Module 86 - How to Competently Draft a Will -
Court recorded a CONVICTION in my absence…
Court matter (Quasi-criminal) was heard in my absence 2 days ago, and I’ve recieved an email saying there is a conviction (I don’t have a criminal record and I don’t plan to get one)
I emailed the court the night beforehand requesting a (third) adjournment
I already have a private agreement with the informant using the non-consent process
I’ve called the court and the woman said that I cannot appeal, but the process is to request an annulment.
What processes would you people recommend I follow to reverse this conviction that was heard in my absence?
If I follow the court’s procedure for requesting annulment, would that involve me (tacitly) consenting to the proceedings? I DEFINITELY DO NOT CONSENTThanks
-
7 Replies
-
It probably would be tacit consent, I’ve given you some suggestions/options in your PM. Check out page 97-98 of the manual.
-
The correct process is an annulment. Then if granted the case starts over.
If you do not attend court, the prosecutor takes on both roles in court. 1st they stand on the left of the court and state the prosecutions cause. Then in your absence they go and stand on the right of the court and address the court in your name conceding your guilt and requesting a judgement.
This is why, if they go through with the hearing you need to be there.
Your paper work is nothing if not presented to court… as it is evidence but only evidence if entered into court.
In some cases the matter will be withdrawn before the hearing, other times not. Many times the first thing that happens in court is either prosecutor withdraws or the Judge/Maji comes up with a technical reason why they are dismissing the matter. .. if the paper work they suddenly see looks troublesome…
-
Thanks for clarifying that. Question: if I request the annulment, will that not be tacitly consenting to the proceedings?
-
-
It might depend on how you stand.
If the strawman (legal person) doesn’t participate then consent is assumed. Perhaps the strawman (legal person) has a personal representative. A PP. OR you give notice of a limited appearance.
Often times you just want to get rid of the problem and if it’s an easy problem to get rid of e.g. there is no evidence, such as they are relying on mobile speed cameras, then do it as the person just to get it over with and move on.
What ever is most expedient.
You might want to view some material by BillTurner7554 on YT or MatrixDecoded on bitchute.
Things I would want to focus on.. why BT7554 says you don’t want to go to court. What the legal definition of the word “appearance” is.. as per BT7554. Start with his videos posted in the year 2023. There are only 6 or so. Maybe skip over the banking one and come back to it if curious.
Is it lawful to be the person? MatrixDecoded – The Identity Trap. or Is it illegal to use the legal name?
Court is also about participating in a trust from which $$ are trying to be extracted. Who gets the $$/benefit and who gets the $$/Bill depends on what role you take. The roles appear to be up for grabs.
-
Those channels are golden stuff mate.
-
Sweet as, good answer yeah I’m not the person and at the proceedings I will not appear however I am just concerned that the mere act of me filing for an annulment would be me unintentionally tacitly consenting to the proceedings before the case even starts ?
-
-
Sweet as, good answer yeah I’m not the person I will check out those videos and at the proceedings I will not appear however I am just concerned that the mere act of me filing for an annulment would be me unintentionally tacitly consenting to the proceedings before the case even starts ?