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:
