Full Disclosure - Expanding Connectivity - Networking

Power Independence > Networking > Expanding Connectivity > Full Disclosure

Moderated by: Joe Kelley

Author

Post

Joe Kelley
Administrator

Joined:	Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location:	California USA
Posts:	6399
Status:	Offline
Mana:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcsbO_qPvwc&feature=youtu.be

http://www.fulldisclosure.net/2011/03/how-to-disqualify-your-state-superior-court-judge-get-a-new-trial/

How To Disqualify Your State Superior Court Judge & Get A New Trial #593 & VB96

If you paid money to the County, you now have a chance to recover that money, according to Dr. Fine’s experience, he has already disqualified five judges who have been “On the Take” in his cases involving the County of L.A. That is why he was locked up in L A County jail for 18 months without being charged or convicted of a crime. Now he can show you the way to get JUSTICE. Featured here are Dr. Fine’s Motions to “Null & Void” that were used by him to disqualify the five Judges so far in his case.

One document is here:
http://cdn.fulldisclosure.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/LASCNoticeVoid-Null-8-6-10.pdf

Note how it begins with "RICHARD I. FINE In Pro Per"

That (if I am not mistaken) is commonly understood (in legal matters) as propria persona:

http://dictionary.law.com/default.aspx?selected=975

in propria persona

adj. from Latin "for one's self," acting on one's own behalf, generally used to identify a person who is acting as his/her own attorney in a lawsuit. The popular abbreviation is "in pro per." In the filed legal documents (pleadings), the party's name, address and telephone number are written where the name, address and telephone number of the attorney would normally be stated. The words "in propria persona" or "in pro per" are typed where normally it would say "attorney for plaintiff." Judges sometimes warn a party "in propria persona" of the old adage that "anyone who represents himself in court has a fool for a client and an ass for an attorney."

Judges tell lies too.

How about this:
http://www.1215.org/lawnotes/work-in-progress/bonding-code.htm

9.2 - Escalation

Further:

A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil. rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U.S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).

When a state, by and through its officials and agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen's U.S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists.

"I found this insight on the UBC to be very perspicuous and most useful to the Patriot movement, but like all laws, it is useful only to the one(s) who use it and enforce it."

Remember the etymon at the tine of law's creation and The Federalist Papers. (Read and discern until it's perspicuous.)

"Prior law governs always." "Prior etymons govern always."

"To act in pro se fashion in a court of law or equity is to profess in law, thus, casting yourself to drift away from logic and into the arms of a fool."

So...pro se is really bad, and pro per is really good unless you happen to be a summary justice judge running a for profit court under the color of law.

What about sui juris?

1. Pro se (bad)
2. Pro Per (good)
3. Sui Juris

http://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/sui-juris.html

sui juris adj [Latin, of one's own right] 1 : having full legal capacity to act on one's own behalf : not subject to the authority of another 2 : qualified to enjoy full rights of citizenship (as of holding public office or serving on a jury)

http://sicknesshope.com/node/2033

MLR-C5: If the public official violates allegiance to the U.S. Constitution by deliberately violating the Constitution, or by deliberately treating the mandates of the Constitution with contempt, especially after being put on notice of, or reprimanded for, said contempt, and thereby acts as a domestic enemy of this Nation/Country and its Constitution by reversing the benefits gotten by the sacrifice of our soldiers, and thus threatens to demoralize the legal force of the Nation/Country, then that public official is lawfully subject to the penalty of death at the hand of the injured citizen or his/her assignee; because – any lesser penalty would allow the corrupt agents of the present government and the next corrupt ruling agents of the government to pardon the violation of the Constitution and laws of this Nation/Country, and would allow those agents to reward past evil performance by new employment of the offenders in the new regime (New World Order).

In American history, the Declaration of Independence served the legal purpose of making a Solemn Recognition of Mixed War, which is a Notice of Military Lien Right, a warning of No Trespass, an assertion that any killing or taking of human life necessary for the protection of the legal remedies of the common citizen is being done, in the immediate situation described in the Solemn Recognition or Notice, not as murder, but as lethal self-defense of the commercial and social remedy against the cited domestic enemy or enemies. The Declaration of Independence is the legal model or format for the construction of the Solemn Recognition of Mixed War and the Notice of Military Lien Right.