In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

[Unregistered]

I live in the United States. I have noticed that every government document with my name on it misspells my name by printing it in all capital letters. According to every English grammar and style guide I've seen, proper nouns such as people's names are not to be spelled in all capital letters. In fact, names spelled in all capital letters are considered to be acronyms.

My understanding is that in order to be valid, a legal filing must name all parties precisely and unambiguously. Every last letter and piece of punctuation is critical (has "deadly force.") Since my name as it appears in the government's records is not really my name, but rather a legal fiction, how can a court claim jurisdiction over my actual person? It's not within my power to appear as a fictitious character, and the law cannot command an impossibility. In the absence of having a person to answer for the crime, would a court be forced to dismiss?

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

You could certainly try to go in and argue that, but you will likely lose in front of most judges unfortunately; many court docs just caption it as such and it has become accepted.

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

Well as I understand it, jurisdiction ("juris diction") means the swearing of an oath, or an agreement by one party to subject himself to the laws of another party. United States courts claim jurisdiction over US citizens due to the fact that many US citizens do certain things, like make use of the government's Social Security numbers, and voluntarily file tax returns. Being born in the United States, as I understand it, entitles me to US citizenship but does not obligate me to accept that status.

Unfortunately, my parents applied for a Social Security number for me when I was born. However, I myself did not enter into any contracts knowingly, willingly, and intentionally with the US government where I accepted the status of US citizenship and the jurisdiction that implies. Should I notice the court that I reserve my rights under UCC 1-207 not to be forced to perform under the terms of a contract that I did not enter into knowingly, willingly, and intentionally? How would I do that? And what do you think would happen if I disclaimed US citizenship in that way?

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

What is the underlying issue; what do you want to do?

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

I want to make it impossible for a US court to bring charges against my flesh-and-blood person. They may be able to bring charges against an artificial ink-and-paper identity, an identity that the government created for its record-keeping purposes and which therefore belongs to them. But what I want, as a flesh-and-blood person, is to not be required to assume that created identity. If no human being steps forward and agrees (either by oath or by acquiescence) to assume that identity and its alleged liabilities, then what need is there for anyone to defend himself/herself against those liabilities in court?

What I want to know is how to make sure the court understands that I am a flesh-and-blood person with no ability to appear before them as the artificial identity that is the only entity they can legally try for guilt.

As far as I can see, a legal identity is nothing more than a pile of paperwork bearing a name that appears to belong to a human being (but doesn't, unless that person accepts it as his/her own.) I don't want to be put in a position where I'm stuck defending myself in court against crimes that the state alleges were committed by a pile of paperwork.

I think the burden of proof is on the people to show how a pile of paperwork is able to commit a crime at all. If, as I suspect, a pile of paperwork cannot commit a crime, then they should have to show how a human being (hypothetically myself) that might be called to appear before the court is in any way equivalent to that pile of paperwork. Since the charges are brought against the pile of paperwork, what makes them think that I'm obligated to, or even able to, answer for them?

I want to make sure they understand that since I am a flesh-and-blood human being, and not a pile of paperwork with an unrecognized acronym printed on it, there is no legal way for them to claim jurisdiction over me.

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

i hope they answer this but they might not - if people knew it was this easy to stay out of jail then no one would pay crazy money for a defense lawyer and an entire profession would be out of work...

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

acdd

I live in the United States. I have noticed that every government document with my name on it misspells my name by printing it in all capital letters. According to every English grammar and style guide I've seen, proper nouns such as people's names are not to be spelled in all capital letters. In fact, names spelled in all capital letters are considered to be acronyms.

My understanding is that in order to be valid, a legal filing must name all parties precisely and unambiguously. Every last letter and piece of punctuation is critical (has "deadly force.") Since my name as it appears in the government's records is not really my name, but rather a legal fiction, how can a court claim jurisdiction over my actual person? It's not within my power to appear as a fictitious character, and the law cannot command an impossibility. In the absence of having a person to answer for the crime, would a court be forced to dismiss?

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

i m an american, i was born here & when 2 public (government) school so i m not that bright (the way they like it) don`t get me wrong. i love my (your) country, but not our government. with is very sad. i can`t belive (or spell) that we were not tought this in school. think about it! would you every sign anything without reading it first? (of corse u would & have) but everytime u did at least u had a chance to read it. you wouldn`t sign a blank check. well i hope you fell really smart now (public school worked)! everything u sign for the man u never had a chance to read. we all ***** about taxes ticket insurance etc. but we were told (intimated) into signing invisible contracts with the man. i will give anyone (us public school attendee) 1million dollhairs if they can resight 2 of your (our) rights. the moral of the story is they don`t want u to no your rights so u don`t LEARN THEM NOONE CAN TAKE THEM AWAY YOU (WE) CAN ONLY GIVE THEM AWAY!!!! if u don`t do it 4 u do it 4 the millions of men (&women) that died 4 them p.s IT STARTS WITH 1 PERSON REMEMBER ROSA PARKS IS A CRIMINAL BURIED IN ARLINGTON. GOD BLESS (whatever god u worship)

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

I have been reading a lot on this subject recently. A lot makes sense, there is a lot of evidence to support the claim we have been hoodwinked. Unfortunately there are people attempting to get rich charging people for info on how to do 'Commercial Redemption' (basicly reclaiming the your security the government is holding onto, and reaping rewards/dividends from such securities they have floated on the stock market). This idea of Commercial Redemption makes no sense, you are affectively asking the rapist to stop raping you! duh, he wouldn't be raping you if he was compassionate or caring enough to worry about your feelings!
I believe there is a simple way, though like most other people, I've got a lot to lose if this is tried and backfires (married with 3 kids under 6, self employed and havn't had a holiday in 9 years, worked from 16, and never claimed unemployment benefits). But, theoretically, I believe an affidavid, or a notice of understanding, intent and claim of right, are all accepted means of process outside the nonsense that is this statute happy looney toon government( UK AND US) , which I believe are companies/corporations. When you want to leave a job (like a grown up) you hand in your notice. A notice of U, I and R: "I believe I have been unknowingly been incorporated into a society, and have unknowingly given my consent to be governed, Therefore be it now known to any and all concerned and affected parties, that I,........an Individual/Freeman do hereby state clearly and unequivoclly my intent to peacefully and lawfully exist free of all statutory obligations restrictions and maintain all rights at law to trade, exchange or barter. and so on thinkfree.ca do a much better job at it , take a look. must go, best of luck, be careful.

[knowing]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

right ok the way it works is the legalese language thats being used if you can get to a library check out blacks law 1st 2nd editions look for the definitions PERSON,defacto,dejure depending on your countrys status regarding which law it acts on is it an admiralty court or a common law court?if your interested in all this freeman on the land thing and being able actually become a freeman rather then a slave on which the government trades your NAME and then robs your tax from you afterwards for the pleasure of you working for them then firstly check tpuc.org its about trying to free you from slavery and taking control of your own life rather then being governed

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

how to arrest a christian and how to be exempt to the courts. that is over with

I want to make it impossible for a US court to bring charges against my flesh-and-blood person. They may be able to bring charges against an artificial ink-and-paper identity, an identity that the government created for its record-keeping purposes and which therefore belongs to them. But what I want, as a flesh-and-blood person, is to not be required to assume that created identity. If no human being steps forward and agrees (either by oath or by acquiescence) to assume that identity and its alleged liabilities, then what need is there for anyone to defend himself/herself against those liabilities in court?

What I want to know is how to make sure the court understands that I am a flesh-and-blood person with no ability to appear before them as the artificial identity that is the only entity they can legally try for guilt.

As far as I can see, a legal identity is nothing more than a pile of paperwork bearing a name that appears to belong to a human being (but doesn't, unless that person accepts it as his/her own.) I don't want to be put in a position where I'm stuck defending myself in court against crimes that the state alleges were committed by a pile of paperwork.

I think the burden of proof is on the people to show how a pile of paperwork is able to commit a crime at all. If, as I suspect, a pile of paperwork cannot commit a crime, then they should have to show how a human being (hypothetically myself) that might be called to appear before the court is in any way equivalent to that pile of paperwork. Since the charges are brought against the pile of paperwork, what makes them think that I'm obligated to, or even able to, answer for them?

I want to make sure they understand that since I am a flesh-and-blood human being, and not a pile of paperwork with an unrecognized acronym printed on it, there is no legal way for them to claim jurisdiction over me.

there is a lot of talk about it. politically christians/ parties that claim in a procudural correct way not to be an all captals name can be exampt from the state. this is purely political however since we becamer a christian state. so thereis a way for the judge to arrest christians that want to be exempt from the state by means of a mistake in identiti/separation from the evil cursingsymbol named the nothing ( the all capitals) that goes as follows:

the judge askes if they are a 'man on the land'and the christian must admit that for a christian cannot claim land in accordance to the gods aboriginal law
then the christian name of the land is asked or proven. the christian capital of the name of the
christian belonges to his identitie for he belongs to the land under authority of the state.
this then belongs to his living place as an adres would do and also to his identitie for man belongs to the land and in god law is land even though you can misuse gods laws in order to capitalize the name of the land. you can then add his first christian name capital to the landname and he can then be called a two letter capital person and thus an all capitals name can be given to him. ( who what will the christians be angry with me when this happens their sovreign lord to pieces ;-) ) so he can be centanced and arrested as all of us that lie.

greetings to the slaves of christ the STATESMAN!

thereis a way out and they know that. do not lie to god and do not be his slave he does not like that!

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

how to arrest a christian and how to be exempt to the courts. that is over with



there is a lot of talk about it. politically christians/ parties that claim in a procudural correct way not to be an all captals name can be exampt from the state. this is purely political however since we becamer a christian state. so thereis a way for the judge to arrest christians that want to be exempt from the state by means of a mistake in identiti/separation from the evil cursingsymbol named the nothing ( the all capitals) that goes as follows:

the judge askes if they are a 'man on the land'and the christian must admit that for a christian cannot claim land in accordance to the gods aboriginal law
then the christian name of the land is asked or proven. the christian capital of the name of the
christian belonges to his identitie for he belongs to the land under authority of the state.
this then belongs to his living place as an adres would do and also to his identitie for man belongs to the land and in god law is land even though you can misuse gods laws in order to capitalize the name of the land. you can then add his first christian name capital to the landname and he can then be called a two letter capital person and thus an all capitals name can be given to him. ( who what will the christians be angry with me when this happens their sovreign lord to pieces ;-) ) so he can be centanced and arrested as all of us that lie.

greetings to the slaves of christ the STATESMAN!

oh yes and if they start writing their names in underscore then you, judge are in a difficult case. it can be that they are for real and you must let them go.... and if they are n ot real and what is the difference.....
they are not real if they can not say they are a true aboriginal that is what is is in short.
white christians cannot be responcable aboriginals even not in europe. this means they cannot be respocable for the land for their identitie is enfringes in sovreignty. in general people who claim sovreingty or to have a sovreign god to whom they are aleiges to or a dead sovreign person like jezus' now know finally to be dead' or to whom they are slaves of must be in case of writing their names in underscore classified as lying kranks for they do not uphold and portray their law truthfully. they do not show whom they realy are. there more to it but i am not telling. they must 'show couse'and have permission to be a man 'in' the land from a true aboriginal.
thereis a way out and they know that. do not lie to god and do not be his slave he does not like that!

aboriginals go for it!

[pete8888]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

i have found evasion of joinder to the legal fiction works outside of courts however if you appear in an admiralty court that requests your strawman's presence by appearing you have already entered in dishonor of the court. that you have exhausted all administrative remedies and have hired the judge to perform conversion and remedy for you on the claim. unless within the court you invoke the judges oath of office so the judge is really a public judge and under oath and melchizedek priesthood; then you would be in private law calling a gentleman a liar. but "Gentleman do not lie" even if they are lying. in an admiralty court we are all guilty to the facts of the case -- something to consider.

Police officers however have issues doing paperwork that lack the strawman's information. if they create a claim they need joinder so they are not in dishonor. they best solution to evade joinder is to not have a physical address that anyone knows of. inform everyone you know to remain silent rather than give away joinder-by-proxy which is enough to enforce policy. but the formula remains simple: no person, no address = no joinder.

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

It doesn't matter how they spell your name or how it is capitalized or punctuated. First off, that isn't a "misspelling" it's just an alternative style. Second off, the law doesn't trouble itself with technicalities - it is concerned with justice.

There is no magical legal argument or loophole that will allow you to avoid the law. Don't waste your time stressed out about it.

[Unregistered]

Re: In United States - Legal Straw Man Leads to Dismissal?

This is the most ridiculous idea I've ever heard. You're not subject to US jurisdiction because of a contract, you're subject to US jurisdiction because you're a US citizen. It's in the constitution, dumbass.

You want to give up your citizenship? Then leave, and swear allegiance to a different country. But if you're going to stay here, and take advantage of the rights and benefits of being a resident - including driving on the roads, getting mail, using your government-regulated internet, etc., you're subject to the obligations of it. Like having to go to court and answer for whatever dumb **** you did that made you ask this question in the first place.