Court summons

[Ant_made]

You don’t have to answer questions, but you can ask them. You did the right thing by not consenting. Stick to that and don’t give your names up. Don’t be that fictional entity for commercial purposes. A summons or warrant are ways to charge the Strawman account and giving up the name is the surety to it, a Bankers acceptance. They are just offers and It’s all commerce. With respect and don’t argue, ask for their names, badges and indemnity insurance, also are you under Oath and are you upholding the law today? So you are Officers of the Law and not Officers of the Legal then. Always decline doing business with them and always Film, Film, Film.

[Ant_made]

The Power of No Consent is more than just you not wanting to engage, but you are ultimately saying you don’t consent for your Estate to be the surety. That is Trust Law and has more power in it. You could even say at the end that they are in Breach of Trust and will be held liable and that you require their supervisors Name, Badge and indemnity insurance as well and they too will be held liable for Breach of Trust if they do not stop harassing you for a victimless crime.

[morag-janet-of-the-hill-family]

Even more powerful than just non consent (which can be considered belligerent and gives them a hook to drag you in on) is conditional acceptance. I’ll attach a simple conditional acceptance, so you can see how to formulate an effective one. Once you have worked out what you want on yours, then keep a copy by the front and back doors so you can hand it to them if they turn up again. I have put trespass signs on my gates and padlocks, and cameras so they have no right to enter and harass. I have witnessed them turning away from a locked gate with trespass signs and cameras.

Conditional-acceptance-process-1.pdf 35 KB PDF - Click to view

Options

• Copy Download Link

Conditional-acceptance-Masks.pdf 61 KB PDF - Click to view

Options

• Copy Download Link

[Ant_made]

Sorry Morag and with all due respect, I beg to differ. I do believe Yes, if you choose to operate in a commercial capacity, a non consent may seem belligerent, but you don’t have to accept anything on offer that may cause you harm. Also Trust Law, is superior Law over Legislation, Statues, Codes, Regulations, Directives and so on. Why put anything into a Private trust, if it is not superior? If you really want to operate in Private, then remain there and operate from there. We are Attorneys to the Name that has been held in Trust without our knowledge. We never abandon it, because we never knew about it. They don’t have any title insurance with their Indemnity insurance to cover the fraud, once you Express the Trust and nothing is Implied.

They are presuming legal title to the funds by General Deposit and you are going to be the bankers Acceptance, the surety by way of Appearance, even Special Appearance. If you get taken into court against your will and non consent, they are the Owners of the Court/House, you are in their custody and that makes them Custodians, which makes them Trustees and now they have the obligation to perform and a duty of care for your best interest. Especially if you Do Not Consent to your Estate being the Surety. That means the Judgey Wudgey is the Surety and their securities are on the table and will be crediting the bill/Cheque, not yours. Also it’s your Original Issue Security that they put in General deposit with the court, so they leveraged their security against yours, making theirs secondary and taxable, so they are up for Tax Fraud with the ATO for Tax evasion and Capital gains.

I am not there to argue, but only to set things right and protect my Estate. Now that I am aware it and a man of Honour, I am not going to assume or presume anything and I will give Judgey Wudgey the benefit of the doubt, to be honourable and help set things right. He who seeks equity, must give equity.

I Do Not Consent in Trust law has weight and under the Uniform Trust code, a Judge must follow the directives of the Grantor. We are the Grantor to the Estate by way of right. We already grant things for it and our mothers would have wanted us to be beneficiaries first up and then when at age of Majority, the Grantor had they known. It is called the Reasonable Man doctrine. Tell me Judgey, would your mother give me, a stranger the benefit and control over your estate? If so, can I have your house keys please.

If we have not Trespassed against our fellow Wo/man, then we don’t have to accept anything they have on offer. They are Trespassing, by stealing our credit/funds and making us pay again for a fake law that has no substance and built on fraud and deception. Why play make believe and entertain these crooks. Let’s Play Ball Instead. Brandy is a good one.

[morag-janet-of-the-hill-family]

What you are saying is true in theory but in practice you are dealing with front line sheeples/police etc who generally don’t know anything apart from what they have been trained to do. They are trained to believe if some one is refusing to co-operate, this then gives them jurisdiction to proceed and damage you to bring you back into line. I haven’t said to offer consent, what I have learnt on this site is to offer conditional acceptances, which is still not consenting but it puts you in a far more powerful and honourable position than just saying “I don’t consent” which in commerce is a refusal and considered dishonourable like a slap in the face(The rules of commerce are basically set in concrete.) . I know a woman here in my area who said to police “I don’t consent” over and over and they dragged her out of the car and beat her up and severely damaged her arm. Four men against one woman. She made it clear she didn’t consent and they considered her to be belligerent and in their eyes it gave them the jurisdiction to proceed. She is taking them to court but using a lawyer so she probably won’t get anything like the settlement she deserves, if she gets anything at all.

[Ant_made]

It is not theory, it is fact and if you are going to put that much effort in to the Debtor/Creditor relationship, why not invest in the Grantor/Trustee/Beneficiary relationship? You prove the point with the woman just saying I do not consent in a commercial exchange and it had no strength, she needed to express herself properly or have the paperwork to back it up. The same goes with Trust Law, you are not there to argue, but Express your Trust and your Intent to protect it. Ignorance of the Law goes to both parties and that is why in both Jurisdictions you film and get their details, and I would get the Supervisors involve with all their details as well. If they are willing to put up their security on a presumption, well then, Let’s rock’n’Roll. We are not mixing jurisdictions here, they are.

Like I said, their indemnity Insurance wont cover it on the Trust side. The other thing about the Debtor/creditor relationship is that we are so use to being that name and the fear of losing our possessions, we tend to cave in and defend it. Defending your Trust seems easier, as you can seperate yourself, but still have every right to protect it. By way of action and definition, we are the Grantors and the Attorney to our names, and we have an equitable interest in it. What do they have? If they arrest you, they are taking you into custody and they are the Trustees, they are liable and it’s their securities that they are leveraging against you to be that name. DO NOT BE THE NAME.

My main point here is, that we need to stop feeding the lie by playing along with it. If you want to live in the Private, then studying Trust Law seems to me to be logical way to go. That is my view of how I am seeing now. The say it is our fault we don’t educate ourselves to know the truth, well then the same goes to the Public that try to bond us to it. Trust underline everything, it is the bases of all commerce and banking. Monetised through Securitisation. They say if you understand banking, you can find remedies in this system and play along side it. Investing in your Estate, is investing in your wellbeing. We have been doing it all our lives anyway, just without the proper knowledge and standing.

I believe if you look into Trust law and securities, then remedies in the Legal realm will become more obvious. With your knowledge Morag, you would be on a whole ‘nother level.

I hope you are smiling, Big Hugs to you and enjoy the weekend.

Ps. Listen to they way we talk in the Legal Realm. We are supposed to be respectful and remain in honour to them, when it is nothing but a lie. I can’t help calling a spade a spade and I am certainly not going to lie to myself, especially once seeing the system at play. You can’t hurt a Corporation, but a Corporation can hurt us if we allow it. If it is anything the last 3 years should have taught us, is that We should walk, talk and live in the Truth. We set the standard by our Actions and the more doing it, we might have a chance of turning things around. We have not done anything WRONG here, it is us that are being Wronged.

[morag-janet-of-the-hill-family]

Great, I’m glad you are so confident and I look forward to your successes carrying this out 🙂

[charles-and-melissa]

Thank you everyone for your messages 🙂

[charles-and-melissa]

Hey Everyone.

We just had a situation whereby police broke into our house from an apparant search warrant. After walking past 4 no trespassing notices and me repeatedly saying I do not consent.

They badgered us and threatened with arrest if we do not give details. Under which we unfortunately complied under duress(stated on camera) that we are the living man answering to the name…..

So I guess technically we contracted. Our little one was in our arms and it was very traumatic. We offered to comply if they agree to our terms and handed them conditional acceptance notices to which they refused.

They served a VRO and a Warrant to which we did not consent nor sign. They have left it here with the words refused where a signature is to go. They have caused thousands of $$ of damage to the front door. Can anyone point us in the right direction to who is experienced in these matters and who we can contact? We understand we have 72 hours to respond.

Do we have any remedy here given that we have up our names under duress?

[Ant_made]

Did you film and did you get all their details? Also, I am not assuming or presuming anything, but as long as you both haven’t done anything wrong or to provoke the situation, then stand up for yourself and do with respect. If you conduct yourself well, while protecting your integrity, it is harder for them to put it over you and you have every right to defend yourself.

They are looking for your signature, for your Estate to be the surety, you don’t have to consent to that. Say it for the record, I do not consent for the Estate to being the surety. Make it personal on them and tell them they are going to be held liable. Do they have written authority to administer your Estate? Show me the contract, that says I am your property. Get their indemnity insurance numbers and providers, and go as high as you can. Whoever wants to put their name to it. You require for all parties making the claim to be identified. You want a copy of the the original warrant, to make sure it was even legal and gave them just cause to act accordingly. Even though, you don’t operate under their jurisdiction, they do and have to follow the codes and regulations. They are bound by them. Are they under Oath? and what Laws have you broken?

Put them on the back foot. Do not be the name, it is not real, but legal fiction, so you can not be it. We are men or women before any name or title. Ask them to prove you are not a Wo/Man. Remember the Name is just a token on the Monopoly board. They can’t recognise us (Men and Women) in the public, it’s just Numbers and paperwork in that system, no substance, just titles. Legal only applies to the person, which you can not be unless you say you are. They are only assuming and presuming.

Whatever you do, you need to be strong, confident and keep it simple.

[charles-and-melissa]

Thanks Ant. Much appreciated. It has already happened which makes it challenging if we didn’t do all the right things,but I feel we held our ground fairly well.

[Ant_made]

It only happens, when you say or accept it to be. Remember The Wizard of Oz was just a little man hiding behind a BIG Title. When singled out and exposed, they sing a different tune. Law works both ways and they are accountable, just as much as the next man (person). Single them out, break them down so to speak. Who is in charge?

In the end, We can only do what we feel or know what we are capable of doing. Sometimes it’s a situation that kicks us into gear and things always have a way of presenting themselves. So keep a clear mind, remain strong and trust yourself. If you show respect, respect should come back and that is the start of equity. Equity isn’t law, but the true essence of right and wrong on both sides and what is justified accordingly. We should always reverse it and put ourselves in their shoes to get a better understanding of what is going on. That is where you will find answers and relief.

All the best to you both.

[charles-and-melissa]

Hey guys,

We are going to be pursuing this. I see there is either Reyna or Zoltan to get in touch with. Does anyone have any experience with either of them or be able to provide guidance who would be best to assist us given the situation?

Thanks again.