks. Listen to brother boris explain everything...
Rumble — IAMSOMEDUDE.COM "Boris" DOCS:
http://www.lawofboris.com/files/10212021.zip
Borris TalkShoe is "Surfing with the Alien" Hosted by: Law of BorisPhone
Number: (724) 444-7444 Thurs ?timeCall ID:
82668http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=82668&cmd=tc*** ;
lawofborris.COM [sign up videos, files, private stash on Rumble-get link from
LOB FOR TELEGRAM chat AND rUMBLE
stephen570-443-7892
----- Forwarded Message -----From: Some Dude <iamsomedude2@xxxxxxxxx>To:
Stephen Schwika <motiond@xxxxxxxxxxx>Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2021, 01:15:35
PM EDTSubject: Re: Assumed Name Certificate - strategic amendment (text desired)
this is more like a "fee schedule" and I do not think it will fit on a
Minnesota dba filing. but i could be mistaken; i would just download a form and
see for yourself ...
but, i think you should watch/listen to the 10-21 and 10-27 calls on the
private stash
https://rumble.com/vo269p-zoom-meeting-10.21.2021.html
https://rumble.com/vod8fb-zoom-meeting-10.28.2021.html
On Sat, Oct 30, 2021 at 4:09 AM Stephen Schwika <motiond@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Minn. A.N.C. Name Holder : for STEPHEN JOHN SCHWIKA [[ I think the below is
about ALL I AM ABLE TO do ]]:Stephen-John: Schwika. – ATTENTION: Notice of
Liability pursuant to $250k "unauthorized" (private property) use fee for
”name use” of Minnesota (Secretary of State) certified “ASSUMED NAME” (SEE
ABOVE). For (any evidenced written or corporate) use of Name Holder’s “Private
non-corporate Business/Trad” name, any derivative - variant names, copyrighted
name(s), the use of name holder, Assumed Name Certificate’s registered
“fictitious” business entity or “other variant ” as any presumed surety, the
Name Estate for U.S. certificated “PERSON” [Name Estate] decedent (birth
certificate) TITLE holder possessing valid standing, Full Faith and Credit,
plus highest “security” interest in and FOR ALL PURPOSES OF THE OBLIGATION OF
THE “PERSON” [Name Estate] wherein, above shall not be held liable in ANY COURT
in pursuance of and reliance on 12 USC 95a Sect. 2, wherein same “PERSON” [Name
Estate] is entitled to ACQUITTANCE and DISCHARGE FOR ALL PURPOSES OF THE
OBLIGATION OF THE “PERSON” [Name Estate]. Named “PERSON” [Name Estate] shall
not be held liable in ANY COURT for or in respect to ANYTHING done or omitted
in good faith in connection with the administration of, or in pursuance of and
in reliance on, this section, or any rule, regulation[code, ordinance or
statute], instruction, or direction issued hereunder… under full and complete
INDEMNITY via. General Orders 100 section 38. The RECEIPT [Birth
Certificate] and the [Estate?] name/title on same is being used in pursuance of
and reliance on 12 USC95a Sect. 2 for discharge of any U.S. associated debt,
plus discharge of liability, in pursuance of and reliance upon same section
further evidenced by (recorded) Dual Secretary of State (Federal and State)
"authenticated" Birth Certificate with other "verified" (sworn - true and
correct) document evidence supporting the private property $250,000 "NAME USE"
fee – due within seven (7) days of verbal or other notification of (each
incidence of) unauthorized name [Name Estate - TITLE] usage.
I am unsure if ALL THE ABOVE IS PERFECTLY ACCURATE or appropriate to be used
in (my) pursuance of and reliance on 12 USC95a Sect. 2. Possibly some changes,
additional points, or EDITING - may be required.
I would appreciate a little assistance hammering this NOTICE out a little MORE
in order to optimize / and for accuratizing same... Dean do you think this
WILL ALL FIT IN THE MINN. ASSUME NAM CERTIFICATE'S "NAME HOLDR" field (form)
space available...
Any helpful feedback on this TOPIC / objective (HOPEFULLY - to be automatically
"Printed-out" ON the Minn. A.N.C. FORM) will be greatly appreciated -
Please advise,stephen570/ 443-7892 ...kindly call me
