408,800 criminal convictions under color of financial responsibility law that is a shakedown of the poor, the people who can't pay the extortion demanded by revenue
Jan, the Bond case doesn't do as you suggest as regards upholding the sovereignty of the people.It defends the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Here's the last chunk of the ruling. For revisionist review of the founding document, read Gary North's Conspiracy in Philadelphia. 484pp. https://garynorth.com/philadelphia.pdf. No people can be sovereign; only God.
*** Here, petitioner concedes that, by placing his bag in the overhead compartment, he could expect that it would be exposed to certain kinds of touching and handling. But petitioner argues that Agent Cantu's physical manipulation of his luggage “far exceeded the casual contact [petitioner] could have expected from other passengers.” Brief for Petitioner 18–19. The Government counters that it did not.
345 Our Fourth Amendment analysis embraces two questions. First, we ask whether the individual, by his conduct, has exhibited an actual expectation of privacy; that is, whether he has shown that “he [sought] to preserve [something] as private.” Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 740, 99 S.Ct. 2577, 61 L.Ed.2d 220 (1979) (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, petitioner sought to preserve privacy by using an opaque bag and placing that bag directly above his seat. Second, we inquire whether the individual's expectation of privacy is “one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.” Ibid. (internal quotation marks omitted).2 When a bus passenger places a bag in an overhead bin, he expects that other passengers or bus employees may move it for one reason or another. Thus, a bus passenger clearly expects that his bag may be handled. He does not expect that other passengers or bus employees will, *339 as a matter of course, feel the bag in an exploratory manner. But this is exactly what the agent did here. We therefore hold that the agent's physical manipulation of petitioner's bag violated the Fourth Amendment.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is
Reversed.
Bond v. United States, 529 U.S. 334, 338–39, 120 S. Ct. 1462, 1465, 146 L. Ed. 2d 365 (2000)
*using the roadways cannot be made into a criminal act*
the point?
After all, Tennessee is an American- common- law State, just like all the rest of our States, except Louisiana, ... which, Louisiana, is the only State in our Union that is under the (essentially French- constructed) Civil/ Criminal law system, just like Quebec, Canada is.
I am trying to follow your logic, but the focus seems like it should be on: that we ALL have unalienable right to travel, and more rights that I won't iterate here; -- so I'm trying to figure out why your FOCUS is on the Officers of the Tennessee Corporation targeting a certain, specific group of people for this completely unlawful EIVS rather than having The Officers answer for why ANY Tennesseean is unlawfully required to purchase Products from one of their Co-Responding Corporations, at all. It's all done under Color of Law. It's all forced, but called "Voluntary"!! Or *Common Usage*!! Geeesh, it's all Fraud. And none of it applies to the American people at all; the Corporation's Rules and Regulations, and Policies, all only apply to the Corporations and their Hires. So, I'm NOT CRITICIZING!, just trying to comprehend your Case. I'll be looking for your answer here. Ty David!
Jan, David is trying to get the STATE to stop its crimes against it's own corporate citizens in the administrative process where most of the crime takes place without even a hint of human oversite. It's a noble pursuit
I am more like you. I sent a long letter to the Sheriff, discussed the fraud of having the state occupy the accuser, prosecutor, judge and collector in ANY action at all. I terminated my DL from the date of issue (and registrations) due to fraud in the inducement and my refusal to waive my Natural Rights which is a requirement of the license. I claimed Sovereign Immunity under Article 1 Section 1 of the Tennessee constitution, to any and all statutory claims made by any state agent, and instructed to him to find ANY state officer willing to challenge my declaration.
Lastly, and most importantly, I advised him that in the event any of his deputies or any other state agent issues a citation I would REQUIRE a Trial By Jury of MY peers in his office in the absence of any state agents other than the one making the claim, for the purpose of obtaining justice according to the constitution.
Months have gone by and the requested response not received, and follow up went unanswered as well. In the follow up I advised him should I wind up in one of the corporate kangaroo courts that he would be subpoenaed to read the letters into the record and testify to the undisputed nature of my Sovereign immunity claim.
Darrell, I like the approach you are describing. Give notice — perhaps about your status, or about the law via administrative notice. Notice is a mine laid in front of these people to run over whenever they harass a party who knows about the notice and intends to seek protection under it. Make followup queries. Keep perfect records of mailings and responses. Use affidavits to keep contmporaneous record. I am wary, however, of using "sovereign" claims of any kind. If you've read our coverage on "sovcit" training by courts, you'll understand why. I was arrested Nov. 6, 2021, covering a lecture to city court judges on the purported sovcit problem.
David, the one acting like what the state describes as Sovereign Citizens are the officers in uniform who believe THEY are above the law. I claimed a status RESERVED in the TN constitution, so if they imply I am claiming to be above the Law I can toss the accusation back to them and it would be valid ONLY in my use.
I even described in the letter to the Sheriff that the term Sovereign Citizen was an ad hominem attack on people who were merely trying to get the kangaroo courts to stop their criminal behavior. Those they victimize simply want answers, so we must make them the "sovereign citizen", as the label fits because they think being employed by a corporation that claims to be sovereign makes THEM above the law.
Jan, I didn't mention ANY statutes or case law or anything else in my letter. Those things are for corporate "persons", not people. David, in administrative actions can use them, but these criminals WILL NOT EVER listen. A Sovereign would never mention inferior law or courts in his own defense, but would use the Laws of his Creator. That's why "persons" go into court with statutes, because that is what created them.
There is no Law but Natural Law and the Bible, which is in compliance with it. I am working on a paper now that proves Jesus will not get you to God if you do not HONOR GODS LAW ALONE along with your commitment to Him. There are no statutes in Gods Kingdom, and if you live under them now you will not be welcomed there.
My current direction is to make any defense or Notice based solely on Gods Law and my Sovereign status which is granted in the Bible and Reserved in the Tennessee constitution.
It is not enough to say that some law does not apply to you. Your arguments, when dealing with bureaucrats and government criminals (oops, redundant there) should all be based on what Law does apply to you, and that is God's Law. Bring the Bible into any court they FORCE you into, and ONLY go if forced at gunpoint.
Always remember, if you don't tell them what Law applies to you they will tell you theirs does.
Darrell, I have answered you but the System said it didn't go through. What I said was what you are saying is very helpful and I love that about taking the Bible to their Fictional Court Proceedings. Have one tomorrow, and will be carrying my bible in with me.
Have made known many times and many ways that I comply for my safety and well- being only; that I comply only under threat, duress, coercion, and •further• use of deadly force on me: but do not agree or consent, and also preserve all of my rights.
Hi Jan. If you have court tomorrow, it's pretty much too late. What I would suggest is that you follow something David said which was to "waive the court". When they call your fake name, just tell them you are it's agent and there to waive the court and DEMAND a grand jury be convened to hear the matter in YOUR PRESENCE. Tell them you will only respond to a Grand Jury indictment and to let you know when they get one. If they push, keep repeating the demand and don't add to it. "I waive the court and demand a grand jury be convened to hear the matter." REPEAT.
You can only correct your standing BEFORE they get you. That's what I did with the Sheriff letter. I'll send you a copy of it if you want.
Jan, please call me. I have stories about "waiving the court," one particularly about a man named Aaron Berry. Look for his name on the site, with one story explaining the rationale for "waiving the court" and demand the prosecutor present allegations against you to the grand jury.Junk cases are not taken there, as I explain.
David, you misspelled "office" in the last paragraph there... '...let me know your *ofice* received...' . And anyway, so what if the *ofice* or *office* received your writings?... that could be the MailRoom or FileClerk who received it, right? ... You want to ask for an answer to whether or not the man Acting As Officer Holder got it, read it, and what his reply to it is, don't you??Everything is so perfect except asking for his answer! Don't you want him to answer you? Please respond, I am a new subscriber and trying to follow your logic here. Tysm!
Jan, the Bond case doesn't do as you suggest as regards upholding the sovereignty of the people.It defends the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Here's the last chunk of the ruling. For revisionist review of the founding document, read Gary North's Conspiracy in Philadelphia. 484pp. https://garynorth.com/philadelphia.pdf. No people can be sovereign; only God.
*** Here, petitioner concedes that, by placing his bag in the overhead compartment, he could expect that it would be exposed to certain kinds of touching and handling. But petitioner argues that Agent Cantu's physical manipulation of his luggage “far exceeded the casual contact [petitioner] could have expected from other passengers.” Brief for Petitioner 18–19. The Government counters that it did not.
345 Our Fourth Amendment analysis embraces two questions. First, we ask whether the individual, by his conduct, has exhibited an actual expectation of privacy; that is, whether he has shown that “he [sought] to preserve [something] as private.” Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735, 740, 99 S.Ct. 2577, 61 L.Ed.2d 220 (1979) (internal quotation marks omitted). Here, petitioner sought to preserve privacy by using an opaque bag and placing that bag directly above his seat. Second, we inquire whether the individual's expectation of privacy is “one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable.” Ibid. (internal quotation marks omitted).2 When a bus passenger places a bag in an overhead bin, he expects that other passengers or bus employees may move it for one reason or another. Thus, a bus passenger clearly expects that his bag may be handled. He does not expect that other passengers or bus employees will, *339 as a matter of course, feel the bag in an exploratory manner. But this is exactly what the agent did here. We therefore hold that the agent's physical manipulation of petitioner's bag violated the Fourth Amendment.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is
Reversed.
Bond v. United States, 529 U.S. 334, 338–39, 120 S. Ct. 1462, 1465, 146 L. Ed. 2d 365 (2000)
Besides David, isn't:
*using the roadways cannot be made into a criminal act*
the point?
After all, Tennessee is an American- common- law State, just like all the rest of our States, except Louisiana, ... which, Louisiana, is the only State in our Union that is under the (essentially French- constructed) Civil/ Criminal law system, just like Quebec, Canada is.
I am trying to follow your logic, but the focus seems like it should be on: that we ALL have unalienable right to travel, and more rights that I won't iterate here; -- so I'm trying to figure out why your FOCUS is on the Officers of the Tennessee Corporation targeting a certain, specific group of people for this completely unlawful EIVS rather than having The Officers answer for why ANY Tennesseean is unlawfully required to purchase Products from one of their Co-Responding Corporations, at all. It's all done under Color of Law. It's all forced, but called "Voluntary"!! Or *Common Usage*!! Geeesh, it's all Fraud. And none of it applies to the American people at all; the Corporation's Rules and Regulations, and Policies, all only apply to the Corporations and their Hires. So, I'm NOT CRITICIZING!, just trying to comprehend your Case. I'll be looking for your answer here. Ty David!
Jan, David is trying to get the STATE to stop its crimes against it's own corporate citizens in the administrative process where most of the crime takes place without even a hint of human oversite. It's a noble pursuit
I am more like you. I sent a long letter to the Sheriff, discussed the fraud of having the state occupy the accuser, prosecutor, judge and collector in ANY action at all. I terminated my DL from the date of issue (and registrations) due to fraud in the inducement and my refusal to waive my Natural Rights which is a requirement of the license. I claimed Sovereign Immunity under Article 1 Section 1 of the Tennessee constitution, to any and all statutory claims made by any state agent, and instructed to him to find ANY state officer willing to challenge my declaration.
Lastly, and most importantly, I advised him that in the event any of his deputies or any other state agent issues a citation I would REQUIRE a Trial By Jury of MY peers in his office in the absence of any state agents other than the one making the claim, for the purpose of obtaining justice according to the constitution.
Months have gone by and the requested response not received, and follow up went unanswered as well. In the follow up I advised him should I wind up in one of the corporate kangaroo courts that he would be subpoenaed to read the letters into the record and testify to the undisputed nature of my Sovereign immunity claim.
Darrell, I like the approach you are describing. Give notice — perhaps about your status, or about the law via administrative notice. Notice is a mine laid in front of these people to run over whenever they harass a party who knows about the notice and intends to seek protection under it. Make followup queries. Keep perfect records of mailings and responses. Use affidavits to keep contmporaneous record. I am wary, however, of using "sovereign" claims of any kind. If you've read our coverage on "sovcit" training by courts, you'll understand why. I was arrested Nov. 6, 2021, covering a lecture to city court judges on the purported sovcit problem.
David, the one acting like what the state describes as Sovereign Citizens are the officers in uniform who believe THEY are above the law. I claimed a status RESERVED in the TN constitution, so if they imply I am claiming to be above the Law I can toss the accusation back to them and it would be valid ONLY in my use.
I even described in the letter to the Sheriff that the term Sovereign Citizen was an ad hominem attack on people who were merely trying to get the kangaroo courts to stop their criminal behavior. Those they victimize simply want answers, so we must make them the "sovereign citizen", as the label fits because they think being employed by a corporation that claims to be sovereign makes THEM above the law.
Jan, I didn't mention ANY statutes or case law or anything else in my letter. Those things are for corporate "persons", not people. David, in administrative actions can use them, but these criminals WILL NOT EVER listen. A Sovereign would never mention inferior law or courts in his own defense, but would use the Laws of his Creator. That's why "persons" go into court with statutes, because that is what created them.
There is no Law but Natural Law and the Bible, which is in compliance with it. I am working on a paper now that proves Jesus will not get you to God if you do not HONOR GODS LAW ALONE along with your commitment to Him. There are no statutes in Gods Kingdom, and if you live under them now you will not be welcomed there.
My current direction is to make any defense or Notice based solely on Gods Law and my Sovereign status which is granted in the Bible and Reserved in the Tennessee constitution.
Darell, I'm studying you guys' replies. Thanks for the info.
Darell and David,
Are you aware of the U. S. Supreme Court Case:
[Steven Dewayne] Bond v. UNITED STATES 529 U S. 334 (2000)?
The Supreme Court upheld that:
1. The American people are sovereign (s);
2. The State and Government are not sovereign;
3. Local, State, and Federal Law Enforcers commit unlawful acts by enforcing laws on the American people;
4. Law Enforcement Officers are liable for harms their actions cause to the American people.
-----------------
My note:
There ARE no laws, anywhere, written over the American people because it's the American people who create the State and who create the Government:
Basic principle of spiritual law: the creation cannot be over its creator.
It is not enough to say that some law does not apply to you. Your arguments, when dealing with bureaucrats and government criminals (oops, redundant there) should all be based on what Law does apply to you, and that is God's Law. Bring the Bible into any court they FORCE you into, and ONLY go if forced at gunpoint.
Always remember, if you don't tell them what Law applies to you they will tell you theirs does.
Oh and P.S. liked your joke about the criminals.😁
Darrell, I have answered you but the System said it didn't go through. What I said was what you are saying is very helpful and I love that about taking the Bible to their Fictional Court Proceedings. Have one tomorrow, and will be carrying my bible in with me.
Have made known many times and many ways that I comply for my safety and well- being only; that I comply only under threat, duress, coercion, and •further• use of deadly force on me: but do not agree or consent, and also preserve all of my rights.
Appreciate you sharing your knowledge.
jan-marie.
Hi Jan. If you have court tomorrow, it's pretty much too late. What I would suggest is that you follow something David said which was to "waive the court". When they call your fake name, just tell them you are it's agent and there to waive the court and DEMAND a grand jury be convened to hear the matter in YOUR PRESENCE. Tell them you will only respond to a Grand Jury indictment and to let you know when they get one. If they push, keep repeating the demand and don't add to it. "I waive the court and demand a grand jury be convened to hear the matter." REPEAT.
You can only correct your standing BEFORE they get you. That's what I did with the Sheriff letter. I'll send you a copy of it if you want.
Jan, please call me. I have stories about "waiving the court," one particularly about a man named Aaron Berry. Look for his name on the site, with one story explaining the rationale for "waiving the court" and demand the prosecutor present allegations against you to the grand jury.Junk cases are not taken there, as I explain.
David, you misspelled "office" in the last paragraph there... '...let me know your *ofice* received...' . And anyway, so what if the *ofice* or *office* received your writings?... that could be the MailRoom or FileClerk who received it, right? ... You want to ask for an answer to whether or not the man Acting As Officer Holder got it, read it, and what his reply to it is, don't you??Everything is so perfect except asking for his answer! Don't you want him to answer you? Please respond, I am a new subscriber and trying to follow your logic here. Tysm!