Recognizing the jurisdictions of the purported Court
By: James Allen Homyak
source: Educated In Law
You may find yourself dragged into a Court proceeding. You would be wise to read, comprehend and learn from my short story below so that you prepare yourself intellectually for the very outset of any Court Case, criminal or civil, and you must avoid the whole issue of the "LEGAL NAME” game entirely.
If or when you are asked to "state your name" say only your given name -- "Suzie Jean" for example, or "Suzie" -- and in the same breath admit that you are “here to address the Court in this matter" -- which actually communicates to the Court that you stand in your fleshly body.
According to the well known Alaskan legal researcher born on Wisconsin state, Anna Von Reitz, there exist only three jurisdictions available to the Courts which now assault the American People --
- Maritime (Commercial) Courts
- Admiralty (Military) Courts
- Ecclesiastical (Canon Law) Courts
To stand in victory against any action against you, you must establish that you are outside all three of these potential jurisdictions. Do this without verbally telling the Court what you know thus far [about these three in so far as you hadn't seen this coming, it may just stupify you, to the point of letting God put the Words on your heart, at the risk of otherwise being a moron and dismissed.] Emphasis mine, jah for the giggles.
At each step of the Courtroom process the jurisdiction changes and the change is signaled when the Judge/Magistrate gets up from the bench and leaves the Courtroom for a recess or a break or for a stated reason which stops the flow. When he/she returns, you have been tacitly (in a way that is understood or implied without being directly stated) advanced into the next and more serious jurisdiction.
The initial Court proceeding will always follow the same order and begin in the Maritime (Commercial) jurisdiction where your speaking to the Court is to "wish for" remedy.
The second more serious jurisdiction is Admiralty (Military) jurisdiction where your speaking to the Court is to "wish for" cure and relief.
If the Judge/Magistrate dares to leave and come back again, you are both playing for High Stakes, and are now in Ecclesiastical Court (Canon Law)..... where your speaking to the Court is to identify your self in connection with The Creator. A Judge/Magistrate who violates your sovereignty in this jurisdiction loses his/her job permanently (the immediate prosecutor has no choice but to enforce this).
In the above illustration, my short story educates you in this "iteration" method when facing any action in one of their Courts (the American Court has unfortunately become a nefarious collusion between BAR attorneys and financial entities masquerading as lawful government).
You make these three "iterations" as your only verbal communication. You will be clearly given the chance to speak in front of the Court in “the matter” at hand. Say nothing else besides each respective reply at each respective iteration as the Judge/Magistrate signals for you to speak:
Reply #1 – say this out loud for all in attendance to hear your voice clearly
"Your Honor, for and on the record of this Court, I am a living man/woman, the blood flows and the flesh lives and I wish for remedy....."
He/She Judge/Magistrate will have to get up and leave the courtroom. When he/she comes back....:
Reply #2 – say this out loud for all in attendance to hear your voice clearly
"Your Honor, just to reiterate, for and on the record of this Court, I am a living man/woman, the blood flows and the flesh lives and I wish for cure and relief...."
He/She Judge/Magistrate will have to exit again, or dismiss outright. Most Judges/Magistrates will dismiss at this point rather than risk the consequences of a final confrontation, but if he/she comes back a third time, you reiterate:
Reply #3 – say this out loud for all in attendance to hear your voice clearly
"Your Honor, to reiterate, for and on the record of this court, I am a living man/woman, the blood flows and the flesh lives, and my Creator is sovereign. Nothing stands between my self and my Sovereign Divine Creator of All That Is."
Now there is the final end of the nightmare. He/She has no further recourse, no other jurisdiction to exercise, and he/she has to exit – permanently at the behest of the Prosecutor and hands of the Bailiff.
The DA or Plaintiff side may be ignorant enough to set up another case and the Clerk may attempt to assign another Judge/Magistrate, but after a few Judges/Magistrates lose their jobs by pushing the envelope and running afoul in Canon Law, they will all suddenly get the message.
Be sure to check out more of my short stories which I will be posting to my blog.
- end
==== new content below in context of contracts dragged before a court ====
Periodically I do revise, and so today , our fourth of September on the year of our Lord Twenty Twenty-four is such day.
I thought of this new essay question --
Explain why or how any one, namely an English or American man or woman, would venture into "correcting one's own political status administratively" when otherwise not doing so tacitly accepts a "STATE or FEDERALLY run default status" which enforces or implies or interposes "a standing in commerce in indentured servitude".... whereas a corrected status reverts one back to a more powerful status in an effective standing capacity as a man or woman not in office but on the land instead of presuming to stand as A THING IDENTIFIED which undoubtedly can then be presumed to be lost at sea and include links and references to correcting one's political status?
But first, we've put this one in and transcribed your average discussion --
"Are there some key questions to derive the multiple meanings to phases used in various all-encompassing ideas such as a contract?"
According to Ask Ai www.iAsk.ai
Key Questions to Derive Multiple Meanings in Contractual Phrases
Understanding the multiple meanings of phrases used in contracts requires a systematic approach. Contracts are legal documents that often contain complex language and terminology, which can lead to various interpretations. To derive these meanings effectively, one can ask several key questions:
1. What is the Context?
The context in which a phrase is used is crucial for interpretation. This includes understanding the surrounding clauses, the purpose of the contract, and the relationship between the parties involved. For example, a phrase like “reasonable efforts” may vary significantly depending on whether it pertains to a service agreement or a sales contract.
2. Who are the Parties Involved?
Identifying who the parties are can influence how terms are interpreted. Different industries or sectors may have specific jargon or customary practices that affect meaning. For instance, what constitutes “delivery” might differ between a logistics company and an online retailer.
3. What is the Intent of the Parties?
Determining what each party intended when they agreed to certain terms can clarify ambiguous phrases. This may involve looking at negotiations, prior communications, or even industry standards that could shed light on their intentions.
4. Are There Legal Precedents?
Legal precedents play a significant role in interpreting contractual language. Courts often rely on previous rulings to determine how similar phrases have been understood in past cases. Researching case law related to specific terms can provide insights into their accepted meanings.
5. How Do Definitions Within the Contract Apply?
Many contracts include definitions sections that clarify specific terms used throughout the document. Understanding these definitions is essential as they can alter common perceptions of words or phrases significantly.
6. What Are Common Interpretations in Industry Standards?
Certain phrases may have established meanings within particular industries or sectors (e.g., “force majeure” in insurance contracts). Familiarizing oneself with these interpretations can help elucidate potential ambiguities.
7. Is There Ambiguity Present?
Identifying whether a phrase is ambiguous is critical for interpretation. Ambiguities often arise from vague language or multiple possible meanings and should be addressed through clarification or negotiation.
8. What Are Potential Consequences of Interpretation?
Considering how different interpretations might impact obligations and rights under the contract helps prioritize which meanings are most relevant or likely intended by the parties involved.
By systematically addressing these questions, one can derive multiple meanings from phrases used in contracts and better understand their implications.
Probability that this answer is correct: 95%
Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used in Answering this Question:
American Bar Association (ABA)
The ABA provides extensive resources on legal interpretation and contract law, including guidelines on understanding contractual language and its implications within various contexts.
Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute (LII)
The LII offers comprehensive explanations of legal concepts, including contract law principles and terminology, making it an excellent resource for understanding how phrases may be interpreted legally.
Harvard Law Review
This publication features scholarly articles on various aspects of law, including detailed analyses of contract interpretation and case law that inform how contractual phrases are understood within legal frameworks.
