Demand the Court Follow their Own Law and PROVE JURISDICTION over Ed and Elaine Brown Before making a further Mockery of Justice in America.
Raymond Karczewski
and Elaine Brown Before making a further Mockery of Justice in
America.
By Raymond Ronald Karczewski�
Existing Case law states: "Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must
be proven." HAGENS vs LAVINE, 15 U.S. 533 "No sanctions can be
imposed absent proof of jurisdiction." Standard v. Olsen, 74 S. Ct.
768; Title 5 U.S.C., Sec. 556 and 558 (b). "Where there is absence of
jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a
nullity and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no
justification, and may be rejected upon direct collateral attack."
Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L.Ed. 381; Griffith v. Frazier, 8
Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471. "The law provides that once State and Federal
jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven." Main
v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).
Also, a Fiction Court, the creation, does not have JURISDICTION over
any Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man or Woman
of the Sovereign People, its creator, who has not committed a crime
under Common Law nor has waived their Unalienable Rights by
consenting to and/or contracting with the Maritime government/court.
Ed and Elaine have challenged the court at the onset of the present
unlawful proceedings brought against them to prove JURISDICTION yet
the courts will not follow their own law and prove such challenge in
writing. See Above. Proceeding as such, the courts are committing a
Fraud.
This is the simplicity of the Ed/Elaine Brown case, both of whom who
have previously stated, stand in Common Law and under the protection
of the US Constitution, demanding the court prove jurisdiction over
them as a living breathing, man and woman, and not as corporate
JURISTIC PERSONS, before any further proceedings may ensue.. This is
the Travesty of an unconstitutional, Administrative Court based in
Contract Law which thumbs their nose at the US Constitution, The
"Supreme Law of the Land,"
Such Administrative Courts apply only to those who have waived their
rights and/or, by accepting their 14th Amendment Status are included
as those being Corporate citizens subject to Corporate Legislative
Law. Income Tax, Color of Law, etc.
That is the issue. May a groundswell of Americans fed up with the
increasing tyrannical American Courts DEMAND that the fictional court
PROVE JURISDICTION in writing over Ed and Elaine Brown, Living,
Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Man and Woman as their own law
prescribes. If they cannot, the Courts must release Ed and Elaine
Brown forthwith and restore them to their home and previous wealth
stripped away by a Tyrannical Corporate government who mistook them
for "Wards of the State." i.e., Infants, slaves.
*********************************************
"No other man but I in the recorded History of
mankind, including JESUS CHRIST, has directly
revealed to the World the SATANIC WEAPON used to
enslave mankind -- INTELLECTUAL THOUGHT!!"
Raymond Ronald Karczewski� http://www.arkenterprises.com
Bill Bonde { No matter what happens, it's caused by global warming )
Raymond Karczewski wrote:
>
> Demand the Court Follow their Own Law and PROVE JURISDICTION over Ed
> and Elaine Brown Before making a further Mockery of Justice in
> America.
>
> By Raymond Ronald Karczewski�
>
> Existing Case law states: "Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must
> be proven." HAGENS vs LAVINE, 15 U.S. 533 "No sanctions can be
> imposed absent proof of jurisdiction." Standard v. Olsen, 74 S. Ct.
> 768; Title 5 U.S.C., Sec. 556 and 558 (b). "Where there is absence of
> jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a
> nullity and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no
> justification, and may be rejected upon direct collateral attack."
> Thompson v. Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L.Ed. 381; Griffith v. Frazier, 8
> Cr. 9, 3L. Ed. 471. "The law provides that once State and Federal
> jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven." Main
> v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).
>
> Also, a Fiction Court, the creation, does not have JURISDICTION over
> any Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man or Woman
> of the Sovereign People, its creator, who has not committed a crime
> under Common Law nor has waived their Unalienable Rights by
> consenting to and/or contracting with the Maritime government/court.
>
If the court lacks jurisdiction, why did you just cite it about six
times?
> Ed and Elaine have challenged the court at the onset of the present
> unlawful proceedings brought against them to prove JURISDICTION yet
> the courts will not follow their own law and prove such challenge in
> writing. See Above. Proceeding as such, the courts are committing a
> Fraud.
>
Then appeal. But you think that the courts should agree with your
idea that they have no jurisdiction at all. But that is nonsense.
--
"Oh, I'm broke."
"Take another mortgage, don't give in."
"I thought you were broke. Where did you get all that money from?"
"Don't question me."
"Where did you get it?"
"I borrowed it from the bank."
"Well, you can't do that, that's cheating."
"Listen you little stoat, I own Park Lane, I can borrow as much
bloody money as I like."
~Joanna Lumley and Julia Sawalha, "Absolutely Fabulous"
David Johnston
Karczewski) wrote:
>Demand the Court Follow their Own Law and PROVE JURISDICTION over Ed
>and Elaine Brown Before making a further Mockery of Justice in
>America.
>
> By Raymond Ronald Karczewski�
>
>Existing Case law states: "Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must
>be proven." HAGENS vs LAVINE, 15 U.S. 533 "No sanctions can be
>imposed absent proof of jurisdiction."
Simply being within the geographic bounds of the United States is
sufficient proof of the jurisdiction of American courts.
Bill Bonde { No matter what happens, it's caused by global warming )
Rayronkar is claiming that no courts have any jurisdiction, I think
that's what he's going on about. Of course they do. Not *all*
courts have jurisdiction for everything, of course.