Judicial notice: is based on fact. I use agreements we the people have.
"I motion the court to take judicial notice of the Constitution of the United
States of America, article 1, section 8, clause 17.; that the United States
government has very limited jurisdicton to land purchased. "
On Mar 17, 2021, 10:19 AM -0600, Jb <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx>, wrote:
Example of judicial notice please
On Mar 17, 2021, at 11:39 AM, Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
If one wants to limit the judge decisions. Judicial notice of a fact does
that. Judicial notice is some times accepted as everyone knows and others
are verbally put into the record as a fact. Using agreements of treaties,
and constitution binds the court to that statement. Then one can make a
motion from that fact that cannot be debated or changed.
On Mar 17, 2021, 5:50 AM -0600, veritas ghost <guyettedamien8@xxxxxxxxx>,
wrote:
theres law and legislative things may go off of when they choose, but in
reality thats not what the courts actual process is either. their courts
are to follow stare decisis and the rulings of the US supreme court, of
which if it errors no lower court may correct it. "judges" dont get to do
whatever they want or judge however they please even if they act as such,
and fraud can always be overturned or handled in 1 manner or the other
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021, 9:30 PM Charley Dan <charleydan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dice and everyone
Here is my present approach in the court presently. We all know they
use presumptions and assumptions. We are to use facts. Unbeatable
facts. Not just a statement or a fact that may be debatable. Court
cases is their judges opinion at the time legislative laws existed.
Ever changing legislative changing laws.
Affadavits unrebutted are truth. That is only true if on the surface
it appears as truth. Make sure your affadavit is reasonable, logical
and appears true. That affadavit can be challenged at anytime by
opposing party.
Better then affadavits is what I call as contract or agreements in
law. Article 1, section 8, clause 17 is a fact. So motion the court
to take judicial notice of that article and stating your a national
and not an United States citizen. That is now fact in the court and
can not be challenged. It may be initially but has no standing unless
you twisted the interpretation. Judge/magistrate prosecutor (whatever
as the name means nothing) may
try to debate it. That is why little and browns edition of law and
treaties is important because it states anything in that book is not
debatable in all courts. So darn solid they made a code on it.
So one addresses every point with the constitution/agreement and
treaties. These are facts. That one needs to motion into the record
by judicial notice. Judicial notice is a fact established and not
opened for debate. Then one can motion from there. If they do not
have jurisdicton by the fact that the constitution agreement states
otherwise. Motion to vacate the case for lack of authority by
judicial notice of Article 1, section 8, clause 17. Denied? appeal
and probably could file a judicial ? on the judge. I'm not familiar
with that process and someone else will have to instruct.
One cannot mix jurisdictions.
On Mar 15, 2021, 6:56 PM -0600, victor swope <vmswope@xxxxxxxxx>,
wrote:
You go after the man acting in capacity of the public servant,
notice of claim, trespass! Register mail him an affidavit he cant
rebutt and he's a witness against himself.
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021, 10:38 AM NELSON DICE <nelsondice@xxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thanks Charley, very clear explanation of how to delineate.
Q. Does Positive Law apply to U.S. citizens, citizens of the
United States, and also public officers and employees? IF so,
how would a man proceed agiasnt a pubic servant successfully,
washout access to a common law court?
Or can a man call open a common law court in a defact state?
From: Charley Dan
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2021 10:23 AM
To: administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re: Interesting
notations of USC Titles that are marked positive law
Positive law is still their law. A common law court has no
written law. Or is not common law. It is written on your heart
unless your conscience is seared and why it takes a jury then.
On Mar 15, 2021, 6:57 AM -0600, NELSON DICE
<nelsondice@xxxxxxxx>, wrote:
quote_typehttps://photos.app.goo.gl/ry42QQbvpJ89D2hA8
The Title for Congress is NOT Positive Law....seems to fit ...
Get Outlook for Android
<>
From:
administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> on
behalf of J_B <tf4624@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2021 8:00:21 PM
To: administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<administrating-your-public-servants@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [administrating-your-public-servants] Re:
Interesting notations of USC Titles that are marked positive
law
the stars asterisks represent Positive law
On Sun, Mar 14, 2021 at 7:54 PM NELSON DICE
<nelsondice@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
