Jack & Margy Flynn7/25/06
Treason
• If the judge rules against your order they are committing Treason on the public record.
• Usually the judges will find some technical reason to rule favorably (defect in the prosecution, failure by the court or some failure by your opponent). If not, then you have a treason action against that judge and you can take everything that he owns in this world and you can get him off the bench and put him in prison if you so desire. That’s how serious those motions are.
Demand the Facts and the Law
• Anytime a judge rules against your motions, trial or case, immediately question and challenge him to base his ruling in fact and in law. They don’t know what that is because they are used to making decisions by the seat of their pants.
• Immediately ask the judge to support his ruling based in relevant fact and law. If the judge can’t or won’t do that, then what he is simply doing is making an opinion and an unsupported opinion even by a judge has no validity as the basis of a ruling in any court.
“Your honor, I need to insist that you support your ruling in fact and law.”
• DEMAND that he make a ruling on the motion pursuant to his oath. If he is not willing to do his job, he is a fraud and you have to call him a fraud.
“Your honor, I’d like you to rule on the motion pursuant to your oath of office.”
• DISQUALIFY (not recuse) the judge for valid reasons using the disqualification provisions in every state.
• TREASON. We charge the judge with Treason all the time when they violate our rights. You can accuse that judge right then and there that he committed treason.
• Any time the prosecutor opposes us he is going against his oath and the constitution and a lot of bright guys in that profession are not willing to commit treason on the public record.
• If they get NASTY you can get just as NASTY. An American citizen has no duty whatsoever to obey any unlawful or unconstitutional order. You have to use their law and procedure against them.
Establish the Venue
“Are you ready to proceed?”
• When the judge asks if you are ready to proceed:
“No sir, there are some matters I need to bring before the court before we proceed.”
“You and the prosecuting attorneys have taken oaths of office to the Constitution of these United States. Is that correct?”
“You and the prosecuting attorneys are required to abide by those oaths in the performance of your official duties, especially those before this court. Is that Correct?”
• Once the judge says Yes to both statements and the confirming questions, any thing that happens in that case from that point on has to be conducted according to constitutional requirements.
• Confirming questions:
“Sir, I am presumed innocent of all aspects of all charges and all assumptions and presumptions of this court until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of my peers. Is that correct?”
“Proof” consists of verified and demonstrated evidence, and not opinion, especially opinion unsupported by fact, law and evidence. Is that correct?”
“ ‘Beyond a reasonable doubt’ consists solely of decisions and verdicts from a jury of my peers based entirely on proof that absolutely and conclusively confirms guilt, without any reservation or questions whatsoever from the jury. Is that correct?”
“Opinion from any witness or prosecuting attorney unsupported and unverified by fact, law and proven evidence is simply opinion, and opinion, as previously established, is not proof. Is that correct?
“Since I am guaranteed a fair and impartial trial, how is that possible when you, the presiding judge, the prosecuting attorney and all the witnesses against me work for and are paid by the state that is the plaintiff and my opponent in this case? Under that condition, it is impossible for me to have a fair trial. Is that correct?”
“Further, any data used against me is obtained from sources who are also paid by the state, the same plaintiff against me. At minimum, conflict of interest takes place.”
“Since I am presumed innocent of the charges and all aspects, presumptions and assumptions of those charges and this court, I have challenged the jurisdiction of this court, which is an aspect of the charges and a presumption of this court. This court has failed to prove jurisdiction, on the public record. Therefore, since I am presumed innocent of all aspects of the charges and presumptions of the court, I am presumed innocent of jurisdiction, and since this court has not proven jurisdiction, on the record, this case must be dismissed. Pursuant to the foregoing, and to numerous federal and Supreme Court rulings, this case must be dismissed, with prejudice, and I hereby move for dismissal of all charges and this case, with prejudice.”
Interceptive Warning
• If events are unconstitutional, you can remind the judge of his answer and hold him to it (not part of the conference).
“Sir, I need to remind you that you have taken public notice of your oath, I have expressly accepted it on the record, you are under both Constitutional and contractual restraint, and right now you’re in violation of both and bordering on treason for violating that oath.”
Notice of Status
• It is critical to place your status on the public record immediately. You want to make sure everything is on the public record.
“Sir, I appear before this court as a living breathing natural born citizen with full rights guaranteed in the federal and state constitutions and with my name spelled in upper and lower case. That is how I appearbefore this court.”
Pause a few seconds, then… “Are there any objections?”
• If there are no objection, you have just noticed the court of your standing and method of appearance.
• If the court assumes and presumes that you are the fiction and they have a contract with the fiction you have dispersed that position immediately.
Refusal to Confirm Oath
• If they refuse to confirm the statement or their oath (this is my big issue)…
“There is a Constitutional requirement not only for you to have an oath but for you to have a surety bond which binds that oath. On what constitutional basis do you refuse to confirm your oath?”
Surety Bond
• Can also attack their bond.
“There is a Constitutional requirement not only for you to have an oath but for you to have a surety bond which binds that oath. On what constitutional basis do you refuse to confirm your oath?”
Disqualify the Offender
• Upon such refusal, they are imposters, not judges.
“Excuse me, sir, are you refusing to recognize my standing on the record in an open courtroom, and proceeding under the assumption that I’m a procedural phantom? I need to warn you that you will be in insurrection against your oath which you’ve previously entered into the record and in treason against the American people. And I’ll be forced to disqualify you” (not from conference).
“Excuse me sir, am I to understand that you are refusing to confirm your oath here on the public record – in an open courtroom?” Sir, that is tantamount to insurrection, sedition and treason I believe. Sir is that what I am to understand? YOU ARE DISQUALIFIED – STEP DOWN.
“You are disqualified sir, step down. You are required to confirm your oath any time you are questioned. Step down sir, you’re disqualified!”
• You need to show the impostor that you aware of the requirements to which he must conform, and what kind of specific performance he is expected to give when he sits on this bench under the auspices of being a judge, to dissuade any notion that he is not going to answer your questions.
Challenging Jurisdiction by Special Appearance
• One of the first things we do is challenge jurisdiction by motion, which forces the judge to rule on the motion.
• When a court fails to provide due process of law it forfeits any jurisdiction and any rulings rendered are null and void.
• Jurisdiction has to be substantiated throughout the record and so you come forth under special appearance not a general appearance.
“Sir, I am presumed innocent of all aspects of all charges and all assumptions and presumptions of this court until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of my peers. Is that correct?”
“Sir I have challenged the jurisdiction of this court by motion. This court has failed to prove jurisdiction on the public record. Therefore the jurisdiction of this court is unsubstantiated. It is simply a presumption of this court and an unsupported presumption which is in fact reduced to an opinion. And since I am presumed innocent of all presumptions and assumptions of this court, I move for immediate dismissal because of lack of jurisdiction. (how would this play in the bankruptcy court where I want them to validate or cause the IRS to prove their claims or be forever barred from further action?)”
CRITICAL: Responding to Unfavorable Rulings
“Upon what facts of law did you base your dismissal of the case?”
• If the judge refuses:
“Sir, I demand an answer. If you cannot support your ruling/decision in fact and law, then it’s strictly opinion. And opinion has no basis in this court and certainly has no basis for any ruling. Is that correct?”
• File a motion for a reconsideration of the rulings demanding fact and law to support his ruling.
“If you insist on violating your oath of office, I will take affidavits from the witnesses and file criminal charges against you (or arrest him on the spot) for insurrection against the Constitution and treason against the American people.
Show Cause Hearing
• It was a motion to set a show cause hearing for the plaintiff to prove criminal offense.
This stopped them dead. (59:00 on tape)
Judge Supresses Evidence or Your Right to Speak
“With all due respect, you have no authority to disparage or limit my freedom of speech or to disparage the very document from which you derive your limited delegated authority which you have just disparaged and therefore you have committed sedition and insurrection and impeached yourself as a valid judge to sit on the bench. YOU ARE DISQUALIFIED FOR THE RECORD.
Prosecuting Impeachment, Treason, Insurrection
• We have power, but if we don’t use it, it is useless:
1. File criminal charges against everyone in sight in all possible prosecution venues: local DA, state attorney general, united states attorney.
2. Notify responsible parties. The charge may be filed against five people but we notify 50 – 60 people – only those with oversight responsibility such as the supreme court, judiciary committee, governor, etc. Go as far and as wide as possible.
3. Notify every member of the house and senate judiciary committee, the president of the senate, the speaker of the house, every member of the supreme court and every member of the governors staff. Let them all know that they have been noticed and if they condone, aid and abet the treason committed by the people that you are complaining against, then we will take action against them. [R11]We have done that numerous times in New Mexico and the judge is either relieved of his duties or suddenly retires, the secretary resigns, etc.
4. Require accountability. Include notice that each party will be held accountable and liable for correcting the treason activity in that court pursuant to that persons oversight responsibility.
5. Require corrective action of those parties to remedy the fraud and treason that is active within the court. And if they don’t do that we will take action against them.
6. Provide Notice of Penalty that such parties who are unwilling to get involved will be prosecuted for aiding, abetting, condoning and acting in collusion and conspiracy to commit treason and perpetuate treason in that court. That usually elicits rapid responses.
7. Bring impeachment charges against the judge for his comments by way of an impeachment proceeding by and thru the state legislature by contacting the secretary of the judiciary committee for the house (assembly) in your state legislature and advising of your intention to file a sworn formal complaint to initiate impeachment proceedings against a judge or judges. You have to file a formal statement stating what your constitutional grounds are and it has to be sworn and notarized. Then arrange to have a face to face meeting with this person to submit the statement, and bring a witness
“Now I want you to bring this to the house and initiate impeachment proceedings.”
8. Relief. You want to request relief and an award to be provided by ______for failure of that court to uphold your constitutional rights and for failure to provide for due process of law.[R12]
9. Jurisdiction. When a court fails to provide due process of law it forfeits any jurisdiction and any rulings rendered are null and void.
10. Method: Letters. We write presumptive letters which make statements, charges, averments and allegations. So that is the type of letter we would suggest concerning any charges you file. If you want to use their forms go right ahead. It is up to you. Whatever you prefer.
11. Clean Hands. Lawful notification is the first essential element of due process of law (Connelly v. General Construction). So we always want to be in proper process of law and proper procedure. So we always notify our opponent.
12. Response from government. Government has a responsibility and duty to respond to you pursuant to minimum to oaths taken and the first amendment.
13. Failure to Respond. When government does not respond to you there is a legal matter involved, they have acted in dereliction of their duty and basically obstruction of justice…
“If you fail to respond and or fail to rebut the charges, then by your failures you admit to everything contained in this letter, fully binding in any court in America without your protest, objection or that of those who represent you.”[R13]
“Your failure to respond and and/or rebut the charges will comprise your admission and confession to all facts, statements, averments, terms and provisions contained in this letter, and waiver of all rights to waiver of all rights to raise a controversy, the said admissions being fully binding in any court in America without protest or objection from you or those who represent you “ (not from conference alternative).
Their failure to respond is their admission to everything you are charging them fully binding on them in any court.
14. Estoppel in court. So when your opponent shows up in court you can exercise estoppel on him because he had the opportunity to rebut the position and failed to do so. [R14]And by bringing his position or defense to the court what he is actually doing is putting fraud upon the court because he has already admitted to the charges. Now that type of letter usually gets a lot of attention.
[R11]PLEASE DISCUSS THIS.
[R12]ESSENTIAL: WHAT SORT OF RELIEF AND AWARDS DO YOU SPECIFY? AND DO YOU APPROACH COURT OF CLAIMS, THE BAR, STATE INSURANCE, OR OTHER SPECIFIC RESOURCES?
[R13]CONTRAST THEIRS AND OURS
[R14]WHAT SUCCESS HAVE THEY HAD? WHEN DID THEY TAKE THESE NONRESPONSIVE PEOPLE TO COURT FOR FAILING TO IMPEACH AND SANCTION THE JUDGE?