PDA

View Full Version : Proving the "person" question once and for all


the worm that turned
31-08-2009, 09:22 PM
This is a work in progress so please bear with me and contribute freely:

It is clear that gaining an admission of the PERSON being used to create contracts in the commercial (admiralty) law based system of statutes that the Government, Judiciary and various other bodies are so keen to enforce on us is proving difficult. So how do we achieve proof once and for all?

THEORETICAL EXAMPLE:

If caught speeding or not paying a parking ticket etc then do not accept what is said and instead allow it to go to court. When summonsed to court you could request for a trial by jury (as is your Right of an English Man), or alternatively just go to the Magistrate's Court, as it will still be "On the Record".

Now create an affidavit attesting to the facts as YOU see them. You don't even need to mention the offense in question because what you put in YOUR affidavit is UP TO YOU.

What it is important to put in there is a statement of your understanding, in that the name MR JOE BLOGGS is not a living breathing man and is in fact a dead legal fiction that was created when you parents registered your birth (give details of birth). Also include details that the offense in question is in relation to MR JOE BLOGGS, however due to the inextricable link between the living breathing man, commonly called Joe of the family Bloggs, you feel that you must represent the dead legal fiction, MR JOE BLOGGS who this offense is in relation to. Also worth mentioning is that at all times you operate under the common law, as this is the only law that is applicable to a living breathing man, and at no time in the past, present or future do you wish to commit harm, loss or suffering to a fellow living breathing man or woman.

Now regardless of whether you win or lose the case in question (a small fine or points on your person's licence) the affidavit becomes binding in law unless rebutted. If it is rebutted then the rebuttal provided (I assume) will need to be a legal document (such as affidavit) that will become binding in law. Either way a definitive, precedent-setting, fact of law will be provided to prove the PERSON question once and for all.

One final point, it might be best to request a trial by jury to ensure that this is carried out under common law and with a judge (not a magistrate). The reason is due to the mortgage-related Credit River Case in the US, where the Grand Jury declared that the outcome of that case could not be used as precedent because it was a magistrate that determined the case, even thought there was a jury, and as far as I believe a judge involved too!!!

Just a thought - now rip it apart boys (and girls) :D

TWTT

tien an
31-08-2009, 10:26 PM
That's a very good idea, Wormy!

I can see my case for a parking ticket going to court...

Can anyone point me in the right direction for swearing an affidavit, (if that's the right term?)

Once that's done...*imagines oysters.


tian an.

the worm that turned
31-08-2009, 11:11 PM
That's a very good idea, Wormy!

I can see my case for a parking ticket going to court...

Can anyone point me in the right direction for swearing an affidavit, (if that's the right term?)

Once that's done...*imagines oysters.


tian an.

I can send you a template for an affidavit (very simple and you can probably just download one off the web) and then you just call up a solicitor (any firm will do) and ask them to witness your affidavit (costs about £5).

With regards to submission of the affidavit to court, you will need to ask someone else. Perhaps a solicitor ;)

bsmurph83
01-09-2009, 04:02 AM
yes, this whole getting the judge to see and acknowledge the affidavit in court is still a bit of a sticking point with me. i'm not 100% clear on procedure...

number_6
02-09-2009, 11:23 PM
That's a very good idea, Wormy!

I can see my case for a parking ticket going to court...

Can anyone point me in the right direction for swearing an affidavit, (if that's the right term?)

Once that's done...*imagines oysters.


tian an.

If your parking ticket is a PCN it never will go to Court hearing. The decriminalised parking scheme doesn't work like that.

the worm that turned
02-09-2009, 11:42 PM
Perhaps this isn't necessary after all as I stumbled upon the following legal maxim:

Homo vocabulum est naturae; persona juris civilis - Man is a term of nature, person of the civil law.

It appears in Bouviers and Blacks in the 1910's (sorry Yozhik or anyone else if you have posted this one elsewhere).

A great one to use in an affidavit or in court when being asked if you are MR JOE BLOGGS.

Answer to give - "it is my understanding that MR JOE BLOGGS is a reference to a person, and the (bullshit) act you are attempting to use also refers to a person, it is also my understanding that according to the legal maxim Homo vocabulum est naturae; persona juris civilis, man is a term of nature, person of the civil law. As I am clearly a living breathing man standing before you, then I am only to be considered in relation to natural law, unless before me now you can prove I am a person, who is a dead legal fiction, I cannot be both, which is it to be?"

yozhik
03-09-2009, 12:03 AM
Homo vocabulum est naturae; persona juris civilis - Man is a term of nature, person of the civil law.
ohhhhhhhhh ... me likey likey :D


EDIT
Came across this slightly different version ... which now has be pondering the significance of the highlighted words;
Homo vocabulum est naturae persona juris civilis,- By Nature one is human being, in civil law he is person
Could this suggest that to state "he is a man" is incorrect?
If "one" is "human being" and "he" is "person"; then "he" can not be "man".
Or maybe I'm just being too paranoid?
:rolleyes:

bsmurph83
03-09-2009, 03:44 AM
ohhhhhhhhh ... me likey likey :D


EDIT
Came across this slightly different version ... which now has be pondering the significance of the highlighted words;

Could this suggest that to state "he is a man" is incorrect?
If "one" is "human being" and "he" is "person"; then "he" can not be "man".
Or maybe I'm just being too paranoid?
:rolleyes:

definitely a question worthy of asking, yoz.

interesting that royalty speak of themselves as 'one' (real man). 'one' does not like green eggs and ham. one does not like them, sovereign i am

killmicrosoft
03-09-2009, 06:42 PM
get this book it will leave you in no doubt about what a person really is


http://www.books-express.co.uk/book/l9780520235236.jpg
Persons & Masks of the Law

i just got my copy


uk
http://www.books-express.co.uk/book/9780520235236/Persons-Masks-of-the-Law-Cardozo-Holmes-Jefferson-Wythe-as-Makers-of-the-Masks.html

us
http://www.amazon.com/Persons-Masks-Law-Cardozo-Jefferson/dp/0520235231


Review
"Noonan's analyses challenge even as they charm; simultaneously they constitute both pieces of creative scholarship and literary gems." -- Walter F. Murphy, editor of American Constitutional Interpretation

Product Description
Legal thought in this country has always focused on the rules rather than on the persons affected by the rules. Persons and Masks of the Law restores the balance by taking a person-centered view of the law. The author shows how even great jurists have chosen the "masks of the law" over persons, his surprising examples being Thomas Jefferson, George Wythe, Benjamin Cardozo, and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.--four of the greatest lawyers of the United States. Noonan discusses how the concept of property, applied to a person, is a perfect mask since no trace of human identity remains. An auction of slaves in Virginia, the takeover of a banana plantation in Costa Rica, and an accident on the Long Island railroad are the famous cases involving these four legal giants. The stories of the litigations at three different periods of our history provide and new and powerful analyses of American law. This book, breaking through the formalism in which jurisprudence is enshrined, offers a new vision of law and represents a call for reform in the education and even behavior of lawyers.

girlgye
03-09-2009, 08:20 PM
This is all fine bearing in mind it has worked for some and not for others just depends on the arsehole you get on the day whether he is honourable or not. I'd like to see an Affadavit template that you refer to. It would be interesting seeing as how it is meant to be a personal truth of facts.

the worm that turned
03-09-2009, 08:22 PM
This is all fine bearing in mind it has worked for some and not for others just depends on the arsehole you get on the day whether he is honourable or not. I'd like to see an Affadavit template that you refer to. It would be interesting seeing as how it is meant to be a personal truth of facts.

If you do a search on Google for the term "Homo vocabulum est naturae persona juris civilis" you will find a page offering a .doc document that has an affidavit on it which is very interesting.

With regards to an affidavit to submit prior to a hearing, like you say that really is a personal thing.

tien an
03-09-2009, 10:36 PM
If your parking ticket is a PCN it never will go to Court hearing. The decriminalised parking scheme doesn't work like that.

Without wishing to troll Wormy's thread, could you explain that in a brief manner please?
(Impossible to send you a PM).

tian an.

dolores1
03-09-2009, 10:38 PM
get this book it will leave you in no doubt about what a person really is


http://www.books-express.co.uk/book/l9780520235236.jpg
Persons & Masks of the Law

i just got my copy


uk
http://www.books-express.co.uk/book/9780520235236/Persons-Masks-of-the-Law-Cardozo-Holmes-Jefferson-Wythe-as-Makers-of-the-Masks.html

us
http://www.amazon.com/Persons-Masks-Law-Cardozo-Jefferson/dp/0520235231


My copy is ordered and on its' way. Thank you