Friday, October 31, 2014

October 2014 Ponzi Scheme Roundup

Posted by Kathy Bazoian Phelps

    Below is a summary of the activity reported for October 2014. The reported stories reflect: 8 guilty pleas or convictions in pending cases; over 158 years of newly imposed sentences for people involved in Ponzi schemes; at least 10 newly discovered schemes involving more $500 million in the aggregate; and an average age of approximately 55 for the alleged Ponzi schemers. Please feel free to post comments about these or other Ponzi schemes that I may have missed. And please remember that I am just relaying what’s in the news, not writing or verifying it.

    Ron Battistella was sentenced to 5 years in prison in connection with a Ponzi scheme that he ran through a car dealership known as Steven’s Creek Auto Mall. Funds from investors were solicited to supposedly purchase vehicles for the showroom, and investors received pink slips for the vehicles as collateral for their investments. The scheme involved more than $1.3 million.

    David Boden, 53, an attorney who worked at Scott Rothstein’s law firm, Rothstein, Rosenfeldt Adler, pleaded guilty to charges in connection with that scheme. Boden admitted that he worked with a broker, Richard L. Pearson, on some of the fictitious settlements that Rothstein was selling to investors and that the broker made false statements to one group of investors that lost about $2.4 million. Both Boden and Pearson received commissions on these sales. Pearson has also pleaded guilty to charges relating to his role as a broker in connection with the Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme. Boden was named in a $37.8 million lawsuit filed by Rothstein investors and filed a personal Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition in 2012.

    Marie Maksche Bontiago, 43, was accused of running a $2 million Ponzi scheme through her franchise of EXIT Realty, Tri-State Group, and Tri-State Investment Holdings, Inc. Bontiago solicited funds for investments in real estate but instead used the money for business expenses. Bontiago promised investors interest of 10% to 40%.

    John C. Boschert, 43, pleaded guilty to charges that he ran a Ponzi scheme under the name Assured Capital Consultants. Boschert, along with Jennifer E. Hoffman and Bryan Zuzga, were accused of running the scheme that defrauded about 100 victims.

    John Bravata, 46, has asked to appeal the $8.2 million judgment obtained against him by the SEC. Bravata had been accused of collecting $53 million from more than 500 investors in a real estate investment scheme. Bravata is serving 20 years in prison and was ordered to pay $44.5 million in criminal restitution. His son, Antonio Bravata, was sentenced to 5 years in prison, and the company’s CEO, Richard Trabulsy, was sentenced to 45 months in prison in connection with the scheme.

    Paul Burks, 67, was indicted in connection with charges that he masterminded the $850 million ZeekRewards Ponzi scheme. The indictment alleges that Burks diverted more than $10 million to himself. Burks is the third person charged in connection with the scheme. Dawn Wright Olivares and Daniel Olivares pleaded guilty and are awaiting sentencing.

    Brian Caisse, 54, was sentenced to 1½ to 4½ years in prison in connection with a $1 million Ponzi scheme run through Huxley Capital Management. Caisse, who had fled to Colombia after police searched his apartment in 2013, pleaded guilty in August. Caisse had graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1985 and the academy's Nuclear Power School in 1986. He later served as weapons officer on the nuclear submarine, USS John Marshall.

    Angela Dawn Campbell, 42, pleaded guilty to operating a Ponzi scheme in which she took $1.6 million from 27 people. Campbell guaranteed investors that they could double or triple their savings in the stock market through her day-trading business.

    Francis Cinelli Sr., 88, was charged with helping his son, Francis Cinelli Jr., file a false federal tax return. The father and son have also been sued in connection with an alleged Ponzi scheme run through Blue Mountain Consumer Discount. Victims allege in the suit that Walter “Buddy” Lambert, the company’s former CEO, defrauded them out of about $5 million and that the Cinellis either knew or should have known. Lambert pleaded guilty last month and Nicholas Sabatine pleaded guilty to related charges as well.

    James Ronald Donahoo II, 36, was sentenced to 4 years in prison and ordered to pay $2.7 million in restitution following his guilty plea in his Ponzi scheme case. Donahoo was known as “The Bamboo Cyclist” and sought funds to supposedly benefit storm-ravaged communities. Donahoo ran his scheme through Paradigm Investing, Inc. and promised monthly returns of 1% to 3%.

    EmGoldex MLM program was charged by the Massachusetts Securities Division with securities fraud in connection with a scheme that promised guaranteed returns of up to 1,105% for recruiting more individuals. Others named in the action are EmGoldEx Team USA Inc., Matthew Michael D’Agati, Joseph Zingales, James Vincent Piemonte, and Jonathan Herman Seigler. The Massachusetts entity was a recruiting arm for EMGX FS Ltd. EmGoldex raised about $500,000 from hundreds of investors.

    Armand Franquelin, 57, was sentenced to 57 months in prison and ordered to pay $5,560,000 in restitution in connection with a Ponzi scheme in which investors were promised 8% to 20% returns for investments in a real estate project called Haven Estates. Franquelin worked with Martin Pool who was previously sentenced to 78 months in prison.

    Edwin Fujinaga and MRI International Inc. were found liable for operating an $800 million Ponzi scheme. Fujinaga had operated a fraudulent investment scheme, promising mostly Japanese investors that their investment was guaranteed. The scheme defrauded more than 8,000 people.

    Ian Campbell Gent had his 8 year prison sentence vacated. Gent had been sentenced in connection with a $6 million Ponzi scheme run through Watermark Financial Services Group Inc. and M-One Financial Services LLC. The Second Circuit rejected James Lagona’s appeal that the sentence was procedurally and substantively unreasonable and upheld his 11 year sentence.

    Barry J. Graham, 59, was charged in connection with the Cay Clubs Resort and Marinas $300 million scheme. Graham is the third officer to be charged in connection with the program that stated that investors could “Retire Rich and Young in Paradise.” Cay Clubs founder Fred Davis Clark, 56, and his wife, Cristal Coleman Clark, 41, were previously charged in connection with the scheme that is believed to have defrauded 1,400 investors.


    Susanne Helbig, 50, pleaded guilty to charges relating to a Ponzi scheme that she ran through her construction company, Genesis Mansions. Helbig borrowed more than $17 million from financial institutions based on falsified loan applications.

    Charles Huggins, 68, was convicted on charges relating to a Ponzi scheme in which he solicited millions of dollars from investors and promised high returns from mining in Sierra Leone and Liberia. Huggins ran his scheme through his companies JYork Industries Inc. and Urogo Inc. The scheme raised more than $4 million from investors, but the funds were not used for mining in Africa. Instead, Huggins spent the money on personal expenditures including $7,200 monthly rent for an apartment and Mercedes car payments. Christopher Butchko and Ann Thomas were named as co-conspirators.

    IFreeX is the subject of an announcement in Massachusetts that the company is a fraudulent scheme like TelexFree but for mobile phones. The scheme is being promoted by Sanderley de Vasconcelos aka Sann Rodrigues, who was formerly a TelexFree promoter. The scheme targeted investors in Brazilian and other minority communities.

    Kevin James, 57, was sentenced to 10 years in prison and ordered to pay $1.3 million in restitution in connection with a $1.4 million Ponzi scheme. James defrauded victims into investment annuities into a fictitious fund called the Financial Security Program.

    Thomas Kimmel, 68, was sentenced to 22 years in prison and ordered to pay $16.5 million in restitution in connection with his Ponzi scheme that defrauded more than 300 investors out of at about $16 million. Kimmel held himself out as a financial adviser in the name of Jesus Christ and built a reputation on kindness and by hosting conferences such as “God’s Plan for His Money” conferences. He used his companies Sure Line Acceptance Corp. and Faithful Stewards to lure in investors, promising some of them returns of 1% per month. Three other officers of the company, James Willis Kirk Jr., Glen E. Smith Jr., and Carol April Graff, pleaded guilty earlier in the year and each received up to 5 years in prison.

    Robert E. Lee Jr., 50, was indicted for allegedly operating a Ponzi scheme. Lee was employed as a broker and financial advisor for various financial investment firms and defrauded clients by claiming that he was investing their funds when he was instead holding their funds in his personal bank account.

    Kevin Loux, 63, pleaded guilty to charges that he ran a Ponzi scheme that netted more than $450,000. Loux was a licensed life insurance and annuity broker in Hawaii and California and failed to invest money that he took from his clients.

    Bernard Madoff offered to put in a good word for five of his former employees who have been convicted and are awaiting sentencing on charges relating to the Madoff Ponzi scheme. The employees are Joann Crupi, George Perez, Jerome O’Hara, Annette Bongiorno, and Daniel Bonventre. Madoff sent a series of emails to the lawyers for the ex-Madoff employees offering to discredit the testimony of Frank DiPascali, the government’s star witness, who was also convicted in connection with the scheme.


    Sean F. Mescall, 35, was sentenced to 16 years in prison in connection with a Ponzi scheme that he ran through Capitalstreet Financial. The scheme defrauded 119 victims and promised them 60% to 80% returns on their investments.

    Frank Mete, 57, was sentenced to 41 months in prison for running a $1.2 million Ponzi scheme, and has also previously been charged with robbing and raping a prostitute while impersonating an officer.

    Roger Miller, 62, was sentenced to 20 years in prison in connection with a Ponzi scheme that defrauded more than 40 victims. Miller sought investments for a pre-construction condo project in Thailand.

    Nationwide Automated Systems, Inc. had its assets frozen after the SEC filed civil charges against the company and its principals, Joel Barry Gillis and Edward Wishner. The court also approved the appointment of a temporary receiver. The alleged Ponzi scheme involved phantom ATM machines and it is believed that the scheme involved $123 million and a few thousand investors. The SEC complaint states that the company records show that it was leasing back more than 31,000 ATMs, but the ATM servicers show that only 253 ATMS were being serviced. A website has been established at
http://www.nasi-nationwideatm.com/. An involuntary bankruptcy petition was also filed against the company but was then dismissed by stipulation between the receiver and the debtor.

    James Nicholson, 48, had his request to shorten his 40 year prison sentence turned down. Nicholson is serving time for running a $140 million Ponzi scheme.

    Luis Felipe Perez, 42, had his 10 year sentence cut in half for assisting in the prosecution of former Hialeah Mayor Julio Robaina. Perez had been convicted in connection with a $40 million jewelry investment scheme. Robaina and his wife were acquitted on tax evasion charges.

    David Prenatt rejected a plea deal to which he had previously agreed, admitting that he had engaged in a fraudulent securities scheme that involved about $13 million. Prenatt now states that he received “ineffective assistance of counsel.” Prenatt was then sentenced to 10 years in prison.

    Aubrey Lee Price, 48, was sentenced to 30 years in prison and ordered to forfeit $51 million in connection with a $46 million Ponzi scheme. Price ran his scheme through PFG, LLC and Montgomery Asset Management LLC fka PFG Asset Management LLC. Price used investor funds to acquire Montgomery Bank & Trust and transferred at least $10 million from the bank.

    Stuart Rosenfeldt, 59, was sentenced to nearly 3 years in prison after pleading guilty to charges for conspiracy that included campaign finance violations. Rosenfeldt had previously pleaded guilty in connection with charges stemming from conduct relating to the Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme, although it was never alleged that Rosenfeldt was aware of or involved in the Ponzi scheme itself.

    Vincent Singh 
was sentenced to 15 years and 8 months in prison following a guilty plea in connection with a scheme that defrauded hundreds of victims. In sentencing Singh, the court said that Singh’s crimes were “the worst of their kind that I’ve seen in 12 years as a federal judge.”

    Frank Spinosa, 53, was charged with criminal conduct in his role as a former TD Bank officer in the Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme case. Spinosa is accused of preparing false “lock letters” to give to investors to show that their investments were safe, among other things. The SEC also filed civil charges against Spinosa last year alleging that Spinosa made oral assurances to at least two investors that their money was held in trust accounts holding hundreds of millions of dollars when in reality those accounts held less than $100.

    R. Allen Stanford filed a 299-page appeal to try to reduce or reverse his 110 year sentence.  Stanford argues, among other things, that the U.S. lacked jurisdiction to bring charges against him because his bank, Stanford International Bank, was located in Antigua.

    James Staz and William Staz were charged on allegations that they stole $11 million from clients in a scheme run through Employee-Services.Net, Inc. The company supposedly processed payroll for companies, but the father and son kept the money for themselves.

    Joel Wilson, 32, will stand trial for charges arising from an alleged Ponzi scheme run in Michigan through the company, Diversified Group Advisory Fund LLC. Wilson was extradited from Germany after he was in Europe for over a year. It is alleged that he kept about $600,000 of investors funds after promising them returns supposedly generated from refurbishing and flipping distressed homes for a profit.

    Ron Wilson, 67, pleaded guilty to another charge relating to his $57 million Ponzi scheme run through Atlantic Bullion and Coin that defrauded about 800 victims. Wilson is currently serving a 19 year prison term after pleading guilty to other charges relating to the scheme. Wilson has not, however, pleaded guilty to conspiring to hide money from the federal government when it was alleged that he gave his wife and brother money after his initial arrest; they have been indicted for conspiring to obstruct justice.

    Carl David Wright, 54, was sentenced to 4 years in prison and ordered to pay $817,975 in restitution in connection with a scheme that defrauded victims out of more than $1 million. Wright promised investors returns of 20% to 30%, telling investors that he was putting the money into hedge funds, commodities, and Quick Trip service stores.

    Dennis Wright, 68, was accused by the SEC of running a $1.5 million Ponzi scheme through his company, Axa Advisors. Wright allegedly defrauded 28 customers by persuading them to withdraw funds from Axa variable annuity accounts to transfer to mutual funds with higher interest rates. Instead, Wright deposited the funds into his personal account to pay his expenses.

    Bryan Zuzga was arrested in connection with an alleged $25 million Ponzi scheme that defrauded 100 victims. The scheme was run through Assured Capital Consultants along with Jennifer E. Hoffman and John C. Boschert.

INTERNATIONAL PONZI SCHEME NEWS

Brazil

    Additional raids took place in Brazil to seize assets related to the TelexFree Ponzi scheme. Telexfree is known as Ympactus in Brazil

Canada

    Garth Bailey, 61, was sentenced to 9 years in prison for his role in assisting two others to run a Ponzi scheme by acting as their lawyer. Bailey participated in the scheme run by Robert Fyn and Harold Murray Stark through HMS Financial, which promised investors that their money was safe because it was backed by up to $40 million in bonds. Fyn and Stark had pleaded guilty and were sentenced to 8 and 6 year terms, respectively.

     Banners Broker and its masterminds, Christopher George Smith and Rajiv Dixit, were the subject of accusations that Banners Broker is a Ponzi scheme and an asset freeze. It was alleged that they were operating a pyramid scheme with 12,000 investors that evolved into a Ponzi scheme.


England

    Patrick Coppeard, 49, was sentenced to 6 years in connection with a £5.3 million Ponzi scheme that defrauded 61 victims.


Finland

    Finland’s Supreme Court ruled that 5 investors in the WinCapital Investment scheme must forfeit the proceeds that they earned from the scheme. The court ruled that financial gain from criminal activity must be forfeited not only by the criminals, but also by those who benefited from the criminal activity. The WinCapital scheme had raised more than 100 million euros from over 10,000 investors.

India

    The director of Green Ray International, Avub Shah, was arrested in connection with a scheme that is believed to have defrauded over Rs crore from about 1.5 lakh investors. Other insiders, Mir Sairuddin aka Gora and Abdul Khaliq have also been ordered to appear before the Security Exchange Board of India in connection with the matter.

Ireland

    Breifne O’Brien, 53, was sentenced to 7 years in jail in connection with a $10.8 million Ponzi scheme that involved fake shipping and insurance businesses.

Malaysia

    Manuel Amalilio aka Mohammad Kamal Said, the mastermind of a P12 billion Ponzi scheme run through Aman Futures Group Philippines Inc. in the Philippines, was freed after a Malaysian court declined to extradite Amalilio to the Philippines.

New Zealand

    John David Milne, 79, admitted to running a $2.8 million Ponzi scheme in which he defrauded 29 clients. Milne was a lawyer who had promised to invest his clients’ funds and pay them a return.

South Africa

    Prinasen Dhaver, 29, was accused of running a Ponzi scheme through his profit sharing company, Innovatech International Solutions.

South Korea

    Two men with surnames Kwon, 39, and Lee, 38, were arrested on charges that they defrauded 614 people of $6.4 million in connection with a scheme relating to the 2018 Winter Olympics. They promised investors high returns for investing in a land lot near the skating and hockey venue for the Olympics.

Thailand

    Song Migui aka Zhang Jiam, 37, a Chinese man, was arrested in Bangkok on charges that he engaged in a $277 million scheme. Geng Lian Bao and Wang Wen Fang were also arrested in connection with the scheme.

    Chong Mee Chew aka Supachai Rujathorn, Keng Lean Pao aka Surin Sophonsukson, and Wang Wen Fan were arrested in connection with a scheme run through Yun Shu Mao Co. Before the group arrived in Thailand, they allegedly defrauded Chinese people of 1.3 billion Yuan, and thereafter persuaded another 80,000 in Malaysia to invest.
 
NEWSWORTHY LEGAL ISSUES IN PENDING PONZI SCHEME CASES

    Skye Bonow filed lawsuits against Bitcoin Savings & Trust and Project Investors Inc. dba Cryptsy for the handing of his Bitcoin accounts at those companies. Cryptsy is the subject of allegations that it violated Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act by failing to provide critical information regarding security risks and customer fund management protocols and that the plaintiff was deceived into transferring Bitcoin to the defendants.

    A settlement was reached in the Dreier LLP bankruptcy case for Westford Asset Management LLC to pay $32.2 million to settle claims that it received $137 million of Ponzi scheme proceeds. Marc Dreier is currently serving his prison sentence and will now not need to be called to court testify in connection with the matter. Dreier had been ordered to testify in person in connection with the proceeding, and Dreier had asked to appear by telephone or video, but the court had denied his request.

    The Madoff Victim Fund being run by Richard Breeden as special master reported that 63,553 claims have been asserted against the Fund in connection with the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme. The Fund further reported that the losses reported in those claims total $76.654 billion. However, those numbers have not yet been fully reviewed for duplicative, ineligible or overstated claims.

    Edward Blumenfeld, a real estate developer who invested with Madoff, settled with the Trustee and agreed to pay back $32.75 million and to surrender $29.35 million in claims.

    The Eleventh Circuit found that former officers of Quest Energy Management Group Inc. did not have standing to appeal a decision that gave the receiver of Arthur Nadel authority over the company. Nadel, now deceased, was sentenced to 14 years in prison in 2010 in connection with his Ponzi scheme. Nadel invested $5.1 million of his victim’s money in Quest Energy.

    The Backstreet Boys settled their claims against their creator, Lou Pearlman. The trustee in Pearlman’s bankruptcy case settled the Backstreet Boys’ claims for $3.5 million by agreeing to pay them $99,000 and giving them possession of recordings of their music.

    Two hedge funds that invested in the Thomas Petters scheme – the Westford and Epsilon funds - have agreed to a settlement that finds them liable for $322 million received as false profits. The settlement is subject to court approval, and the trustee is permitted to withdraw from the settlement if there are material changes in the financial condition of the defendants. The trustee had sought recovery of as much as $3.2 billion, which was the total amount of funds transferred between the funds and Petters.

    George Levin, an investment manager in the Banyon 1030-32 LLC, a feeder fund in the Scott Rothstein Ponzi scheme, agreed to settle claims against it on the eve of trial. Levin has entered into a tentative settlement with the SEC in connection with charges that Levin, along with investment manager Frank Preve, raised $157 million from 173 investors by selling the fictitious Rothstein settlements.

    Chadbourne & Park LLP filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Stanford Financial’s receiver in which the receiver alleged that the firm aided and abetted the Ponzi scheme through its representation of Stanford.

    The Allen Stanford receiver was permitted to proceed with his fraudulent transfer lawsuit seeking to recover $500,000 from the Tiger Woods Foundation. The court denied the charity’s motion seeking to dismiss the complaint on statute of limitations grounds. The court found that the receiver should be afforded more time under the discovery rule, which gives the receiver an extra year to sue after he discovers or could have discovered the transfer. The court stated that it was “perfectly reasonable to surmise that the generally complex and obfuscated nature of the Stanford financial records made these particular transfers difficult to discover.”

    Mary Margaret Butler, wife of accused Ponzi schemer Steven Wessel, 56, filed a lawsuit against Wessel alleging that he defrauded her out of her money and property she had acquired before marriage. Wessel’s criminal indictment states that Wessel used his company, Steeplechase USA, LLC, to defraud victims.

    The Zeek Rewards receiver mailed checks to more than 90,000 claimants that equal about 40% of the allowed claims. The first interim distribution totals about $134.2 million. A law firm representing victims who filed claims, Patrick Miller LLC, filed a Notice of Attorney’s Charging Liens asserting a lien in the amount of about $134,000 for fees it says is owed to the firm as a contingency fee for assisting the claimants in filing their claims. The receiver is also hearing complaints that he should not have withheld taxes from the payments. The receiver’s website states that “For those claimants to whom checks were mailed that did not provide an IRS Form W-9 (for US residents) as requested on the claims portal, we withheld a certain percentage for tax purposes. For non-US claimants, a percentage was withheld whether or not an IRS Form W-9 was provided." The receiver could not get a definitive opinion from the IRS about whether withholdings were required so he aired on the side of caution and made the withholding.

Thursday, October 30, 2014

Americans' civil status 12-12-15






U.S. Law is Private Merchant Law, leaving the people as Surety and
Debtor on the national bankruptcy.

Law is contract, universally and in the U.S., so we must follow the progression of contractual agreements, which constitute the underlying U.S. Law. We cannot address all individual laws and cases for it would take lifetimes to review them all—even though ignorance is no excuse
of the millions of laws, statutes, codes, etc.—in Private Admiralty Jurisdictions.

In basically chronological order, the following progression of contracts, and our interpretation of them, follows:

The USA, a corporation of the English Crown, is bankrupt, and has been since at least 1788. The Articles of Confederation states in Article 12: "All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed as considered a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged."

The "Founding Fathers," as constitutors, acknowledged and reorganized the debt in the U.S. Constitution 1787, Article VI, hence "constitution." Bankruptcy occurred on January 1, 1788 based on 21 loans that the United States of America received from the King of
England dating from February 28, 1778, through July 5, 1782, the repayment of which had been ratified by Congress on January 22, 1783.  The United States Bank, created in 1791, was a private bank, with 18,000 of 25,000 shares owned by England.

No de jure, constitutional Congress has existed since March 27, 1861, when seven (7) Southern States walked out of Congress leaving Congress without a quorum for adjourning and therefore ending sine die. That which is called "Congress" today assembles and acts under the authority of the President acting in capacity of being Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces, under emergency war-powers rule, i.e. "law of necessity," i.e. no law (see 12 Stat 319, which has never been repealed and exists in Title 50 USC §§ 212, 213, 215, Appendix 16, 26 CFR Chapter 1 § 303.1-6(a), and 31 CFR Chapter 5 § 500.701 Penalties).

Since the above-referenced date, March 27, 1861, Americans have been under Fascist rule via presidential executive order under the aforementioned Emergency War Powers, 12 USC 95 a, b. Every "citizen of t he United States" is now "legally" established as an "enemy" via the
Amendatory Act of March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, amending Trading With Enemy Act of October 6, 1917, H.R. 4960, Public Law No. 91.

On December 6, 1865, the 14th Amendment was proclaimed as ratified (even though it never properly was, see below). The 14th Amendment, which is private Roman Catholic Ecclesiastical Trust Law, constitutes a constructive, cestui que trust, a public charitable trust (PCT) that was expressly designed to bring every corporate franchise artificial person called a "citizen of the United States" into an inseparable merging with the government until the two are united (with power held by the government, not the people). A cestui que trust is fundamentally different from a regular trust, which is express [clear, definite, explicit] in nature and consists of a contractual indenture involving three (3) parties: Grantor (Creator or Trustor), Trustee,
and Beneficiaries. In an express trust, legal ownership is transferred by written contract between Grantor and Trustee in which the Grantor surrenders ownership of property to the legal person, the Trust, to be managed by the Trustee on behalf of those who are to benefit from the arrangement, the Beneficiaries. A cestui que trust, on the other hand, differs from an express trust in several crucial ways:

a. It is not formed by express contract, i.e. overt agreement expressed in writing, but by legal construction, i.e. fiat.

b. A cestui que trust has no Grantor, but, being a constructive trust created by operation of law, i.e. by make-believe, has only co-trustees and co-beneficiaries. The co-trustees are the parties with the duties for managing property for the "public good," i.e. for the benefit of those designated as co-beneficiaries.

The Legislative Act of February 21, 1871, Forty-first Congress, Session III, Chapter 62, page 419, chartered a Federal company entitled "United States," a/k/a "US Inc.," a "Commercial Agency" originally designated as "Washington, D.C.," in accordance with the so-called 14th Amendment, which the record indicates was never ratified (see Utah Supreme Court Cases, Dyett v Turner, (1968) 439 P2d 266, 267; State v Phillips, (1975) 540 P 2d 936; as well as Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 448, 59 S. Ct. 972; 28 Tulane Law Review, 22; 11
South Carolina Law Quarterly 484; Congressional Record, June 13, 1967, pp. 15641-15646). A "citizen of the United States" is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT, the constructive, cestui que trust of US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc. in Section 4 [of the 14th Amendment].

In conformity with the above-referenced creation of United States (1871) and the 14th Amendment, the Legislature of each State created a limited-liability corporation, chartered in a private, military, international, commercial, admiralty/maritime jurisdiction, entitled "STATE OF…" e.g. "STATE OF CALIFORNIA," as evidenced by, inter alia, the change in the seal and the creation of a new constitution, e.g. Constitution of the State of California (1879), concerning which, re California:

a. A general partnership agreement, hereinafter "General Partnership," exists between the California Republic (1849), and STATE OF CALIFORNIA (1879), with STATE OF CALIFORNIA acting as governmental controller.

b. STATE OF CALIFORNIA now acts as an agent/instrumentality of United States, collecting whole life insurance premiums, known as "taxes," for the International Monetary Fund, based, inter alia, upon the Limited Liability Act of 1851 and the bankruptcy of United States of 1933, see House Joint Resolution 192 of June 5, 1933; Public Law 73-10; Perry v. U.S. (1935), 294 U.S. 330-381, 79 L Ed 912 ; 31 USC 5112, 5119.

Inasmuch as all law is contract, the contract involved in a constructive trust is an implied contract. An implied contract can be ratified by two (2) means:

a. Acquiescence by silence, i.e. the "government" asserts its intentions concerning your life, rights, and property and you assent, don't rebut, and compliantly go along with what they claim. In 1871 the Government changed the nature of its contract with the people from law as defined by the original Constitution of 1787 that recognizes law (common law), admiralty (on the sea only), and equity (functioning by voluntary contract between all participating parties), and began
relating to people as if they were "citizens of the Unites States" within/under the private, commercial, international, military jurisdiction of the new de facto corporation, i.e. US Inc. They
offered people a "new deal," and almost everyone bought it (based on naïve and foolish trust and assuming that everything was OK). The people were thereby denied access to law and placed on the ship of state of US Inc. where the captain's word is law and no one has any rights. As Jefferson phrased the matter, "As government grows, liberty recedes."

b. You expressly accept "benefits" offered by the government, and thereby finalize the contract by deed. This is similar to finalizing a contract with a restaurant by sitting down at a table, reading a menu, and then ordering and consuming a meal. By your deeds you affirm to the restaurant that you will pay for the meal in accordance with the price stated on the menu. No written contract is signed, but a contract is formed nevertheless.

By the above two (2) means people give implied assent that they are bound by an alleged contract with US Inc. in accordance with the terms and conditions that inhere in being treated as a "citizen of the United States" under the 14th Amendment, and are therefore placed into
permanent legal status as a Debtor and Surety for U.S. Inc. In such a position people leave the ground of sovereignty and all capacity for asserting their unalienable rights in favor of being presumed as having exercised their sovereignty and free-will autonomy for the purpose of going along with the government's assertion that they sacrifice everything for the "public good," i.e. the PCT.

By so doing people lose their standing in law, i.e. they "die a civil death in the law." They are placed in the legal position of mortmain (i.e. as if deceased) and are shorn of capacity for asserting their rights, since the presumption is that they have already exercised those rights for the purpose of being placed in the position they are in, i.e. property of the government with a lien against them and everything their lives of labor could ever create, including children.  The private being (the real individual) is sacrificed for the good of the public (the imaginary collective).

When people die such a civil death in the law they are like ghosts, and thereby incapable of managing their own affairs and enjoying their unalienable rights. Like the estate of a decedent, they are then managed by the executors/administrators of the estate, in probate.  Such is the condition of every "citizen of the United States" today in law, managed by the government agencies acting as executors/administrators of their estates in bankruptcy, legal incapacity, and civil death as assets of the bankrupt US. The US is property of the private Real Parties of Interest, the Creditors in bankruptcy.

The 14th Amendment was allegedly established for the purpose of creating a citizenship for the liberated blacks, and other disenfranchised people, who otherwise had no citizenship because they could not comply with the requirements for state citizenship. What actually happened was that the blacks were taken off of the Southern slave plantations and placed into the slave plantation of US Inc., a far worse lot. The government then gradually absorbed everyone else—including state citizens—into the same condition.

1871-1913—Officers of the actual government held office in dual capacity, i.e. in both USA and US Inc. status.

1912—Bonds issued by US Inc. came due but US Inc. did not have the resources for paying its creditors (the seven families that founded the Federal Reserve Bank), so US Inc.'s owner (the actual government) was required to pay the balance. The national government was also
without sufficient funds to meet US Inc.'s obligations, so the creditors settled for all of the assets of both US Inc. and the national government instead of foreclosure on and liquidation of the
entire country. By so doing they expropriated the nation—both USA and US Inc.

1912—US Inc. forms an agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank (It is important to note that both of these entities are private corporations which removes the general allegations of treason or fraud from this relationship). Through this agreement US Inc. must function in debt, even though it has neither funds nor resources for financing its operation.

1912—The first corporate-only Senators are seated in the next election year by popular vote of the US Inc. registered voters. The original-jurisdiction national Senators of the States did not assume office that year and at least one third of the nation's Senators seats were lawfully and voluntarily vacant.

February 3, 1913—US Inc. passes its 16th Amendment and Congress orders the Secretary of State to enter it as ratified even though the States had not ratified it according to Law. The Secretary complied. It should be noted that this would not have been lawful if it were a
national Constitution amendment, however it was perfectly legal within the colorable, de facto corporation. It should also be noted that where the national Constitution already had a 16th amendment and where the Supreme Court says that the new 16th Amendment did not do
anything, this corporate amendment must simply be a space filler entered such that US Inc.'s Constitution (1871) would have the same number of amendments as that of the national Constitution (1787).

April 8, 1913—US Inc. passes its 17th amendment and Congress orders it to be entered as ratified in the exact same manner as they did with US Inc.'s 16th Amendment. This amendment changes where US Inc.'s Senators are elected. This amendment is not even lawfully possible as a
national Constitution amendment for several reasons, not the least of which is that the amendment would have required that Congress first pass an amendment that stated that they had the power to say where Senators are elected before they could even deliberate on such a subject matter, after which they would then have to have competent ratifications performed on such amendments in accord with constitutional limits, not as was done with US Inc.'s 16th Amendment.

December 23, 1913—The Congress, late at night with only a small cadre of supporters present, passed the Federal Reserve Act, surrendering the creation and management of the nation's currency into the hands of a cartel of private—and mostly foreign—bankers. Currency is the single most essential and critical commodity in the world, embodying more law and principles of commerce than any other. Since all interactions are "commerce," and the medium of doing business in commerce is currency, money is, in a very significant sense, the measure of all things. By abandoning control and management of the money supply the nation surrendered all capacity for claiming sovereignty. The government lost its independent treasury (one of the requirements in law for national sovereignty). The United States Government became a mere fiefdom, or administrative arm, of the bankers, who now owned the store.

Passage of the Federal Reserve Act was a major milestone on the "road to serfdom" that this entire progression outlines. The conspiratorial nature of matters is exemplified in comments by one of the major actors in the triumph of the Federal Reserve, Edward Mandell House, who had this to say in a private meeting with President Woodrow Wilson:

"[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will effect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer being unable to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us, will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through
taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will
inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call 'Social Insurance.' Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner, every American will
unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America." (1917).

Corporate-only Senators begin participating in all matters with those Senators who still had original jurisdiction government capacity, as a result of which all activities of the government were performed in corporate capacity only.

1917—President Wilson was re-elected by the Electoral College, but only US Inc.'s Senate performed the Senate confirmation necessary for seating the national President. There was no national government Senate confirmation; no national seats were seated and all remained
vacant. Note: the national President is also the Military's Commander in Chief, and under the nation's status of being ruled by the private, commercial, martial-law rule of the Bankers and English Crown, the business needs of the nation have remained under US Inc. control since
1871, i.e. ever since US Inc. was incorporated and made operational over such matters.

1917-1944—All national government seats are and remain vacant, and US Inc. continues maintaining the business needs of the government under martial-law rule.

June 5, 1933—US Inc. declares bankruptcy under House Joint Resolution, "HJR," 192.

1935—The Social Security Act is passed.

On application, the new Social Security Administration (hereinafter "SSA") creates a private Trust with a trust name that sounds like the name of the applicant except the Trust's name is spelled with all capital letters. SSA makes the applicant a co-trustee of the namesake Trust, designates the SSA General Trust Fund as the Beneficiary of the namesake trust, and assigns the Trust a Social Security General Trust Fund Account number regarding the applicant for accounting and identification purposes.

1938—In Erie Railroad v. Tompkins (1938), 304 U.S. 64-92, the U.S. Supreme Court sets the presumption regarding the status and capacity of an individual as that of General Capacity/General Partnership relationship with the namesake Trust, as if the two (2) entities—individual and namesake Trust—were one-in-the-same person.

1944—In the Bretton Woods Agreement US Inc. is quit-claimed into the newly formed International Monetary Fund (hereinafter "IMF") in exchange for the power allowing US Inc.'s President the right of naming (seating and controlling) the governors and general managers of
the International Monetary Fund, The World Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the Inter-American Bank also formed in that agreement (codified at United States Code Title 22 § 286). It must be noted that this act created an unlawful conflict of interest between US Inc.
(with its new foreign owner) and its purpose of carrying out the business needs of the national government. This is the cause of our use of the term "original-jurisdiction" government. With the new foreign owner of US Inc. a conflict of interest is created between the national government and US Inc., even though the contracted purpose of US Inc. has not changed on its face.

1962—At the National Governor's Conference in Lexington, Kentucky, US Inc. informs the governors, under the guise of "public necessity," that they must all form, or reform existing, private corporations under US Inc. (in their state's interest), so that the people will not
discover what the state governments are doing with the people's money (dabbling in foreign notes, i.e. Federal Reserve Notes [FRNs], bonds, and other evidences of debt), which activity is forbidden from State governments by their own State constitutions, which information would
likely cause a people's revolt ending in the State officials being at worst killed and at least replaced. The proposed incorporation deadline was 1968.

1970—By this time each State revised its constitution and statutes and formed private corporate entities of the name "STATE OF (X)" (where "(X)" is representative of the common State name), and then vacated their original jurisdiction government seats in favor of foreign ownership and control under the mandate of US Inc.

It appears that this was all done so a General Partnership could be presumed as existing between "The State" (of the national Union of States) and "STATE OF (X)", a private corporation. Said STATE OF (X), as General Partner, then assumes the role of governmental operator/controller. This scenario is further proven by the fact that these corporate entities cannot handle gold and silver coin of the United States of America in commercial transactions without violating the Par Value Modifications Act and the Foreign Currency Exchange Act.

Consider the following examples in light of the forgoing:

*On April 19th, 1994, Federal agents attacked, burned and razed the Branch Davidians "compound" in Waco, Texas, killing approximately 100 of the members of the sect (including 17 innocent children) without any lawful cause for the action.

*50 USC 1520 et seq. (revised in 1997) demonstrates that there exists an agenda for using Americans (Sovereign and otherwise) as biological test subjects. This is a fundamental breach of an alleged Constitutional contract.

*President Clinton pushes for a mandatory health care bill for the purpose of placing the physical bodies of all Americans under control of US Inc., with international identification attached, for the purpose of tagging the populance, as per the Biblical prophesy of the Mark of the Beast. The computer that would handle the tracking is even identified with the acronym "B.E.A.S.T."

What the above progression depicts is the systematic growth of the power, scope, and pervasive control of Government exercised against the American people by foreign, criminal, and hostile powers. This same dreary gestalt constitutes the nature of man's history on this planet as far back as recorded history will take us. Civilizations rise, fall, and disappear, replaced by new ones that—based upon being founded on, and functioning in accordance with wrong principles—are
foredoomed for extinction, as were all of their predecessors and as all future civilizations will be until mankind finally learns and ceases "beating a dead horse" by structuring law, commerce, religion, and social organization in general on principles that are existentially impossible.

The above progression has proceeded in America by implementing such
strategy as:

1. Relentlessly instilling in people the foundational idea that governments in general are absolutely essential in the society of man and that the Government in America is the people's friend and servant, i.e. a "government of the people, by the people, and for the people." These premises are untrue—self-serving cons by those in the seat of power.

2. Creating governmentally-owned corporate franchises, such as a "citizen of the United States" and one's all-capital-letter name, with which people are deceived into identifying as themselves.

3. Regarding every citizen of the United States as contractually being:

a. A corporate citizen, i.e. a corporate franchise;

b. A co-trustee (with duties) and co-beneficiary (with privileges) of the 14th Amendment Public Charitable cestui que Trust;

c. Pledged as an asset in the bankruptcy of US Inc., and therefore a co-surety for the debts of US Inc.;

d. An enemy of the Creditors;

e. Chattel property of the Bankers and Power Elite;

f. A slave with no capacity for asserting any rights, no standing in law, and no capacity for contracting.

4. Functioning on the presumption that the individual being, with autonomy and free will, knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily contracted into the situation of being united—like heads and tails of a coin—with a corporate entity created and owned by the Government.

As per the established maxim of law, "As a thing is bound, so it is unbound," the way out of the problem is within and through the problem. This is accomplished by understanding what the problem is, i.e. its structure and character, just as solving the problem of a plugged drain is accomplished by realizing that the problem is the plugged drain, whereby the solution consists of unplugging the drain. "Know the truth and the truth shall make you free."

The United States Library of Congress now has between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000 books on law. Any law library is a daunting place, possessing row after row of shelves with books full of fine print.  Making knowledge of such "law" even more unattainable is not only that what passes for law today perpetually changes, altered by every new court case/opinion, legislative enactment, and all of the ever-changing policies, rules, and regulations of administrative agencies, but an immense amount of the world's law today, as actually implemented, is unwritten and inaccessible.

This is not only because judges operate in general equity in which the ultimate arbiter of a matter is the "conscience of the court" (i.e. how the judge feels about something that day), but because almost all of the world's law is the private Law Merchant of the Creditors in bankruptcy of the world's nations, essentially all of which are insolvent and in receivership to the Bankers. This private Law Merchant is of ancient origin, and is implemented today by men whose identities are unknown to the mass of mankind.

In the face of this undependability of law we may ask some fundamental and ingenuous questions:

1. Is there such a thing as genuine law that is timeless, stable, and dependable?

2. If so, can such universal law be effectively invoked and utilized in practice today? How can I use it to ensure my inalienable sovereign birth rights to life and happiness?

3. If genuine law exists, why is it not taught and uniformly utilized instead of the chaotic and colorable charade that dominates the legal field today?

4. Can we integrate said universal law with the ephemeral, desultory "law" that now enslaves the overwhelming majority of people on this planet?

Note: Natural law, which is really limited to punishing those who harm others or take their property, is in harmony with God's law. God has given every one of us the authority to choose. Since people choose to harm others and take property not belonging to them, unnatural laws
prevail. Universal law, God's law and natural law would restore balance to our lives, but people must choose to abide them. (DWH)

Friday, October 17, 2014

Are the Bankster Pirates attempting to high-jack America? 11-13-15



See for Yourself!  (all is not well)

Check and see if you have any identity documents referring to you as a living private man or woman on the land.

Unless you created an affidavit recorded and seasoned in the Public record you don't.
That ALL CAPS name is a dead legal fiction entity created by a corporation (it is not You!)
Is that Birth Certificate (issued by the state) referring to You (flesh) or some legal fiction? Look at the ALL CAPS!
Mom, Dad and You in ALL CAPS, does that seem right?  Those are PAPER legal fictions!
Why are the names on the headstones at the cemetery in ALL CAPS? (because they are dead!)
Go look! (civilly dead)

Time to wake up and define who you are....   you are presumed dead by the state.
JOHN HENRY DOE, abandoned vessel, lost beyond the sea, a decedent, is that You? (salvage claim)
They turned the Republic government into a corporation (legal fiction)  UNITED STATES INC.
Did they then create a legal fiction trust as a shadow of your labor potential? (ALL CAPS)
Is the state holding equitable title to a presumed decedent's estate? (ALL CAPS)

Pull out your documents and see for yourself BCs, Titles, Deeds, Policies, IRAs, licenses etc. (ALL CAPS)

There it is in BLACK and WHITE!    (WHOA!)  You have no living identity!


Tuesday, October 14, 2014

Prepaid Card Fees and Fraud

With the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) tackling a variety of issues, from confronting student loan abuses (See, CFPB Sues Corinthian) to new rulemaking on home mortgage disclosure, when will it finally turn to prepaid debit cards?  While the use of prepaid debit cards as alternatives to traditional checking accounts has often been associated with those with credit problems, the cards have grown in popularity with consumers wanting to avoid banking fees. Oh, and there has been the string of failed celebrity sponsored prepaid cards, often with high fees.  The CFPB hasn't exactly been quick to tackle issue with fees, card loss and fraud on these cards, though. 
Even though the CFPB is late to take up these issues, it has started accepting consumer complaints online with expectation that companies resolve complaints within 90 days.  The CFPB is working on draft regulations to keep consumers of pre-paid cards safer, specifically disclosure requirements. A lot of the pre-paid cards don't allow the consumer to understand the system of fees until after they have purchased the cards.  In particular, the CFPB is continuing with the CARD Act's popular tabular method for disclosure in the prepaid card arena

Only time will tell what type of regulations will be effective on the fee front, but the CFPB is not yet tackling the fraud front. While a consumer may have recourse for some frauds if they use their Debit or Credit Cards under the Truth in Lending Act or the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, victim of prepaid card fraud have little protections outside of criminal law.  While most of these losses are small in nature, some victims have lost substantial amounts of money through alleged tax collection, bill collection and lottery schemes.  While it never hurts to be informed, particularly when your money is involved, pure public awareness of fraud is not likely to protect vulnerable consumers.  Sometimes disclosure alone is insufficient.  Perhaps its time for the regulators to more aggressively pursue the card issuers?

- JSM (with Devon Locay, St. Thomas University J.D. expected 2016)

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Convert debt energy into credit energy through Acceptance.

Let us begin by defining some very key words in order to understand Acceptance.

Contract. An agreement between two or more persons which creates an obligation to do or not to do a particular thing. Its essentials are competent parties, subject matter, a legal consideration, mutuality of agreement, and mutuality of obligation.

Offer.  v. To bring to or before; to present for acceptance or rejection; to hold out or proffer; to make a proposal to; to exhibit something that may be taken or received or not. n. A proposal to do a thing or pay an amount, usually accompanied by an expected acceptance, counter-offer, return promise or act. A manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude it.

Offer and acceptance.  In a bilateral contract, the two elements which constitute mutual assent, a requirement of the contract. In a unilateral contract, the acceptance is generally the act or performance of the offeree, though, in most jurisdictions, a promise to perform is inferred if the offeree commences the undertaking and the offeror attempts to revoke before the offeree has had an opportunity to complete the act.

Offeree. In contracts, the person to whom an offer is made by the offeror.

Accept.  To receive with approval or satisfaction; to receive with intent to retain. Admit and agree to; accede to or consent to; receive with approval; adopt; agree to.

Accept. [L. acceptare, from ad, to + capio, to take.] To take or receive, as something offered; received with approbation or favor; take as it comes; accede or assent to (a treaty, a proposal); to acknowledge, especially by signature, and thus to promise to pay (a bill of exchange).

The Consolidated Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary 1933

Acceptance. The taking and receiving of anything in good part, and as it were a tacit agreement to a preceding act, which might have been defeated or avoided if such acceptance had not been made.

Tacit. Existing, inferred, or understood without being openly expressed or stated; implied by silence or silent acquiescence, as a tacit agreement or a tacit understanding. Done or made in silence, implied or indicated, but not actually expressed. Manifested by the refraining from contradiction or objection; inferred from the situation and circumstances, in the absence of express matter.

Tacit acceptance.  A tacit acceptance of an inheritance takes place when some act is done by the heir which necessarily supposes his intention to accept and which he would have no right to do but in his capacity as heir.

Tacit law.  A law which derives its authority from the common consent of the people without any legislative enactment.

            As you know by now, UNITED STATES is a trust with our forefathers as the Grantors, the government agents as the Trustees and we as the beneficiaries or “heirs.”  All property and “energy” (in the CAFRs) that the government has in its “apparent” possession is our inheritance. But, we have never ACCEPTED it! We have never claimed it back….. until now.

Power.  [LL potere, to be able, from L. posse, from potis, able + esse, to be.] Ability to act; the faculty of doing or performing something; capability; the right of governing or actual government; dominion; rule; authority; a sovereign; a spirit or superhuman agent having a certain sway (celestial powers); the moving force applied to produce the required effect;

Power of Acceptance. Capacity of offeree, upon acceptance of terms of offer, to create binding contract.

When you get an offer, THE OFFEROR JUST PUT YOU IN A POSITION OF POWER! What an honor! Why not accept that gift?

Since the strawman is a corporation created by the state to account for the credit that they are using in your name, it stands to reason that the strawman represents UNITED STATES and THEIR debt – not you and your debt. You are the creditor, and the state or UNITED STATES is the debtor. They owe you exemption for using your credit, but since they are bankrupt, there is no “substance money,” so you, as the creditor, will have to get paid by taking equity, such as your house and your car as a setoff.

As one can see from the above definitions, you are a “banker” that can “issue BILLS OF EXCHANGE (BOE) intended to be circulated as money.” Since that is what ALL currency is today – your credit – it should not be a stretch for the imagination to think that you can USE YOUR OWN CREDIT! However, you are not going to use your credit which creates more debt – you are going to use your EXEMPTION.

Exemption. Freedom from a general duty or service; immunity from a general burden, tax, or charge, Immunity from service of process or from certain legal obligations, as jury duty, military service, or the payment of taxes; Property exempt in bankruptcy proceedings is provided for under Bankruptcy Code sec. 522.

Exempt. [L. exemptum, to take out, to remove, from ex, out + emo, to buy, to take.] To free or permit to be free from any charge, burden, restraint, duty to which others are subject; to grant immunity.

Accept. [L. acceptare, from ad, to + capio, to take.] To take or receive, as something offered; to acknowledge with a signature and thus promise to pay a Bill of Exchange.

All municipalities and corporations are bankrupt because they have no substance to back up their currency. We, as sovereigns, bailed them out by letting them use OUR PROPERTY as collateral, then they mortgaged it and – Voila! – there was currency.  However, we are EXEMPT because they are using our credit to make trillions of dollars a year, and therefore, we are entitled “to take” a portion of their equity in return.

You are going TO TAKE what is already yours and in your possession. Since there is no money, you can only “take” equity – goods and services – from the corporations using your credit as they are BANKRUPT! You will be sending a copy of the BOE to John Snow in a “private” capacity as the trustee for the US Bankruptcy. This is done privately because you cannot deal with a fiction.

You are “foreign” to UNITED STATES and all other corporations, so you can use your EXEMPTION as a FOREIGN BILL OF EXCHANGE to pay the balance due in another country (or should we say “corporation” such as UNITED STATES). The “balance” representing the interest that a person owes you when they are using YOUR credit.

Since the strawman is a corporation created by the state to account for the credit that they are using in your name, it stands to reason that the strawman represents UNITED STATES and THEIR debt – not you. Not your debt. You are the creditor, and the state or UNITED STATES is the debtor. They owe you interest for using your credit, but since they are bankrupt, there is no “substance money,” so you, as the creditor, will have to get paid by taking equity, such as your house and your car as a setoff.

Power of acceptance.  Capacity of offeree, upon acceptance of the terms of the offer, to create a binding contract.

            House Joint Resolution 192, June 5, 1933, states that one cannot demand a certain form of currency that they want to receive if it is dollar for dollar as ALL CURRENCY IS YOUR CREDIT!! If they do, they are in breach of the contract of HJR 192. You have already accepted this contract and now they must perform.        

Pursuant to the contract with the corporation of which you are discharging the debt, and HJR 192, they must give you a Letter of Release or Payment in Full.

            If you have not received the release in 14 days then send them a DEFAULT and contact a notary to do a process that will give you a CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR, because they are in breach of the contract at this time.

            Remember in the Bible who offers? Sinners “offer” offerings to God. That is why you never, never make an offer, because you are admitting that you are the sinner – the debtor, one who is obligated. So when an agent of a fictitious entity (your creation) gives you an offer, they are acknowledging that you are their creator, their “god” and that they are honoring you and returning their appreciation and energy back to you that you have created them.

            There is another type of acceptance called a “conditional acceptance.”

Acceptance, Conditional. An engagement to pay the draft or accept the offer on the happening of a condition. A “conditional acceptance” is in effect a statement that the offeree is willing to enter into a bargain differing in some respects from that proposed in the original offer. The conditional acceptance is, therefore, itself a counter offer.

Counteroffer. A statement by the offeree which has the legal effect of rejecting the offer and of proposing a new offer to the offeror.

            As one can see if you have a condition, it is not complete acceptance. One is actually “rejecting” and making a “new offer.” Now you have just returned the power to them.

            I have seen very good “conditional acceptances” which shifts the burden of proof to the one making the offer and this appears to be effective. The conditional acceptances are a very good gradient to the full acceptance or “absolute acceptance.”

Absolute. [L absolutus to set free, from ab from + solvo to loose.] Freed from limitation or condition; unconditional; unlimited by extraneous power or control; complete in itself; finished; perfect; positive; decided; self-existing; without restriction.

            Since you are the creator or the “god” of this system and everything in it, then you can accept all the offers they give you - ABSOLUTELY! Remember what “duplication” means and that no 2 objects can be in the same space at the same time? Well, when you DUPLICATE an offer, you make the entire matter disappear!

            Which acceptance do you think has more power, “Conditional Acceptance” where you are depending on THEM to provide the condition, or “Absolute Acceptance” where it does not matter what offer is made, you are able or have the power to accept it and it becomes “perfect” and “finished.” It “sets you free” from the obligation completely!

            However, some may be saying “I would never accept what the government is trying to get me to do!”  You must first do what is called “Finding it.” You must first “look” at the document or “hear” what they are actually saying. Who are they talking to, you or the strawman? Who does the strawman represent – you or the one who created that “account” to keep the accounting of how much they owe you as the Creditor? This is one of the biggest misconception of the “strawman” – that it represents you. No, it represents UNITED STATES. It is a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES, a transmitting utility, to deal with you, to interface with the Creditor and to get the Creditor to “think” he is the debtor.

            So, how do you “find” it? You just read and define the words and take the viewpoint of the Creditor and listen to what they want the DEBTOR to do – not you. They cannot even see you or hear you because you are real, not fiction like them. Can a fiction see or hear ANYTHING? Can you see or hear a fiction? Nope! So why do you insist that you are the one they are dealing with? Find it and do an “ABSOLUTE ACCEPTANCE!” As far as the truth goes, I don’t care WHAT they do with the fictional debtor, in their fictional courts with fictional statutes.

            In the Matrix, while waiting to see the Oracle (the word or thought), Neo observed a gifted child “bend a spoon.” The child said, “try not to think that you can bend the spoon, that is impossible. The truth is there is no spoon.”

            Remember when Neo got shot in the chest and thought he was dead? Through unconditional love, Trinity called him back and “woke him up.” He “thought” he was dead, but he wasn’t. When he got up and looked again at the “agents” what did he see? He saw them as they really were – digital images with no significance. What was there to be afraid of? He then realized that he was the ONE and that he had no limitation and they did. He saw through the Matrix, behind the curtain of the Wizard of OZ, through the corporate veil. They were created so they had limitations. He was not the creation but the creator, and therefore had no limitations.

            Look at what this system REALLY is – not what it “appears” to be.

Let’s go into a specific demonstration of a Contract.  Let's assume you have just received an offer from someone, it could be a traffic ticket, a demand from an insurance company, a demand to stop crossing someone else's property, or a notice of foreclosure, etc.

1.     CREATING THE CONTRACT

PURPOSE: As a Creditor of UNITED STATES and all other sub-corporations private and public, you are owed equity and interest for the gold and all property that your forefathers and you “loaned” them starting March 9, 1933 to date. There is NO MONEY, so in order to start getting integrity and ethics back into society, you must NOTICE your DEBTORS of what you expect them to do and the consequences if they do not comply, but first you must ESTABLISH THE LAW. Your acceptance of any and all offers is a binding contract to the Offeror  and tells them what you want and how things are going to be done in this CREDITOR/DEBTOR relationship. This file contains all the documents you will need to PERFECT YOUR CLAIM, TAKE BACK YOUR EQUITY and most of all, ENSURE JUSTICE IS DONE;

1.      Notice of Acceptance to Contract
2.      Notice of Default
3.      Notice of Dishonor – from Notary Public
4.      Notice of Protest and Opportunity to Cure – from Notary Public
5.      Certificate of Dishonor - from Notary Public
6.      Notice of Default and Entry for Default Judgment
7.      Default Judgment - from 3 Creditors
8.      Notice of Acceptance - to be file at the Secretary of State
            The following steps are sequence of events that must occur to get your Contract established and enacted as the supreme law of the land.

1.      NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE TO CONTRACT

Word process the Notice of Acceptance to Contract for all of the correct information
Print the Notice of Acceptance to Contract out, read it several times for correctness and MAKE SURE YOU DESIGNATE A THIRD PARTY RECEIVER WITH NAME AND ADDRESS, Stamp the OFFER with your Acceptance for Value stamp and sign it and send the ORIGINAL OFFER to Respondent, then get the Notice notarized. Send the Notice of Acceptance to Contract by registered mail, return receipt so you have proof that they received your Contract you are in the process of creating. Send the copies of the above documents to the Respondent(s) and keep the originals
2.      NOTICE OF DEFAULT

After the 10 days send them a Notice of Default. This means total failure. This notice completes your court procedure as a sovereign in your nation that is foreign to the public venue. Now you will need to pursue this matter in the “public venue” in their legal proceedings, however it will not go into the courts you are familiar with. You must take this matter up with the SECRETARY OF STATE of the state you in which you live..
Secretary of State. In American law. Title of the chief of the executive bureau of the United States called the “Department of State.” He is a member of the cabinet, and is charged with the general administration of the international and diplomatic affairs of the government. In many of the state governments there is an executive officer bearing the same title and exercising important functions. In English law. The secretaries of state are cabinet ministers attending the sovereign for the receipt and dispatch of letters, grants, petitions, and many of the most important affairs of the kingdom, both foreign and domestic. Black’s 4th edition

You are a foreign nation in their eyes, so you must go through the proper channels so that you can utilize the functions and duties of the Secretary of State –  “general administration of the international affairs” and “attending the sovereign.” There are many “designees” of the Secretary of the state in the area you live, normally called Notary Publics. Find a private Notary Public that you can work with; OR create one by getting a friend to become a Notary who understands this procedure.
3.      NOTICE OF DISHONOR – Notary Public

Now we will go through the process called a Notarial Protest, a very powerful process that will create a witness against the debtor  through a Public Official. Following is the definition of a Notary Public according to Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th edition.  It is important to know why you need to use a Notary Public.

Notary Public:  A public officer whose function it is to administer oaths;  to attest and certify, by her or his hand and official seal, certain classes of documents, in order to give them credit and authenticity in foreign jurisdictions;  to take acknowledgements of deeds and other conveyances, and certify the same;  and to perform certain official acts, chiefly in commercial matters such as the protesting of notes and bills, the noting of foreign drafts, and marine protests in cases of loss or damage.  One who is authorized by the State or Federal Government to administer oaths, and to attest to the authenticity of signatures. Black’s 6th edition

NOTARY PUBLIC. A legal practitioner, usually a solicitor, who attests or certifies deeds and other documents and notes or protests dishonored bills of exchange.

Dictionary of Business, Oxford University Press, © Market House Books Ltd 1996  

Pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) Title 41-332;

Secretary of the State; deputy county clerk; county clerk functions
“…each clerk of the superior court shall deputize the secretary of state and the secretary’s designees as deputy county clerks of the superior court solely for the performance of the superior court clerk’s functions…”

All notary publics are assigned a “commission” by the secretary of the state and deputized by the notary public of the Superior Court.
Commission:  An authority or writ issuing from a court, in relation to a cause before it, directing and authorizing a person or persons named to do some act or exercise some special function; usually to take the depositions of witnesses.

Commissioner:  A person to whom a commission is directed by the government or a court.  A person with a commission.  An officer who is charged with the administration of the laws relating to some particular subject matter, or the management of some bureau or agency of the government.  Member of a commission or board.  Specially appointed officer of the Court.

TABELLIO. In Roman law. An officer corresponding in some respects to a notary. His business was to draw legal instruments, (contracts, wills, etc.,) and witness their execution. Tabelliones differed from notaries in many respects; they had judicial jurisdiction in some cases, and from their judgments there were no appeals. Notaries were then the clerks or aiders of the tabelliones; they received the agreements of the parties, which they reduced to short notes; and these contracts were not binding until they were written in extenso, which was done by the tabelliones. Black’s 4th edition

In summary of the above definitions, a Notary Public is a commissioner designated by the secretary of the state and deputized to be a deputy superior court clerk to hear certain issues presented to them by foreign agents by taking depositions of the parties termed “notes.” In order for the “notes” (contracts) to be binding they are registered in the “extenso,” a public record. We now file with the secretary of state to register our contracts and securities.

BILL OF EXCHANGE. An unconditional order in writing, addressed by one person (the drawer/debtor) to another (the drawee/your strawman) and signed by the person giving it, requiring the drawee to pay on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time a specified sum of money to or to the order of a specified person (the payee/John Snow/trustee of U.S. Bankruptcy) or to the bearer. If the bill is payable at a future time the drawee (your strawman) signifies his acceptance (by you as the creditor of both the drawer and drawee AND the payee), which makes him the party primarily liable upon the bill; the drawer and endorsers may also be liable upon a bill. The use of bills of exchange enables one person to transfer to another an enforceable right to a sum of money. A bill of exchange is not only transferable but also negotiable, since if a person without an enforceable right to the money transfers a bill to a holder in due course, the latter obtains a good title to it. Much of the law on bills of exchange is codified by the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 and the Cheques Act 1992.             Dictionary of Law, Oxford University Press © Market House Books Ltd 1997
DISHONOR. Failure to honor a bill of exchange. This may be by non-acceptance, when a bill of exchange is presented for acceptance and this is refused or cannot be obtained (or when presentment for acceptance is excused and the bill is not accepted); or by nonpayment, when the bill is presented for payment and payment is refused or cannot be obtained (or when presentment is excused and the bill is overdue and unpaid). In both cases the holder has an immediate right of recourse against the drawer and endorsers, but foreign bills that have been dishonored must first be protested (see protest). --Dictionary of Business, Oxford University Press, © Market House Books Ltd 1996      

NOTE A BILL. When a foreign bill has been dishonored, it is usual for a notary public to present it again on the same day and if it be not then paid, to make a minute, consisting of his initials, the day, month, and year, and reason, if assigned, of non-acceptance. The making of this minute is called “noting the bill.”

UCC 3 § 505.        Protest; Noting for Protest
* * * (b) A protest is a certificate of dishonor made by a United States consul or vice consul, or a notary public or other person authorized to administer oaths by the law of the place where dishonor occurs. It may be made upon information satisfactory to that person. The protest shall identify the instrument and certify either that presentment has been made or, if not made, the reason why it was not made, and that the instrument has been dishonored by non-acceptance or nonpayment. The protest may also certify that notice of dishonor has been given to some or all parties.

NOTING. 1. The procedure adopted if a bill of exchange has been dishonored by non-acceptance or by non-payment. Not later than the next business day after the day on which it was dishonored, the holder has to hand it to a notary public to be noted. The notary re-presents the bill; if it is still unaccepted or unpaid, the circumstances are noted in a register and also on a Notarial ticket, which is attached to the bill. The noting can then, if necessary, be extended to a protest.

 Dictionary of Business, Oxford University Press, © Market House Books Ltd 1996    

NOTING. The act of a Notary in minuting on a bill of exchange, after it has been presented for acceptance or payment, the initials of his name, the date of the day, month, and year when such presentment was made, and the reason, if any has been assigned, for non-acceptance or non-payment, together with his charge. Black’s 4th

MINUTES. Practice. A memorandum of what takes place in court, made by authority of the court. Black’s 4th edition

CHARGE. In Equity practice. A written statement presented to a master in chancery (notary public) by a party (you) of the items with which the opposite party should be debited or should account for, or of the claim of the party making it. A charge may embrace the whole liabilities of the accounting party.

TICKET. In contracts. A slip of paper containing a certificate that the person to whom it is issued, or the holder, is entitled to some right or privilege therein mentioned or described; Black’s 4th edition

JUDGMENT NOTE.      A promissory note (contract), embodying an authorization to…a clerk of the court (or a notary public), to enter an appearance for the maker of the note and confess a judgment against him for a sum therein named, upon default of payment of the note.  Black’s 4th edition

PROTEST.  A Notarial act, being a formal statement in writing made by a notary under his seal of office, at the request of the holder of a bill or note, in which it is declared that the bill or note described was on a certain day presented for payment or acceptance and that such payment or acceptance was refused, and stating the reasons, if any, given for such refusal, whereupon the notary protests against all parties to such instrument, and declares that they will be held responsible for all loss or damage arising from its dishonor. It denotes also all the steps or acts accompanying dishonor necessary to charge an endorser. Black’s 4th edition

PROTEST. 2. A procedure by which a notary provides formal evidence of the dishonor of a bill of exchange. When a foreign bill has been dishonored by non-acceptance or nonpayment it is handed to the notary, who usually presents it again. If it is still dishonored, the notary attaches a slip showing the answer received and other particulars - a process called noting. The protest, in the form of a formal document, may then be drawn up at a later time.

Dictionary of Business, Oxford University Press, © Market House Books Ltd 1996  

Locate a Notary Public that is knowledgeable and willing to do your Notarial Protest.  There are 3 documents needed for this process:  Notice of Dishonor, Notice of Protest and Opportunity to Cure, and a Certificate of Dishonor.  The first document is a Notice of Dishonor, which the Notary issues to the Offeror to allow them a second opportunity to provide evidence to substantiate their claim.  Basically the Notary Public is acting in the capacity of taking a deposition from witnesses.  The Notary Public has been shown your affidavit (sworn statement) and now the Notary is asking for the Offeror’s affidavit (sworn statement).
4.      NOTICE OF PROTEST AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE – Notary Public

This notice will allow an additional 10 days to give the debtor another chance to bring the evidence forth to support any claim that they may be professing.
5.      CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR – Notary Public

If in 10 days the Notary Public does not receive a response point for point by affidavit with documented evidence, the debtor has defaulted and therefore dishonored your acceptance.  Then the Notary prepares a Notarial Protest which the Notary keeps for her/his own records, and issues you a Certificate of Dishonor. The Certificate of Dishonor is actually just as valid as a Default Judgment in a Superior Court.
6.      NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

Now that you have a Default in your private venue and a Default in the public venue and the Debtor is still not responding, you will go to an international venue to finalize this matter. This will be done by an INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL consisting of 3 other disinterested parties that are Creditors (anyone who has filed a UCC-1 in the state you are doing business in).    

International agreements. Treaties and other agreements of a contractual character between different countries or organizations of states (foreign) creating legal rights and obligations between the parties.

Tribunal. The seat of a judge; a court of law; the place where he administers justice. The whole body of judges who compose a jurisdiction; a judicial court; Blacks 6th edition

Tribunal.  [L. tribunus, a magistrate or officer, from tribus, tribe.] Tribune. An officer in ancient Rome who represented a tribe for certain purposes; an offer or magistrate chosen by the common people of Rome to protect them from the oppression of the patricians; also a military officer commanding a division or legion; a raised seat or stand; the throne of a bishop; a sort of pulpit or rostrum where a speaker stands to address an assembly.

Tribe. [L. tribus, one of the three bodies into which the Romans were originally divided, from tres three.] A division, class, or distinct portion of a people or nation.

      The reason we call this court an INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL is that it is an action where an “organization of a state” has not performed according to the original agreement (such a HJR 192, Public Policy 73-10, etc.) they have with the initial Creditor who is foreign to said organization’s venue. The “magistrates” who judge this matter “represent” their own “nations.” Therefore, this matter is an “international” matter which must be decided in an international venue.

You will present the 3 Creditors with a package consisting of all of your notices and actions that you have done up to this point. The 3 Creditors will review what you have done for correctness with specific attention on continuity of what you have claimed throughout your contract. Any contradictory statements or facts will be pointed out and will need to be corrected or amended as necessary.  It may even require sending a correction statement to the Debtor to handle the error or point out in the paperwork.

You will write the NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT in affidavit form summarizing the actions of what you have done to this point. The purpose for this document is to enter this matter into the international venue where 3 Creditors will review the matter and witness a response, if any, from the Debtor.

7.      DEFAULT JUDGMENT BY 3 CREDITORS

After ten (10) days have elapsed with no response from Debtor, and after inspecting that all documents are in alignment and correct, and upon finding no evidence of a proper response to the contract, the 3 Creditors will sign a DEFAULT JUDGMENT in front of a Notary Public stating what they have found is true and correct.

UCC 9-601.  Rights After Default;

            (a) [Rights or secured party after default.] After default, a secured party has the rights provided in this part and except as otherwise provided in Section 9-602, those provided by agreement of the parties. A secured party:

1.      may reduce a claim to judgment, foreclose, or otherwise enforce the claim, security interest, or agricultural lien by any available judicial procedure; and

UCC 9-607. Collection and Enforcement by Secured Party.

            (b) [Non-judicial enforcement of mortgage.] If necessary to enable a secured party to

exercise under subsection (a)(3) the right of a debtor to enforce a mortgage non-judicially, the secured party may record in the office in which a record of the mortgage is recorded:

1.      a copy of the security agreement that creates or provides for a security interest in the        

      obligation secured by the mortgage; and

2.      the secured party’s sworn affidavit in recordable form stating that:

a.       a default has occurred; and

b.       the secured party is entitled to enforce the mortgage non-judicially.

Your contract is the “security agreement.” The affidavit, entitled NOTICE OF DEFAULT, is the “sworn affidavit in recordable form stating that a default has occurred.”

UCC 9-609. Secured Party’s Right to Take Possession After Default.

            (a)  [Possession; rendering equipment unusable; disposition on debtor’s premises.] After default, a secured party:

1.        may take possession of the collateral;

(b)  [Judicial and non-judicial process.] A secured party may proceed under subsection (a):

            (2)  without judicial process, if it proceeds without breach of the peace.

            Now that you have completed your “non-judicial process,” you can collect the collateral and take possession of it

      This completes the Dishonor process. The next process will be covered in a separate set of instructions. The next process is INVOLUNTARY BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE.

THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS. IT IS CERTAIN THAT THERE WILL BE IMPROVEMENTS TO THIS PROCESS AND WE WILL STRIVE TO GET THE INFORMATION TO YOU. IN THE MEANTIME, LEARN IT, IMPROVE ON IT YOURSELF, AND SPREAD IT TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW WHO IS DETERMINED TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CREATION OF THEIR WORLD.

John Henry Doe

c/o 6880 S. Broadway

Tucson, AZ 8574

Secured Party



Contract No 101101-JHD-US

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Virginia Mathis, d.b.a. Magistrate

Morton Sitver, d.b.a. Magistrate

Dick Mesh, d.b.a. Assistant U.S. Attorney

Roland Mendoza, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Chuck Jones, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Mr. Metelski, d.b.a Police Officer #5794

Mr. Moore, d.b.a. Police Officer #6803

Raymond Garcia, d.b.a. U.S. Pretrial Services Officer

Donna Long, d.b.a. Finance Manager, BELL LEXUS

                                                                         Respondents



NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE TO CONTRACT



Arizona                  )                              NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

             )  ss                            NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT

Pima  County  
I, John Henry Doe, hereinafter “Secured Party”, am competent to state the matters included
in this contract which are true, correct and complete, and not meant to mislead.                            

PARTIES AND CAPACITY OF

1. Secured Party

I, John Henry Doe, am a Sovereign without subjects. I am a Foreign Nation (not a person) who rules autonomously and is not subject to any entity or jurisdiction anywhere. My authority for this contract is the age-old, timeless, and universal respect for the intrinsic power, property, and responsibilities of the sovereign individual. I choose to comply with mutual respect, which serves to bring harmony to society. All national and state "constitutions, laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, rules, codes and public policy" in all nations and states are private copyrighted material. I do not possess a license or have authority to use such copyrighted material and consequently this material does not have any authority over me, my property or my personal affairs. I have complete sovereign immunity and therefore, my power to contract is unlimited.

2. Respondents

       The UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, is a legal person and a corporation, and the following persons in their private capacities: John Snow, d.b.a. Secretary of the Treasury; Virginia Mathis, d.b.a. Magistrate; Morton Sitver, d.b.a. Magistrate; Dick Mesh, d.b.a. Assistant U.S. Attorney;  Roland Mendoza, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent; Chuck Jones, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent; Mr. Moore, d.b.a. Police Officer #6803; Mr. Metelski, d.b.a. Police Officer #5794, Raymond Garcia, d.b.a. U.S. Pretrial Services Officer; Donna Long, d.b.a. Finance Manager, Bell Lexus; Bell Lexus; and John Doe, 1-10; are agents of the private corporations, BELL LEXUS, COUNTY OF MARICOPA, STATE OF ARIZONA, UNITED STATES and UNITED NATIONS.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

3.   In 1871, the UNITED STATES incorporated in England, which in turn made it an English corporation. Due to impending bankruptcy in 1933, the UNITED STATES made a "New Deal" (a contract) with the UNITED STATES citizens (not the American Sovereigns) on March 9, 1933 entitled, Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session. The contract stated that  "It (the new money) will represent a mortgage on all the homes and other property of all the people in the Nation." As a result, title of property was turned over to the State as evidenced by the statement in the contract, "The ownership of all property is in the State". In order to account for the increase gained by use of the people's property, the UNITED STATES created artificial entities for each of the people using their owns names, however spelled in all capital letters. For example, John Doe the man would have an entity entitled JOHN DOE.

4.    On or about October 31, 1954, The UNITED STATES under contract with the creditor of the bankruptcy created an artificial entity entitled JOHN HENRY DOE.  The application for the birth certificate created by the state when John Henry Doe was born was the instrument upon which the Artificial Entity was created. Thus the application for the birth certificate, hereinafter “title,” was registered in the commercial registry through a constructive contract created by the state and through this title made John Henry Doe the fiduciary for the artificial entity.

5.   All contracts i.e., application for driver’s license, application for Social Security and any other adhesion, constructive, gratuitous, onerous, quasi and any other invisible contracts were made with the artificial entity created by the state - NOT with the Secured Party, John Henry Doe as the Secured Party, I hereby accept for value all of the above contracts.

6.    On August 23 2000, I, John Henry Doe filed UCC-1 Financing Statement #2000-236-0017 with the Secretary of State in the State of Washington which included the Security Agreement between the Debtor, JOHN HENRY DOE (the fictitious entity created by the state) and the superior claimant of right, John Henry Doe.  This act secured title to the artificial entity created by the state and secures to John Henry Doe all property attached to the artificial entity under the name of JOHN HENRY DOE.  This claim is undisputed and therefore stands by fiat that John Henry Doe is Secured Party, Holder In Due Course and creditor of JOHN HENRY DOE.

7.    On October 1, 2001, Secured Party was arrested by Phoenix Police Officers Metelski and Moore in the office of Donna Long, at Bell Lexus and was handcuffed and detained against his will. Secret Service Agents Jones and Mendoza arrived and Agent Mendoza proceeded to interview the Secured Party. Secured Party immediately gave the above mentioned parties testimony of the Secretary of State of the State of Washington that stated John Henry Doe is in fact the Secured Party and superior claimant to all matters involving the person charged. Officer Metelski, Officer Moore and Secret Service Agents Jones and Mendoza knew or should have known that Secured Party is not in the UNITED STATES or any of their agent’s jurisdiction. Officer Metelski threatened Secured Party with physical violence if Secured Party did not comply with their demands.

8.    Secured Party was then asked for consent to search his house, which Secured Party shares with the owner of the house, Darren Starwynn. Secured Party initially declined said consent and then was advised by Agent Mendoza that if he did not give consent that they would get a search warrant and violate Mr. Starwynns privacy as well. Only under this threat, duress and coercion, did Secured Party agree to allow the agents to search only his own possessions in residence. Agents Jones and Mendoza then took Secured Party’s two computer systems, along with several boxes of files and folders of legal documents, as well as checks and other documentation against Secured Party’s will.

9.   Secured Party was then incarcerated, arraigned before Virgina Mathis on 10/2/01, and was taken before Morton Sitver on 10/3/01 on a detainment hearing. Secured Party conditionally accepted a public defender to represent the debtor under the condition that the interests of the Secured Party be put first before the interests of the court and the interests of the UNITED STATES. On 10/3/01 Secured Party was released on personal recognizance and was advised that the Debtor would be placed in third party custody of Darren Starwynn, with various restrictions and requirements of reporting.

10.  Secured Party has accepted for value all offers to contract made by the above named respondents with a qualified acceptance of Secured Party's additional terms and conditions.

11.  Secured Party, on behalf of the artificial entity, JOHN HENRY DOE, hereby accepts the offer to contract with a qualified acceptance and herein states the new terms and conditions.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT

12. Each Respondent agrees to compensate Secured Party for the following:

A.     $10,000,000.00 for each arrest   @1 arrest = $10,000.000.
B.       $1,000,000.00 for each day of involuntary servitude @ 2 days $2,000,000.
C.      $1,000,000.00 for each court appearance, warrant or ticket
       @ 1 arrest warrant, and 2 court appearances                        $3,000,000.

D.      $100,000.00 per day that the warrant is in effect @ 8 days   $800,000.
E.       $100,000.00 per day that Secured Party’s possessions are retained.@ 8 days               $800,000.
TOTAL as of October 9, 2001                                                                   $16,600,000.

13.   Each Respondent has 10 days from the time of  this notice to deliver funds to Secured Party.

14.   In the event each Respondent does not deliver $16,600,000 plus daily fines to Secured Party  as agreed to in the contract, Respondent hereby agrees to be subject to involuntary bankruptcy proceedings on each party in their private and public capacity.

15.  In the event Respondents withdraw their offer to contract entitled, CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, Case Number 01-0313M, within 10 days then this contract will become void and Secured Party will not proceed with the enforcement of  the above terms and conditions.

16.   Notice is hereby given that Secured Party does not consent to Respondents judging him on any matter in any instance, at any location, at any time now or in the future.

17.   Secured Party does not consent to incarceration, detainment, or punishment in any manner.

18.  Secured Party hereby demands that all personal property that was taken from him without his free will consent from the Secret Service agents and Jones be returned to him immediately.

19.  All terms and conditions of this agreement are approved by both parties.

20.  If Respondent wishes to respond to this contract, it must be in form of Affidavit, point for point, with supporting documentation and mailed to Secured Party’s agent, Notary Public William Smith at 41 S. Mesa Drive, #A, Mesa, Arizona 85210.

       It has been said, so it is done.              Signed and Sealed this 9th  day of October 2001.



 _____________________________

      John Henry Doe, Secured Party



Arizona                  )

                                )  ss                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Maricopa county )



As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this _____ day of _____________2002 the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:



_____________________________        

Notary Public



                        John Henry Doe

c/o 6880 S. Broadway

Tucson, AZ 85746

Secured Party


Contract No 101101-JHD-US

To:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Virginia Mathis, d.b.a. Magistrate

Morton Sitver, d.b.a. Magistrate

Dick Mesh, d.b.a. Assistant U.S. Attorney

Roland Mendoza, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Chuck Jones, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Mr. Metelski, d.b.a Police Officer #5794

Mr. Moore, d.b.a. Police Officer #6803

Raymond Garcia, d.b.a. U.S. Pretrial Services Officer

Donna Long, d.b.a. Finance Manager, BELL LEXUS



NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND ENTRY FOR NOTARIAL PROTEST

                                 

Arizona                 )                NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

                 )  ss           NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Pima  County       )

            Notice is hereby given, that the above named respondents are in Default upon the contract, entitled Notice of Acceptance to Contract presented to you on 7 November 2001, and therefore a Notarial Protest has been entered upon them.

            By the terms and conditions of the agreement contained in the Secured Party's affidavit, you were under obligation to timely and in good faith protest and make proper presentment with proof of your claim or interest. Your failure to do so is a dishonor and places you at Default.

            By your default, you are deemed to be under the new terms and conditions of our original contract #101101-JSC-US, and have therefore waived all of your rights to your original presentment and terms. Any attempt to collect on your original presentment places you personally at risk for any damages incurred per this contract and may subject you to criminal sanctions and involuntary bankruptcy.

In order to exhaust all administrative remedies, it is required that a Notarial Protest be executed to obtain any evidence and/or testimony from Respondent that could aid in his defense. In the event no response is received by the Public Official (Notary), this will act as a witness against Respondent. Upon default, a CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR will be issued which will act as a Default Judgment against Respondent who will then be taken in to bankruptcy liquidation whereby all the equity in the name of Respondent will be disposed of in a foreign proceeding.



 _______________________________

11/27/01

 John Henry Doe                      

July 13, 2002

John Henry Doe
c/o 6880 S. Broadway
Tucson, AZ 85746

             

William Smith, Notary Public
P.O. Box 86182
Tucson. Arizona 85754

Request for Notarial Protest



This is a request for you to enter a Notarial Protest to the attached list of Respondents at their respective addresses. I have included Contract #101101-JHD-US beginning with the first Notice mailed, with proof of service, dated August 19, 2001;  The Second Notice dated September 6, 2001; and Default Judgment, dated October 7, 2001

Would you please follow up on this private negotiation under your notary seal and send along the accompanying acceptance of each of their acts and actions of which I have enclosed herewith.

Thank you for your prompt attention in this matter.

                                                                                                Sincerely

                                                                                                _____________________________

 John Henry Doe


NOTICE OF DISHONOR

1/3/2000

Roland Mendoza, d.b.a.

 Secret Service Agent

105 E Speedway

Phoenix, Arizona 85684

Dear Mr. Mendoza,

I received a request by affidavit for a protest pursuant to Arizona Revised Statues at Sections 47-3505(a), from John Henry Doe, who informed me you dishonored his presentments consisting of  the NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE TO CONTRACT and NOTICE OF DEFAULT dated 1/2/2000 and sent to you at 105 E Speedway NW, Washington D.C. 20220 on 1/2/2000, as evidenced by U.S. Postal Service CERTIFICATE OF MAILING verifying the contents of the Mail package.

In the event your dishonor through non-acceptance or non-performance was unintentional or due to reasonable neglect or impossibility, I am attaching a copy of the same presentment to this Notice.

You may respond to me, and I will forward your response to John Henry Doe. Your response is expected no later than ten (10) days from the postmark of this Notice of Dishonor.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

______________________________________

Notary Public (name)

Address:

______________________________________

______________________________________

______________________________________



  (Stamp)                                          (Seal)

NOTICE OF PROTEST AND

OPPORTUNITY TO CURE

1/4/2000

Roland Mendoza, d.b.a.

Secret Service Agent

105 E Speedway

Phoenix, Arizona 85684



Dear Mr. Mendoza,

On 1/3/2000, I sent you a Notice of Dishonor regarding the presentments of NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE TO CONTRACT and NOTICE OF DEFAULT sent you on 1/2/2000. You failed to accept or perform after receiving these presentments from John Henry Doe, and you failed to accept or perform after receiving the same presentment from me.

You are now in default and have stipulated to the terms of John Henry Doe's 1/2/2000 dated presentment through your dishonor. You have the right to cure this default and perform according to said terms within the ten (10) days from the postmark of this Notice. Should you fail to cure the default, I will issue a CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR pursuant to Arizona Revised Statues 47-3535.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

_______________________________________

Notary Public

________________________________

_____________________________

_____________________________

Address of Notary



(Stamp)                                                   (Seal)

CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR

I, William Smith, am the notary to whom all communications are to be mailed regarding the contract entitled CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE and Contract #101101-JHD-US in response to Public Account # 01-0313M, herein "presentment.”

Pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes 47-3505(b), and Uniform Commercial Code 3-505(b) and 1-202, Notice of Protest is hereby given with Certificate of Dishonor regarding the following:

On September 22, 2001, I sent a Notice of Dishonor of John Henry Doe's presentment to Respondent Roland Mendoza, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent,  herein "Respondent,” located at 1500 Pennsylvania Ave, Phoenix, Arizona 85684, who was given 10 days to respond.

On October 22, 2001, Proof of Service shows a Notice of Protest and Opportunity to Cure was mailed to Respondent who was given 10 days to respond.

As of this date, no response had been delivered to me, the designated receiver. I interviewed John Henry Doe, whose affidavit is attached to this Notarial Protest. John Henry Doe has stated to me by affidavit that Petitioner has received no response to said Contract at any other mailing location. Based on the foregoing information, Respondent has dishonored John Henry Doe's presentments by non-acceptance and/or non-performance and have therefore assented to the terms and conditions in said Contract. _____________________________

William Smith, Third Party Witness



Arizona                  )

                                )  ss                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county         )

 As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this _____ day of _____________2002 the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:



_____________________________        

Notary Public

INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL

Contract No 101101-JHD-US


John Henry Doe

c/o 6880 S. Broadway

Tucson, AZ 85746



Affiant
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Virginia Mathis, d.b.a. Magistrate

Morton Sitver, d.b.a. Magistrate

Dick Mesh, d.b.a. Assistant U.S. Attorney

Roland Mendoza, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Chuck Jones, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Mr. Metelski, d.b.a Police Officer #5794

Mr. Moore, d.b.a. Police Officer #6803

Raymond Garcia, d.b.a. U.S. Pretrial Services Officer

Donna Long, d.b.a. Finance Manager, BELL LEXUS

Respondent



 NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND ENTRY FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

Arizona  )         NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

)  ss         NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Pima county )
 I, John Henry Doe, herein “Affiant,” having been duly sworn, declares that affidavit and response of the parties to the contract entitled, Notice of NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE TO CONTRACT, hereinafter "Contract," are in full agreement regarding the following:

1.      Affiant is competent to state to the matters included in his/her declaration, has knowledge of the facts, and declared that to the best of his/her knowledge, the statements made in his/her affidavit are true, correct, and not meant to mislead;

2.      Affiant is the secured party, superior claimant, holder in due course, and principal creditor having a registered priority lien hold interest to all property held in the name of JOHN HENRY DOE organization # 520-80-6307, evidenced by UCC-1 Financing Statement #0565988 filed with the Secretary of State of the State of West Virginia.

3.      On October 9, 2001, Affiant sent Respondents a Notice of Acceptance to Contract, each by registered mail, stating that he had exercised his power of acceptance and accepted all offers and actions made by Respondents with qualified terms as detailed in the Contract.

4.      Affiant or the designated Notary has received no response to date so Respondents are in Default and have therefore fully agreed to all of the terms and conditions of the contract

5.      Respondents have fully assented to all the actions as described in the contract and therefore have confessed to the following felonies; aggravated kidnapping, terrorism, terroristic threats, trespassing, grand theft, impeding the commerce of the Secured Party, and involuntary servitude

6.      All administrative remedies have been exhausted including the execution of a Notarial Protest to obtain any evidence and/or testimony from Respondent that could aid in his defense. No response has been received by the Public Official (Notary), and therefore this acquiescence will act as a witness against Respondent as evidenced by the attached CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR which will act as a Default Judgment against Respondent who will then be taken in to bankruptcy liquidation whereby all the equity in the name of Respondent will be disposed of in a foreign proceeding.
It has been said, so it is done.



Dated this          day of                          , 2002.

                                                                                                                                         

John Henry Doe, Affiant

Arizona                  )

                                )  ss                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county         )



As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this _____ day of _____________2002 the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:________________

Notary Public


         INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL

Contract No 101101-JHD-US

John Henry Doe

c/o 6880 S. Broadway

Tucson, AZ 85746



Affiant
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Virginia Mathis, d.b.a. Magistrate

Morton Sitver, d.b.a. Magistrate

Dick Mesh, d.b.a. Assistant U.S. Attorney

Roland Mendoza, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Chuck Jones, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Mr. Metelski, d.b.a Police Officer #5794

Mr. Moore, d.b.a. Police Officer #6803

Raymond Garcia, d.b.a. U.S. Pretrial Services Officer

Donna Long, d.b.a. Finance Manager, BELL LEXUS

                  Respondents



DEFAULT JUDGMENT - DECISION

having the same effect as Res Judicata and Stare Decisis

Arizona                   )                    NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
 )&bsp;   NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Pima county         )                                                                    
Based on the attached affidavit entitled “Notice of Default, RE: Private Contract entitled, Notice of Acceptance to Contract, hereinafter "Contract", and the evidence attached to said affidavit, all of which has been presented to this panel,

JUDGMENT

IT IS THE JUDGMENT OF THIS PANEL that:

1.         Petitioner is a Secured Party/Creditor over the property of JOHN HENRY DOE.

On three occasions Petitioner properly noticed Respondents, in their private capacity and
            in his public capacity as an agent for UNITED STATES, of the Contract and  

            Respondents’ corresponding duty to respond, and that he properly commenced, continued,

            and concluded said Contract.

3.                  Respondent failed to answer or otherwise respond, and therefore stands in agreement with Petitioner.

4.         Maxims of law in support of Petitioner’s request to this panel are:

                        An unrebutted affidavit is a judgment in commerce.
                        In commerce truth is sovereign.
                        Truth is expressed in the form of an affidavit.
                        A lien or claim can be satisfied only through rebuttal by counter-affidavit
                        point-for-point, resolution by jury, or payment.
                        The proof lies on him who affirms, not on him who denies.
                        The agreement of the parties makes the law of the contract.
                        A man’s word is his bond.
                        For truth to be established, it must be expressed.
                        Silence is agreement.
                        He who leaves the battlefield first loses by default.
                        When a party has a duty to speak, his silence equates with fraud.
                        An accessory follows the nature of his principal.
                        A contract founded on a base or unlawful consideration, or against good
                        morals, is null.
                         Sacrifice is the measure of credibility.  One who has not been damaged by,
                        given to, lost on account of, or put at risk by another has no basis to make
                        claims or charges against him.

DECISION

THEREFORE, IT IS THE DECISION OF THIS PANEL that the parties have reached the following agreement:

1.      Petitioner has exercised his power of acceptance and has accepted all offers made by Respondents to contract and therefore has undisputed ownership of the Contract.

2.      Respondent has agreed that John Henry Doe is in fact the Secured Party in this matter, and has agreed to all of the terms and conditions set forth in the Contract.

3.      Respondent, in their private and public capacities as agent for UNITED STATES, failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, against the property of JOHN HENRY DOE which is currently pledged as security to the Petitioner.

4.      Respondents have agreed to be subject to Involuntary Bankruptcy in their private and public capacities.

5.      Respondent’s claims are unenforceable ab initio.

            Done this                       day of                                      , Two Thousand Two.

                                                            L.S.                                                                   (SEAL)

                                                            disinterested third party, as private administrative judge

                                                            L.S.                                                                   (SEAL)

                                                            disinterested third party, as private administrative judge

                                                            L.S.                                                                   (SEAL)

                                                            disinterested third party, as private administrative judge

Arizona                 )

                                ) ss                                          ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima  county        )



For the purpose of verification of signatures and for public notice, I the undersigned Notary Public, being commissioned in the county noted above, do declare on the          day of                   , 2001, the ones known to me to be, or who proved to me to be                                                                    did execute this document before me.



                                                                                                                                                        Notary Public                                                                       My Commission expires



         2.  ENACTING THE CONTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this procedure is to file and PERFECT the claim that you have against a debtor if they have dishonored you or your acceptance of their offer AND ENACT IT AS LAW. Before starting this process, one must have accepted all offers given to them, completed the administrative procedure, including the Notarial Protest, and now have a secured claim against the debtor. This procedure starts once you have a CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR from the Notary which is as valid as a Default Judgment in a Superior Court.

Bankrupt [L bank a bench + ruptus broken, literally one whose bench has been broken, the bench or table which a merchant or banker formerly used in the exchange having been broken on his bankruptcy.]

The Consolidated WEBSTER’S Encyclopedic Dictionary 1939 edition.

Bankrupt. Originally and strictly, a trader who secretes himself or does certain other acts tending to defraud his creditors. In a looser sense, an insolvent person. In English law there were two characteristics which distinguished bankrupts from insolvents; the former must have been a trader and the object of the proceedings against, not by him. As used in American law, the distinction between a bankrupt and an insolvent is not generally regarded.

            Do you find it interesting that a “bankrupt” is one who acts to “defraud his creditors?” Who fits the description of a trader and who is the creditor?

Trader. One who makes it his business to buy merchandise, goods, or chattels to sell the same at a  profit. One who sells goods substantially in the form in which they are bought; one who has not converted them into another form of property by his skill and labor.

            The above definitions for “bankrupt” or “trader” could not be found in the Black’s 6th edition and here is probably why. What institution do you know of  “sells chattels substantially in the form in which they are bought?” Here is a hint – what does the bank do when they deposit your promissory note as an asset instead of a liability, then writes a check off of the deposit to give to the seller of the property? First of all, the bankers do not “buy” your credit with “money.”  After you GIVE your credit to them, they sell your credit to the seller of the property without “converting it into another form.” It goes in and comes out the same – your credit! Or as they would say “money.” Could this be considered of the bank to be an “act to defraud his creditor?”

Bankrupt Law. The leading distinction between a bankrupt law and an insolvent law, in the proper technical sense, consists in the character of the persons upon whom it is designed to operate, - the former contemplating as its objects bankrupts only, that is traders of a certain description; the latter insolvents in general, or persons unable to pay their debts. This has led to a marked separation between the two systems, in principle and in practice, which in England has always been carefully maintained, although the United States it has of late been disregarded. The only substantial difference between a strictly bankrupt law and an insolvent law lies in the circumstance that the former affords relief upon the application of the creditor, and the latter upon the application of the debtor.

            Why do you think that United States has failed to maintain the difference between bankrupt and insolvency? I have a theory.  Since they call you “bankrupt,” they are “assuming” that you are acting to defraud your creditors and therefore you are in dishonor before walking into the court room, and that you are considered a “criminal” by the mere fact the you filed your bankruptcy petition.

            Following is a step by step set of instructions that will assist you in your taking the equity from your debtors. Note, this is only an example that has been used to take property – one will still have to continue processes to KEEP IT! This procedure will, of course, be improved from time to time, but it is a good place to start.

Steps in Sequence

1.                  Notice of Substitution of Trustee

2.                  Notice of  Bankruptcy Petition in a Foreign Proceeding

3.                  Collateral Found

4.                  Substitution of Trustee

5.                  UCC-1 assigned

6.                  Notice of Disposition

7.                  Disposition – Real Property

8.                  Disposition — Personal Property

9.                  Disposition — Vehicle

10.              Confirmation of Receipt of Recordings and Filings

1.                  Notice of Substitution of Trustee

Information.  An accusation exhibited against a person for some criminal offense, without an indictment. An accusation in the nature of an indictment, from which it differs only in being presented by a competent public officer on his oath of office, instead of a grand jury on their oath. Function of an “information” is to inform defendant of the nature of the charge made against him and the act constituting such charge so that he can prepare for trial and to prevent him from being tried again for the same offense. Black’s Law Dictionary 6th edition

Notary Public. A public officer whose function it is to administer oaths; to attest and certify, by his hand and official seal, certain classes of documents, in order to give them credit and authenticity in foreign jurisdictions; the noting of foreign drafts.

      Operating outside a bankruptcy proceeding is considered to be a crime according to 11 USCA. Any public official who is aware of an activity evidencing “unlawful operations” must report such activity to the “proper authorities” such as a US Attorney or the US Bankruptcy Trustee (John Snow).  An information is an accusation exhibited by a “public official.” Since a Notary is a “public official” and has first hand knowledge of the crime by doing a Notarial Protest on that person, the Notary must report such activities by “information.” The information will be in the form of a “Certificate of Dishonor” issued by the Notary that will include all previous notices and evidence of  noticing that you have done since the beginning of the matter.

      The information will be written by you and will contain all details and specifics on such activities and must be in affidavit form in order for a criminal complaint to be initiated and the matter investigated by the US Attorney or any other agency with a duty to handle the matter.

      ACCEPTANCE SUPRA PROTEST (Acceptance for Honor). The acceptance or payment of a bill of exchange, after it has been dishonored, by a person wishing to save the honor of the drawer or an endorser of the bill.

Dictionary of Business, Oxford University Press, © Market House Books Ltd 1996

Supra Protest. In Mercantile law. A term applied to an acceptance of a bill by a third person, after protest for non-acceptance by the drawee. Black’s 4th edition

The second purpose for sending this document is to allow all of the notified parties an opportunity to “accept for honor” this matter. This package is to be sent to the Trustee of the UNITED STATES Bankruptcy, John Snow, so they can investigate why the debtor is unlawfully using your exemption and operating outside the US Bankruptcy. If this third party (who represents you, the Creditor) does not wish to save the honor of the debtor (a sub-corporation or the U.S.), you will put the debtor into Involuntary Bankruptcy.

You will give a ten (10) day notice to the “proper authorities” in order to accept for honor or handle the situation. If they fail to respond, their silence is their consent for you to administrate and conclude the involuntary bankruptcy in a foreign proceeding – your court, as a foreign nation. This is pursuant to 11 USCA 303(b)(4). At this point, the state, United States or all of their agents can not come back to you and bring up the fact that you “did not have the authority” to liquidate the debtor’s property.

The third purpose of this document is to give John Snow, the chapter 11 – Re-organization Bankruptcy Trustee, a notice of substitution. Being a chapter 11 trustee, he is not qualified to commence with any chapter 7 – Liquidation proceedings so he must be “substituted” by another who is qualified to do so.

      11 USCA 703 Successor trustee

(a) If a trustee dies or resigns during a case, fails to qualify under section 322 of this title or is removed under section 324 of this title, creditors may elect, in the manner specified in section 702 of this title, a person to fill the vacancy in the office of trustee.

Since the proceeding is foreign, you would not need a “person to fill the vacancy in the office of trustee,” you would elect or assign a “private” trustee yourself.

Substitution. Putting in one person in the place of another; particularly, the act of a testator in naming a second devisee who is to take the bequest either on failure of the original devisee after him. Black’s 4th edition

      Testator. One who makes a will.

Devisee. A person to whom lands or other real property are devised or given by will. In the case of a devise to an existing trust or trustee, or to a trustee on trust described by will, the trust or trustee is the devisee and the beneficiaries are not devisees.

Devise. A testamentary disposition of land or realty by the last will and testament of the donor; to dispose of real or personal property by will.

      You may be asking “what does a will have to do with bankruptcy or trusts?” or “who died leaving you in charge anyway?”

      One must remember that the debtor is a “trust” created by the state in order to keep an accounting of all the credit they are using in the creditor’s name. It is just an account with the debtor showing how much the state or United States is liable to the creditor – the real man or woman.

The debtor is actually an unincorporated corporation (pursuant to 15 USCA 44) that has been operating in the public venue as a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES in a chapter 11 – Reorganization Bankruptcy. You as its creditor have allowed UNITED STATES and all its sub-corporations to operate in the bankruptcy on the condition that they must honor your method of payment per HJR 192. As creditor, your method of payment is a “set-off,” or a cancellation of mutual debt.  Their debt being interest due for the use of your credit that is backed by your property and your production.  However, once the debtor dishonors your method of payment,  then you may choose to “liquidate” the debtor by disposing all the property in the debtor’s name. In other words “game over.”

When the debtor is liquidated, that corporation “dies.” Now the trust becomes a will and you have the superior claim to the property - unless the state wanted to bring their claim against the debtor! I would love to see them do that – they would have to admit to creating the strawman and consequently blow the lid off this whole scam.

After ten days with no response received regarding this matter, you will file a petition with the US Bankruptcy Court.

2.                  Notice of Bankruptcy Petition in a Foreign Proceeding

      11 USCA 303. Involuntary cases

(b) An involuntary case against a person is commenced by the filing with the bankruptcy court of a petition under chapter 7 or 11 of this title –

(4) by a foreign representative of the estate in a foreign proceeding concerning such person.    

An involuntary bankruptcy proceeding is commenced “by filing with the  Bankruptcy Court of a petition under chapter 7…” Chapter 7 is “liquidation” of all the assets under the debtor’s name. You prepare a NOTICE OF BANKRUPTCY PETITION IN A FOREIGN PROCEEDING. Then you will take it to the US bankruptcy clerk and pay them with a private check. The clerk will then stamp the original and keep it, then stamp your copy. It does not really matter what they do with this petition as it is serving as a “notice” to the court that a foreign proceeding will be commencing on the debtor.

3.                   Collateral Found and Listed

There are a number of ways to find collateral.  The fastest and easiest way is to call an online private detective, the website is www.americafind.com .  The phone number is 713-271-9518.  For $99 the detective searches 22 databases to find the address, social security number, real property and other information of the Offeror.  One can also go down to the Department of Motor Vehicles and tell them that you are going to place a lien on the Offeror’s vehicle and that you need the Vehicle Identification Number (V.I.N. number) for the lien.  There are other detective services that are being tested and you can find your own methods by trial and error (one is Windsor Judicial Services).  However, the main object of finding collateral is to find their social security number, address, real property and vehicle.  List all the collateral as a separate attachment.  An example of the specific descriptions is provided with these instructions.  The goal is to attach this list of collateral to a UCC-3 with the Offeror as the Debtor and claim it as your own property by filing it with the Secretary of State.

4.                  Substitution of Trustee

This document substitutes John Snow, the chapter 11 –  Re-organization Trustee, with the Chapter 7 – Liquidation Trustee.  The substitution trustee will be named and an address given where to contact the trustee. This is a straight forward simple summary which will be attached to your UCC-1 when you file it along with the list of collateral.

5.                  UCC-1 assigned

When you get the list of collateral done you are now ready to fill out a UCC-1.  Fill-in the Debtors information and your information as the Secured Party in the appropriate boxes.  The assignee, in section 5, who will receive the “Assignment for the benefit of Creditors” (you as the creditor), will be someone you know and trust.  You will assign the collateral to the assignee, with the intent to dispose of it.  The assignee is actually listed as an unincorporated foreign corporation, which is the strawman corporation of the flesh and blood being.  This is a method of separating and using the strawman as an interface to the public venue, while remaining in the private side.  This assignment is described more fully in Black’s Dictionary, 6th Edition.

Assignment for benefit of creditors:  A general assignment for benefit of creditors is transfer of all or substantially all of debtors property to another person in trust to collect any money owing to debtor, to sell property, to distribute the proceeds to his creditors and to return the surplus, if any, to debtor.   Under Bankruptcy Act of 1898, such assignment was an “act of  bankruptcy” if made within four months of bankruptcy.

Now that the UCC-1 has been filled out, attach the NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE, SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE, LIST OF COLLATERAL, CERTIFICATE OF DISHONOR and your NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE TO CONTRACT with the DEFAULT.  File these documents in the office of  the secretary of the state, then when you get your copy back from them, send a copy to the Debtor

6.                  Notice of Disposition

You must give the debtor at least a 10-day notification before you dispose of the property.  Less is not considered a reasonable period of time.  “Authenticated” in the definition below means notarized by a Notary Public and recorded at the County Recorders Office of the county the property is in.

UCC-9-611(b)       [Notification of disposition required.]  Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d),  a secure party that disposes of collateral under  Section 9-610 shall send to the persons specified in sub-section (c) a reasonable authenticated notice of disposition.

UCC-9-612(b)       [10-day period sufficient in non-consumer transaction.]  In a transaction other than a consumer transaction, a notification of disposition sent after default and 10 days or more before the earliest time of disposition set forth in the notification is sent within a reasonable time before the disposition.

Make a copy of the Notice of Disposition before you record it and send it to the Debtor giving him at least 10 days (21 to 30 days is better) notice to allow him a last chance remedy.  Send this Notice by Certified Mail or any other proof of service.
7.                  Disposition – Real Property

The assignee you assigned in your UCC-1 has the duty to dispose of all the collateral that you find under the debtors name or is associated with the debtor.

Bill of Sale.  In contracts, a written agreement, formerly limited to one under seal, by which one person assigns or transfers his right or interest in goods and personal chattels to another.  Legal document which conveys title from seller to buyer

When one transfers title using a bill of sale it is actually the only real title that exists on the private side.  This means that once you pay your property taxes with a closed checking account (substance) it takes the property out of the public side and a bill of sale is the only way it can be transferred privately.  Any and every other form of title, i.e. deed of trust, warranty deed, etc. is a fiction and will transfer the private property back to the public side.  The description of the real property should be in metes and bounds and township, section, and range if at all possible.  Include the address and former property identification (tax I.D.) with a note that this is a fictional description.

8.                  Disposition — Personal Property

All other personal property will be transferred with a bill of sale or a UCC-3.   Personal property may include BAR Licenses, business licenses, tradenames, trademarks,  copyrighted materials, bank accounts, computers and any other equipment.

9.                  Disposition — Vehicle

Vehicles will be transferred with a bill of sale and a transfer statement.  Transfer statements are normally provided by the Department of Motor Vehicles.  Request a transfer statement when you go to your DMV to register the vehicle and fill it out with the appropriate information.  Present the transfer statement with the bill of sale at the DMV window and you will receive your new registration and plates.

10.              Confirmation of Receipt of Recordings and Filings

This final step is to verify that all collateral is properly disposed of and titles transferred to their new owners.

John Henry Doe
c/o 6880 S. Broadway

Tucson, AZ 85746

 Creditor

Contract No 101101-JHD-US



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Virginia Mathis, d.b.a. Magistrate

Morton Sitver, d.b.a. Magistrate

Dick Mesh, d.b.a. Assistant U.S. Attorney

Roland Mendoza, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Chuck Jones, d.b.a. Secret Service Agent

Mr. Metelski, d.b.a Police Officer #5794

Mr. Moore, d.b.a. Police Officer #6803

Raymond Garcia, d.b.a. U.S. Pretrial Services Officer

Donna Long, d.b.a. Finance Manager, BELL LEXUS

             Debtors

NOTICE OF SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE

Arizona                                  )                NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

)  ss                NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Pima County                        )



            I, John Henry Doe, herein "Creditor,” hereby state that I am competent to make the following statements, have knowledge of the facts stated herein, that they are true, correct, complete and not meant to mislead and are presented in good faith:

1.      The corporations, entitled UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES, STATE OF ARIZONA, and above named, herein "Debtors," are Bankrupt and must operate pursuant to House Joint Resolution 192, June 5, 1933. The above corporations have been using the credit of Creditor since his birth, January 22, 1958, without remuneration to Creditor;

2.      Creditor has accepted all offers and returned them to the above named Debtors thereby discharging all controversy and all charges. Debtors then claimed the charge still exists and therefore they are liable for the debt.

3.      Creditor has accepted all offers and claims issued by Debtors and returned them to Debtors for proper processing. Debtors have failed to provide a remedy and is operating outside the UNITED STATES Bankruptcy – a criminal offense;

4.      Debtors are holding the discharging instrument, but has failed to provide Creditor with a copy of the 1099 Original Issue Discount, therefore Debtors are TAX DELINQUENT since the claim is considered to be Creditor’s exemption;

5.      Creditor has timely noticed Debtors and has properly commenced and concluded a perfected security interest against Debtors. The perfected security interest, Contract No. 101101-JHD-US herein “Contract,”  includes all notices including a Certificate of Dishonor, herein “Information,” issued by a Public Official.
TERMS AND CONDITIONS


6.      John Snow, the chapter 11 bankruptcy trustee for the UNITED STATES, is hereby given a final opportunity to execute an Acceptance for Honor if he wishes to save the honor of the Debtors by giving Creditor a remedy. In the event John Snow does not wish to save the honor of Debtors, it will constitute John Snow’s consent for substitution of trustee, whereas Creditor will designate an assignee of his choice to liquidate all of Debtor’s property in a foreign proceeding pursuant to Contract #101101-JHD-US;

7.      Debtor has ten (10) days from the date of postmark on this mailing to provide remedy regarding this matter.  In the event Debtor fails to provide a remedy, Creditor  will  accept evidence of Debtors’ dishonor  as a refusal  to volunteer into the bankruptcy remedy, whereby Debtors will be stripped of all immunity that UNITED STATES public policy may have otherwise afforded him. Upon dishonor, Debtors agrees in the alternative to Involuntary Bankruptcy that will be initiated on Debtors in a  private capacity;

8.      In the event Debtors dishonors, Debtors agree to provide a BANKRUPTCY FORM 5 in accord with 11 USCA 303 which is a property description list of all the property held in Debtors’ names.  Creditor will take the equity and place it for sale and proceed to liquidate the personal property for settlement of this account. Debtors additionally agrees to be placed on a UCC-1 Financing Statement as DEBTOR attaching it to a Declaration of Involuntary Bankruptcy and a list of Debtors’ collateral. Upon filing the UCC-1 form with the Secretary of State of Arizona (or your state), the liquidation and disposition of property will be executed immediately.

Dated this ____ of ____________, 2002.                                          
                 _______________________________
                        John Henry Doe

Arizona                  )

                                )  ss                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county         )

As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this _____day of___________________ the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the
foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:

_____________________________        

Notary Public


Copies forwarded to the following:

John Ashcroft
US Attorney General
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
Charles O. Rossotti
Internal Revenue Service, IRS
1111 Constitution Ave NW
Washington, DC 20224-0002

Norman Minetta
US Secretary of Transportation
400 Seventh Street, SW
Washington, DC 20590

Colin L. Powell
US Secretary of State
US Department of State
Washington, DC 20520-6810

Jane Hull
Governor of the State of Arizona
1700 W. Washington Ave.
Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (or your state)

Janet Napolitano
Office of Attorney General
Department of Law
1275 W. Washington Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (or your state)

Barbara LaWall
Pima County Attorney
32 N. Stone Avenue, Ste 2100
Tucson, AZ 85701 (or your state)
     

John Snow
US Secretary of Treasury
 DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY
1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington D.C. 20220
George W. Bush
President of the UNITED STATES
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington DC 20500

Director of Homeland Security
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington DC 20500

Brian L. Stafford
Director of Secret Service
US Government Service Agency
950 H Street, NW Ste 912
Washington, DC 20223

Betsey Bayless
Arizona Secretary of State
1700 W. Washington Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (or your state)

Arizona Judicial Commission
1501 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85077 (or your state)



John Henry Doe

6880 S. Broadway

Tucson, AZ 85746

Phone: 707-897-5129

                                    UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

                                                DISTRICT OF NEVADA



ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for          )           NOTICE OF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA                 )           BANKRUPTCY PETITION

CORPORATION, ASSIGNORS AND           )           CHAPTER 7  303(b)(4)

ASSIGNEES                                                )           IN A FOREIGN PROCEEDING

                                                                    )

                        DEBTOR                             )           CASE NO._________________

                                                                    )

TAX I.D. NO.________________                 )

                                                                    )

105 E Speedway                                            )

Phoenix, Arizona 85684                                  )

                        )
____________________________________)



Arizona state                        )                NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

)  ss                NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Pima county                         )

I, John Henry Doe, herein "Creditor", hereby state that I am competent to make the following statements, have knowledge of the facts stated herein, that they are true, correct, complete and not meant to mislead and are presented in good faith:

INFORMATION REGARDING DEBTOR

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  CORPORATION, ASSIGNORS AND ASSIGNEES, herein jointly “Debtor,” claims to be a person representing a legal entity, entitled UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, as a WASHINGTON D.C. corporation, doing business in the State of Arizona in the capacity of a revenue agent. Debtor has failed to honor registered securities of Creditor.

                                                           VENUE

Debtor has had a residence and/or principal assets in the District for 180 days immediately preceding the date of this petition.

                                                     ALLEGATIONS

1.                  Petitioner is eligible to file this petition pursuant to 11 USCA sec 303 (b)(4) as a foreign government.

2.                  The Debtor is a person against whom an order for relief may be entered under title 11 of the United States Code.

3.                  The Debtor is not paying such Debtor’s debts as they come due.

UNCONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE

Creditor and above referenced Debtors, entered into a private contractual agreement, Contract No. 101101-JHD-US, herein “Contract,” whereby Debtors accepted and agreed to Creditor taking the equity via involuntary bankruptcy proceedings upon Dishonor of said Contract. Debtors have since dishonored said Contract (see attachments).

Debtors have dishonored Creditor’s acceptance of Debtors’ offers which is in direct violation of House Joint Resolution 192 of March 9, 1933, Public Policy 73-10, 307 U.S. 251 & 252 and UCC 1-201 (24). Debtor has refused to deliver title to Creditor and has proceeded to take action to remove Creditor’s property without cause.

Creditor has exhausted all administrative proceedings and has perfected a security interest against Debtor, including a Notarial Protest (UCC 3-505).

            IT IS REQUESTED THAT;

1.                  Full and complete disclosure of all equity from all Debtors referenced in this matter be delivered to Creditor.

2.                  This court immediately secure ALL equity of Debtors for liquidation and/or delivery to Creditor.

3.                  An Order for Relief be entered against Debtor under 11 USCA sec.7

4.                  An Order to close the account #_____________ in accordance with United States Public Policy.

5.                  Creditor be honored to initiate liquidation action against Debtors in a foreign proceeding without interference from this court.



Dated this ____ of ____________, 2002.   _________________________________

               John Henry Doe, Creditor

                          6880 S. Broadway
   Tucson, AZ 85746

   Phone: 707-897-5129

For the purpose of verification of signature -- and seal -- and for public notice, I the undersigned Notary Public, being commissioned in the county noted above, do declare on the _____  day of ______________  2002, the one  known to me to be, or who proved to me to be  John Henry Doe did execute this document before me.



_____________________________                                   _____________________

Notary Public                                                                                   My Commission expires



                                                                                            Creditor:

        John Henry Doe

                                                         6880 S.Broadway
Tucson, AZ 85746

Debtor:

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

105 E Speedway      

Phoenix, Arizona 85684

SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE



Contract No 101101-JHD-US



Arizona                                  )                   NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

)  ss                    NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Pima County                        )



I, John Henry Doe, herein "Creditor", hereby state that I am competent to make the following statements, have knowledge of the facts stated herein, that they are true, correct, complete and not meant to mislead and are presented in good faith:

The undersigned beneficiary hereby appoints WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON, an unincorporated foreign corporation, successor chapter 7 trustee under the contract #10501-EPF executed by GEORGE A DUNSCOMB as Debtor, in which John Henry Doe is named as Creditor, and under the contract/treaty 100701-SWS whereby John Snow is named as the chapter 11 trustee of the UNITED STATES Bankruptcy.

            WHEREAS, the undersigned is the present Creditor under said contracts and,

            WHEREAS, the undersigned desires to substitute a new Trustee under said

Contract in the place and stead of said original Trustee thereunder.

NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned hereby substitutes WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON, an unincorporated foreign corporation, PMB 278, 1830 East Broadway Ste 124,     Tucson, AZ 85734

Dated this ____ of ____________, 2002.         _________________________________

              John Henry Doe, Creditor

For the purpose of verification of signature -- and seal -- and for public notice, I the undersigned Notary Public, being commissioned in the county noted above, do declare on the _____  day of ______________  2002, the one  known to me to be, or who proved to me to be  John Henry Doe did execute this document before me.



_____________________________                                           _________________

Notary Public                                                                                      My Commission expires


When recorded mail to:  William Hanson Harrison

                                     PMB 278, 1830 East Broadway Ste 124

          Tucson, AZ 85734


 NOTICE OF DISPOSITION

                                                             

Arizona                 )          NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

)  ss                NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT
Pima County        )

I, William Hanson Harrison, agent for WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON, an unincorporated foreign corporation, hereinafter “Grantor”, am competent to state the matters included in this contract which are true, correct and complete, and not meant to mislead.

Grantor has been designated to execute the ASSIGNMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREDITOR pursuant to the Involuntary Bankruptcy as stated in Contract No 101101-JHD-US in the UCC-1 Financing Statement filed June 3, 2002 with the Secretary of State of Arizona for

Secured Party:     John Henry Doe

            PO Box 34567,    Tucson, AZ 85734      Phone: (520) 465-7334



Grantor:                  WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON, an unincorporated foreign corporation

                                PMB 278, 1830 East Broadway Ste 124,     Tucson, AZ 85734



DEBTOR:         ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

                                105 E Speedway, Phoenix, AZ 85684



Interested Party:   JOHN SNOW, d.b.a. Trustee for U.S. Bankruptcy

                1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW

                                Washington D.C. 20220



the following described Real Property Located in PIMA, Arizona

CASAS BONITAS LOT 6, BLOCK B, BOOK 8 OF MAPS PLATS AT PAGE 28

Recorded  03/10/89 at Docket  8491,  Page  381,

At the Address of : 105 E Speedway, Phoenix, AZ 85684

PARCEL NUMBER 125-09-1760

We will sell the described property privately in 11 days, sometime after August 12, 2002. You are entitled to an accounting of the unpaid indebtedness secured by the property that we intend to sell. You may request an accounting by calling us at (520) 230-4919.

  _________________________
                WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON,
an unincorporated foreign corporation

 BY: William Hanson Harrison, Creditor
Arizona                  )

                                )  ss                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county         )



As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this _____day of____________________ the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:



_____________________________        

Notary Public



When recorded mail to:    JOHN SMITH

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746



                BILL OF SALE AND CONTRACT FOR DEED

For the consideration of TEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS, and other valuable considerations, I or we,

WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON, an unincorporated foreign corporation

PMB 278

1830 East Broadway Ste 124            

Tucson, AZ 85734  

GRANTOR



do hereby convey to

JOHN SMITH

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

GRANTEE

without covenant or warranty, express or implied, all right, title and interest of Grantor in Real Property in allodium. Pursuant to the Declaration of Involuntary Bankruptcy, Real Property was sold by Grantor at Bankruptcy Liquidation on June 19, 2002, at a private sale to Grantee who was the transferee for Real Property, for $94,000.00, which will be paid with $10,000.00 Down and monthly principal payments of $1,000.00 per month for eighty-four (84) months (7 years) with 0% interest.

the following formerly described Real Property Located in PIMA, Arizona

CASAS BONITAS LOT 6, BLOCK B, BOOK 8 OF MAPS PLATS AT PAGE 28

Recorded  03/10/89 at Docket  8491,  Page  381,

At the Address of : 105 E Speedway, Phoenix, AZ 85684

FORMER TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 125-09-1760

Grantee is now the owner of the land and property described above which is now private property exempt from levy and not under the jurisdiction of anyone or any artificial entity.



Transferred this ______Day of ____________, 2002.                              

                                                               _____________________________________

                                WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON, an unincorporated foreign corporation

                                                                        BY: William Hanson Harrison, Creditor

Arizona                  )

                                )  ss                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county         )



As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this _____day of____________________ the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:

_____________________________        

Notary Public


WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON

               an unincorporated foreign corporation

             PMB 2781830 East Broadway Ste 124

Tucson, AZ 85734



           BILL OF SALE

To Whom It May Concern:

For receipt of the sum of $5,000.00, WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON does hereby sell and transfer at a Bankruptcy Liquidation Sale the motor vehicle described as:

Make:                     Buick

Model:                   Electra

Year:                       1999

VIN:                        3994837237292200



To:                   JOHN SMITH

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746



Transferred this _________ day of _____________________ 2002.

  ________________________________
WILLIAM HANSON HARRISON,
an unincorporated foreign corporation

BY: William Hanson Harrison, Creditor

Arizona                  )

                                )  ss                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county         )



As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this _____day of____________________ the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:



_____________________________        

Notary Public

     3.  EXECUTING YOUR CONTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this procedure is to execute the claim that you have against a debtor in order to get your equity back. Before starting this process, one must have properly filed with your agent the Secretary of State and consequently now have a perfected secured claim against the debtor. This procedure starts after you have recorded a NOTICE OF DISPOSITION and sent the Debtor a copy of it giving them ten (10) days before the Liquidation Sale and then transferred the property.

Execute. To complete; to make; to sign; to perform; to do; to follow out; to carry out according to its terms; to fulfill the command or purpose of.

            This “eviction” process is the same one that the bank uses to remove people who do not know they are Creditors from their homes. We have taken the same documents they have sent us and are using them to evict the bankers from their own buildings! Is this a great country or what?

            The following documents will be used in this process:

1.      NOTICE REQUIRING DELIVERY OF POSSESSION OF PREMISES

2.      SERVICE OF PROCESS BY PRIVATE PERSON

3.      LETTER OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

4.      SUMMONS FOR FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER

5.      COMPLAINT IN FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER

6.      AFFIDAVIT FOR APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

7.      ENTRY FOR DEFAULT

8.      DEFAULT JUDGMENT

1.         NOTICE REQUIRING DELIVERY OF POSSESSION OF PREMISES

            After you have transferred title to another person, they will have to evict the tenants from the property.

Eviction.  Dispossession by process of law; the act of depriving a person of the possession of land or rental property which he has held or leased. Act of turning a tenant out of possession, either by re-entry or legal proceedings, such as an action of ejectment.

Re-entry.  The act of resuming the possession of lands or tenements in pursuance of a right which party exercising it reserved to himself when he quit his former possession. The right reserved by a grantor to enter the premises on breach of a condition of the conveyance.

Quit. To leave; remove from; surrender possession of; as when a tenant “quits” the premises or receives a “notice to quit.”

            Remember the quote from the 73rd Congress, March 9, 1933:

“It (the new money) will be worth 100 cents on the dollar, because it is backed by the credit of the Nation. It will represent a mortgage on all the homes and other property of all the people in the Nation.”

            You see, we as Creditors have given up our homes, property and substance to UNITED STATES to be mortgaged so that they can operate in the bankruptcy. When any agent in UNITED STATES breaches the “mortgage” then we can claim RE-ENTRY and enter the premises that we “quit” when we “surrendered the possession” of the property to the state originally in 1933. It does not matter if it is the same property, it matters that whenever an agent for UNITED STATES (our Debtor) breaches the contract we can claim “possession” of the property back.

2.         SERVICE OF PROCESS BY PRIVATE PERSON

            Service of Process can be done by a private person in the state of Arizona. You will have to check to see if this is legal in your state. The reason why this is so important in this case is that you will be going to court and this will be a requirement to have legal service of process. The process server can be anyone you know, but not a relative. They only need to serve the address if no one is present to answer the door.

            This process has nothing to do with serving the person – only the address. I know this for a fact as I had a house that I rented out and I never got the document that was served on the “tenants.” You see it is not the person occupying the property that matters, only the address that is served.

3.         LETTER OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

            After 7 days go back to the house and if they have vacated, send John Snow, the Trustee to the US Bankruptcy, a LETTER OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT acknowledging the delivery of the possession of the premises to the owner. Why John Snow, you might be asking? Because he is an agent of the US who manages the bankruptcy for you and you let him know that this property is no longer in the possession of UNITED STATES.

4.                  SUMMONS FOR FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER

If however, the “tenants” are detaining you from possession your property, you will start an eviction process to remove them. The summons will notify them of when they will have to answer or they will be in Default.

5.                  COMPLAINT IN FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER

Forcible Entry and Detainer.  A summary proceeding for restoring to possession of land by one who is wrongfully kept out or has been wrongfully deprived of the possession. An action to obtain possession or repossession of real property which had been transferred from one to another pursuant to contract; such proceeding is not an action to determine ownership of title to property.

            How many times have we gone to court thinking “we will just bring up all the paperwork we have sent them about ownership and title of the house?” So what did we learn when that did not work? Did we ever look up the meaning of this action? Noooooooooo! We just complained and blamed the system.

You see, this action has nothing to do with “ownership of title to property.” In fact, you cannot even bring it up as some of you have tried and gotten “denied.” This action is about TENANCY and only that. So when you walk into court, how do you think the judge and the bank attorney look at you? You got it – a tenant!

There is only one thing that can be brought up in that court room – do you have a lease agreement or not. No one that I know has ever had a lease with the bank because they “assigned” the lease to the bank when they signed the Deed of Trust (no kidding)! So when the “tenant” cannot provide a lease, he is given an arbitrary time to remove himself from the premises. He is also told how much rent he is being charged with per day – now he really is a tenant.

Since this works so well on us, it will work on them. When you evict the bank, it will not matter how many attorneys they bring into the courtroom – THEY CAN NEVER BRING UP OWNERSHIP OF THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY!!!!! Use their own instruments against them. Is that justice or what?

6.                  AFFIDAVIT FOR APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

After 20 days (30 days for out of state) and you do not get an answer from the tenants, they have defaulted and you can file for a Default Judgment. This must be in affidavit form summarizing what has been done to this point. You will also file the ENTRY FOR DEFAULT for the Clerk of the Court to sign, and the DEFAULT JUDGMENT for the judge to sign.

7.                  ENTRY FOR DEFAULT

This document is written up by you as if the Clerk of the Court was writing it. The clerk will verify that no response or answer has been made by Defendants, then the clerk will issue a NOTICE OF DEFAULT to the Defendant giving them 10 additional days to answer. If Defendants do not answer within 10 days, the clerk will take this to the judge or even issue the Default themselves.

8.                  DEFAULT JUDGMENT

Since there has been no response from the Defendants, the judge will have no

choice but to issue the DEFAULT JUDGMENT in your favor. Now the clerk will issue a “Writ of Restitution” to the Sheriff to evict the tenants from your property. If this does not happen you can also get the U.S. Marshal to remove the tenants.

JOHN SMITH

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

NOTICE REQUIRING DELIVERY OF POSSESSION OF PREMISES

TO:     ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

            AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR SUBTENANTS

            POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT:

            105 E Speedway                                          

Phoenix, AZ 85684

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, John Smith has purchased the above described property at a liquidation sale under Involuntary Bankruptcy proceedings by Notice of Disposition and transferred by a Bill of Sale duly recorded.

NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that within seven ( 7 ) days after the service of this NOTICE upon you, you are required to deliver up possession of the above described premises to the undersigned, or legal proceedings will be commenced against you to recover possession of said premises.

This NOTICE is given to you pursuant to Section 12-1171 through 12-1174 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. For further information, please contact Wade at (520) 883-3556.

DATED THIS: _________________, 2002

                                                                        OWNER: __________________________.

                                                                                                                        John Smith

 JOHN SMITH

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

                                    PIMA COUNTY, STATE OF ARIZONA



John Smith                                                                    )

                                                                                    )

                                    vs                                             )

                                                                                    )

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for                          )

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORPORATION      )

AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR                     )

SUBTENANTS                                                            )

POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT:              )           SERVICE OF PROCESS

105 E Speedway                                                           )           BY PRIVATE PERSON

Phoenix, AZ 85684                                                       )

__________________________________________      )



I declare that I am a citizen of the United States, over the age of eighteen, and not a party to this action. And that within the boundaries of the state where service was affected, I was authorized to perform said service.

On August 14, 2002, I received a document entitled, NOTICE REQUIRING DELIVERY OF POSSESSION OF PREMISES.

Copies of which I personally served as follows:

UPON OCCUPANT, BY SERVING ONE TRUE COPY UPON JOHN DOE RESIDING THEREIN, AT THE ADDRESS OF 9322 South Patricia Drive, Tucson, PIMA COUNTY, Arizona 85746, AT THE HOUR OF 11:15 AM.

TOTAL COST OF SERVICE:  $25.00

                                                                                   ________________________

                                                                                                William Smith



Arizona                   )

                                )  ss                                         ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county            )



As a Notary Public for said County and State, I do hereby certify that on this ____ day of ____________________ the above mentioned appeared before me and executed the foregoing. Witness my hand and seal:



_____________________________  

Notary Public



John Smith

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

LETTER OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT



TO:      JOHN SNOW, d.b.a. Trustee for U.S. Bankruptcy

1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW

            Washington D.C. 20220

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS HEREBY GIVEN that, STATEN ISLAND SAVINGS BANK AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR SUBTENANTS, herein “Tenants”, have vacated and have delivered up possession of the above-described premises to the undersigned owner of the property, John Smith.

NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that, at anytime in the future, Tenants or any agent thereof wishing to enter the property, a request in writing to John Smith will be required 10 days in advance. Permission will be granted upon the discretion of the owner. If forcible entry is made by Tenants from this point forward legal proceedings will be commenced against them to recover possession of said premises.

Tenants are thanked for their cooperation in this matter.

DATED THIS: _________________, 2002



OWNER:_________________________
                                                                                                John Smith

John Smith

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

                                                ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT

                                                            PIMA COUNTY

JOHN SMITH                                                  )

                                                                        )           CASE NO._____________

            Plaintiff,                                    )        

                                                                        )           SUMMONS

            Vs.                                                       )

                                                                        )           FORCIBLE ENTRY

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for              )           AND DETAINER

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORP.         )

AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR        )

SUBTENANTS                                               )

POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT: )    

105 E Speedway                                              )        

Phoenix, AZ 85684                                          )

& DOES I - X inclusive,                                   )

                                                                        )

                        Defendants                               )

____________________________________     )



THE STATE OF ARIZONA TO:

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORP.

AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR SUBTENANTS & DOES I - X inclusive



YOUR ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to appear and defend or answer in this action in this Court as follows: ARS ss12-1175



            BEFORE:  ________________________

DATE AND TIME: _________________

PLACE: Division No. ______of this Court located at: _____________________



You are further advised that Plaintiffs seek to recover possession of the following property:    

105 E SPEEDWAY, PHOENIX, AZ 85684

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that in case of your failure to appear and defend within the time applicable, judgment by default may be rendered against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint.

REQUESTS FOR REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES MUST BE MADE TO THE COURT BY PARTIES AT LEAST 3 WORKING DAYS IN ADVANCE OF A SCHEDULED COURT PROCEEDING.

SIGNED, SEALED AND DATED____________________________,  2002.

                                                                                 

                                                                                    CLERK OF THE COURT



                                                                               BY:__________________________

                                                                                          Deputy Clerk

ORIGINAL FILED:



COPY of the foregoing sent

_____ day of May, 2002 to:



ROLAND MENDOZA

105 E Speedway                                                      

Phoenix, AZ 85684



JOHN SNOW, d.b.a. Trustee for U.S. Bankruptcy

1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington D.C. 20220


John Smith

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

                                                ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT

                                                            PIMA COUNTY



JOHN SMITH                                                  )

                                                                        )           CASE NO._____________

            Plaintiff,                                    )        

                                                                        )        

            Vs.                                                       )           COMPLAINT IN

                                                                        )           FORCIBLE ENTRY

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for              )           AND DETAINER

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORP.         )

AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR        )

SUBTENANTS                                               )

POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT: )    

105 E Speedway                                              )        

Phoenix, AZ 85684                                          )

& DOES I - X inclusive,                                  )

                                                                      )

                        Defendants                             )

____________________________________    )

Plaintiff alleges:

                                                PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

 1.         Plaintiff is a Creditor registered to do business in Arizona and is entitled to

the possession of, and is the recorded owner of a parcel of property and the dwelling

thereon located at: 105 E Speedway, Phoenix, AZ 85684, property is more particularly

described as follows:

CASAS BONITAS LOT 6, BLOCK B, BOOK 8 OF MAPS PLATS AT PAGE 28, RECORDS OF PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA
as located within the above-captioned Judicial District and County.

            2.         The true names or capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise of the Defendants named herein as DOES I through X in occupancy are unknown to Plaintiff, who therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names.

Plaintiff will amend this complaint to show their true names and capacities when they have been ascertained.

3.         That Defendants, and each of them, are currently in possession of and  occupying the above-described real property.

                        CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FORCIBLE DETAINER

4.         The Plaintiff purchased the above-described real property at a Liquidation Sale held on July 21, 2002, in accordance with Arizona Revised Statutes Section 47-9612 and 47-9613 et seq. and its title has been duly perfected.

            5.         That Plaintiff has a duly executed Bill of Sale and Contract for Deed, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and by this reference incorporated herein as if set forth in full.

            6.         That on July 27, 2002, by written notice, and in compliance with Arizona Revised Statutes Section 12-1173.01, Plaintiff made demand on said Defendants for and required the delivery of possession of said real property within seven (7) days from service of said notice, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “B” and by this reference, incorporated herein as if set forth in full.

            7.         Said written Notice and demand served upon the Defendants has been neglected and refused for seven (7) days following its service upon them, and remains neglected and refused now. A true copy of the Affidavit of  Service of the Notice is attached hereto as Exhibit “C” and by this reference, incorporated herein as if set forth in full.

            8.         Said Defendants unlawfully are continuing in possession of said premises after said demand and without permission of the Plaintiff and under no claim of right.

            9.         The reasonable value for the use and occupancy of the subject premises is $30.00 per day. Plaintiff seeks such damages from July 21, 2002, the date of the Liquidation sale, and for each day thereafter, until the date Defendants are removed from the premises.

            10.       Plaintiff has performed all the necessary conditions and given all the required notices to bring this Forcible Detainer action.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests for Judgment as follows:

1.         Defendants be ordered to leave and vacate subject premises and Plaintiff be placed in possession thereof;

2.         For an order to the Clerk of the Court to issue a Writ of Restitution, in this action to the Sheriff of Pima County, Arizona, commanding him to immediately restore possession of the property to Plaintiff from Defendants and all persons holding possession under Defendants or otherwise;

            3.         Defendants be ordered to pay a fair rental on the premises from July 21, 2002, through the date of judgment at the rate of $30.00 per day;

            4.         For such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper.

DATED____________________________,  2002.

                                                                                 

                                                                              BY:__________________________

                                                                                          John Smith

ORIGINAL FILED:

COPY of the foregoing sent

_____ day of May, 2002 to:



ROLAND MENDOZA

105 E Speedway                                                      

Phoenix, AZ 85684



JOHN SNOW, d.b.a. Trustee for U.S. Bankruptcy

1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington D.C. 20220


 John Smith

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

                                                ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT

                                                             PIMA COUNTY



JOHN SMITH                                                  )

                                                                        )           CASE NO._____________

            Plaintiff,                                    )

                                                                        )           AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF

            Vs.                                                       )

                                                                        )           APPLICATION FOR          

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for              )        

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORP.          )        ENTRY OF DEFAULT

AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR         )

SUBTENANTS                                                 )

POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT:   )    

105 E Speedway                                                )        

Phoenix, AZ 85684                                            )

& DOES I - X inclusive,                                    )

                        Defendants                               )

____________________________________     )



Arizona                                  )                          

)  ss                      
Pima County                        )



        I, John Smith, herein "Plaintiff", hereby state that I am competent to make the following statements, have knowledge of the facts stated herein, that they are true, correct, complete and not meant to mislead and are presented in good faith:

On __________ Plaintiff filed with the Superior Court a cause entitled Forcible Entry and Detainer against Defendants ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for UNITED STATES  OF AMERICA CORPORATION AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR  SUBTENANTS and DOES I - X inclusive, herein "Defendants."  Plaintiff is  now filing for Application for Entry of Default on the Forcible Entry and Detainer and  Affidavit in Support of Application for Entry of Default that Defendants have been regularly served with process, that Defendants have failed to plead or otherwise defend as  to the complaint on file in this action, and the time allowed has expired, the default of  Defendants is hereby applied for to the Clerk of the Superior Court. This default shall not  be effective if Defendants plead or otherwise defend prior to the expiration of ten (10) days from the date hereof.

DATED____________________________,  2002.      

                                                                                    __________________________

                                                                                     John Smith

Arizona                  )

                                )                               ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Pima county          )



For the purpose of verification of signature -- and seal -- and for public notice, I the undersigned Notary Public, being commissioned in the county noted above, do declare on the _____  day of ______________  2002, the one  known to me to be, or who proved to me to be  John Smith  did execute this document before me.



_____________________________                                    _____________________

Notary Public                                                                              My Commission expires



ORIGINAL FILED:



COPY of the foregoing sent

_____ day of May, 2002 to:



ROLAND MENDOZA

105 E Speedway                                                      

Phoenix, AZ 85684



JOHN SNOW, d.b.a. Trustee for U.S. Bankruptcy

1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington D.C. 20220        



John Smith

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

                                                ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT

                                                             PIMA COUNTY



JOHN SMITH                                                  )

                                                                        )           CASE NO._____________

            Plaintiff,                                    )

                                                                        )           ENTRY OF DEFAULT

            Vs.                                                       )

                                                                        )

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for              )        

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORP.         )

AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR        )

SUBTENANTS                                               )

POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT: )    

105 E Speedway                                              )        

Phoenix, AZ 85684                                          )

& DOES I - X inclusive,                                  )

                                                                      )

                        Defendants                              )

____________________________________    )



            It appearing to the Clerk of this Court from the Plaintiff's Application for Entry of

Default on the Forcible Entry and Detainer and Affidavit in Support of Application for

Entry of Default that Defendants OCWEN FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., its

successors and/ or assigns and DOES I - X inclusive, herein "Defendants", have been

regularly served with process, that Defendants have failed to plead or otherwise defend as

to the complaint on file in this action, and the time allowed has expired, the default of

Defendants is hereby entered. This default shall not be effective if Defendants pleads or

otherwise defend prior to the expiration of ten (10) days from the date hereof.

             SIGNED, SEALED AND DATED____________________________,  2002.                                                                                  

CLERK OF THE COURT

                                                                                    BY:__________________________

                                                                                          Deputy Clerk

ORIGINAL FILED:

COPY of the foregoing sent

_____ day of May, 2002 to:



ROLAND MENDOZA

105 E Speedway                                                      

Phoenix, AZ 85684



HENRY PAULSON, d.b.a. Trustee for U.S. Bankruptcy

1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington D.C. 20220



John Smith

342 E Broadway

Tucson, Arizona 85746

520-320-0720

                                                ARIZONA SUPERIOR COURT

                                                             PIMA COUNTY

JOHN SMITH                                                  )

                                                                        )           CASE NO._____________

            Plaintiff,                                    )

                                                                        )

            Vs.                                                       )

                                                                        )           DEFAULT    JUDGMENT

ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for              )        

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORP.         )

AND ALL OCCUPANTS, TENANTS OR         )

SUBTENANTS                                                )

POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT:  )    

105 E Speedway                                               )        

Phoenix, AZ 85684                                           )

& DOES I - X inclusive,                                   )

                                                                       )

                        Defendants                               )

____________________________________)



            This cause came regularly to the Superior Court on _______________ .

 Defendants, being properly served, failed to appear or otherwise respond to the

 Complaint.



The Court having considered the evidence before it and finding that the

 Defendants herein named were regularly entered; that the allegations contained in

 Plaintiff's Complaint are true and correct; and there is no just reason for a delay in

 entering a final judgment against the persons named below, and good cause appearing

 therefore:

         

            IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff is

granted Judgment against the Defendant, ROLAND MENDOZA, d.b.a. agent for

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORPORATION AND ALL OCCUPANTS,

TENANTS OR SUBTENANTS POSSESSION OF PREMISES LOCATED AT:&

DOES I - X inclusive, and each of them as follows:

1.                  For possessions of the premises located at 105 E Speedway,

Phoenix, AZ 85684, and;

2.                  Rental damages and costs are waived.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that should Defendants fail or refuse to vacate

according to this Order, Plaintiff shall be entitled to the Issuance of a Writ of Restitution

of the aforementioned premises no sooner than _______________________, 2002.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this judgment be entered at this time as a

final Judgment.



DATED____________________________,  2002.                                                                                

                                                                               ______________________________

                                                                                Superior Court Judge/Commissioner

ORIGINAL FILED:

COPY of the foregoing sent

_____ day of May, 2002 to:

ROLAND MENDOZA

105 E Speedway                                                      

Phoenix, AZ 85684

JOHN SNOW, d.b.a. Trustee for U.S. Bankruptcy

1500 Pennsylvania Ave NW

Washington D.C. 20220

Wake up! Study, Learn and let’s get busy and take our country back!  Build your foundations deep in the understanding of RESPONSIBILITY next.