A Lawyer Disbarred For Digging Too Deeply

[milehi]

Best thread in a long time. Thanks.

[Awoke]

You're not hogging the thread, Glass; you're posting from Austrailia. A majority of the GSus membership is sleeping when it is your most active time to post, I would think, being that you're pretty much on the other side of the globe.

Thanks for all your amazing posts in this thread. You make things understandable to a noob like me.

Awoke
Driving is a commercial term. It is synonymous with operating. Driving a vehicle and operating a vehicle are commercial activities. You would do both for a fee.


Were you carrying passengers for a fee or were you carrying freight for a fee?

Obviously no, it was a leisurely day trip. Just Travelling.

How about the officer gets a conditional acceptance on his claim, conditional on proof of claim, affidavit made under oath that a) the officer did in fact determine that you were subject to the TLA because you had either a fee paying passenger or that you were transporting freight for a fee and b) some other stuff you might like to include.

Remember I said you write write your letters in such a way as to make rebuttal difficult if not impossible.

So in order to literally go through this process with the cop, at some point I would need to give him my licence and accept the copy of the ticket, right? Then you're saying I should write a letter?
I just don't get it.
I know the bastards will suspend my licence if I let the ticket go without paying for it.

Most officers will not make an oath as to the verasity of their claim. This gives them liability and this is not what they want. We live in limited liability world.

They are cowards and don't want to be culpable for anything.

If someone comes to you with an insturment (a claim) they must also provide the remedy. If they do not then they become liable for the instrument.

Are you telling my my fine is an "instrument"? So how and who would I show that they are responsible to provide the remedy?

[Awoke]

Awoke,

Check out world freeman society forum.

My first impressions are that the forum is heavily moderated by Mods that abitrarily ban whomever they decide they don't like. Not necessarily only agents/trolls either.
After learning how to school trolls on GIM and here, I was really surprised to see members getting banned for simply disagreeing with a theme. They need thicker skin over there. Not too much freedom for a forum based on free and living men.

But I will continue to check it out. I hove only checked out the noob portion of the forum, not the more advanced topic sub forums.

Thanks for the lead either way!

[sirgonzo420]

My first impressions are that the forum is heavily moderated by Mods that abitrarily ban whomever they decide they don't like. Not necessarily only agents/trolls either.
After learning how to school trolls on GIM and here, I was really surprised to see members getting banned for simply disagreeing with a theme. They need thicker skin over there. Not too much freedom for a forum based on free and living men.

But I will continue to check it out. I hove only checked out the noob portion of the forum, not the more advanced topic sub forums.

Thanks for the lead either way!

here are a couple more forums to check out...

There have been some great sui juris forums online, but I have lived through the demise of at least three of them.

Here are a couple decent ones that sprung from the ashes:

http://www.savingtosuitorsclub.net/index.php

http://www.suijurisforum.com/

[palani]

Are you telling my my fine is an "instrument"? So how and who would I show that they are responsible to provide the remedy?

If a vacuum sweeper salesman shows up at your door and manages to convince you to shell out some shekels for his product you have 72 hours to reverse your decision. Same is true with roadside chats with coppicemen. Sign whatever they want you to sign ... whether under duress or, my favorite, R. vi Et Armis ... the king under force and arms... and then abate the nuisance within that 72 hour grace period while far downrange.

Smile the whole time. Chat it up. Offer him a donut (don't have any? carry coupons or gift cards). Be sociable and leave the attitude for later. Ask him if he had training in the use of that weapon on his hip (settles the fact that he is a trained assassin). After all, he is only there as part of the benefit you agreed to.

[Awoke]

Sign whatever they want you to sign ... whether under duress or, my favorite, R. vi Et Armis ... the king under force and arms... and then abate the nuisance within that 72 hour grace period while far downrange.

Funny you mention that. Since you mentioned the R. vi Et Armis signature, I have made a mental note of it, and I was going to sign the ticket with my "Name" and use the R. vi Et Armis as the suffix.
So if my name was Bob Rae, I would have signed it as "Bob Rae R vi Et Armis"

However, I didn't sign anything. He just handed me a ticket. It was a computer-printed slip, really.

[palani]

So if my name was Bob Rae, I would have signed it as "Bob Rae R vi Et Armis"

They tend to read things when a signature is too long. Otherwise they don't even glance at it.

Also, many people err in providing an autograph when a signature is asked for. The first is your property. The latter is a copy.

And the coppiceman is usually diligent in making sure you get the COPY of the instrument. Presumably that makes him holder in due course (for all that is worth until you cancel it).

[Awoke]

Also, many people err in providing an autograph when a signature is asked for. The first is your property. The latter is a copy.

Can you elaborate on that please?

[palani]

Can you elaborate on that please?

Hopefully this is sufficiently elaborate:

SIGNATURE, pract. contr. By signature is understood the act of putting down

a man's name, at the end of an instrument, to attest its validity. The name

thus written is also called a signature.

2. It is not necessary that a party should write his name himself, to

constitute a signature; his mark is now held sufficient though he was able

to write. 8 Ad. & El. 94; 3 N. & Per. 228; 3 Curt. 752; 5 John. 144, A

signature made by a party, another person guiding his band with his consent,

is sufficient. 4 Wash. C. C. 262, 269. Vide to Sign.

SIGN, contracts, evidence. A token of anything; a note or token given

without words.

2. Contracts are express or implied. The express are manifested viva

voce, or by writing; the implied are shown by silence, by acts, or by signs.

3. Among all nations find and at all times, certain signs have been

considered as proof of assent or dissent; for example, the nodding of the

head, and the shaking of hands; 2 Bl. Com. 448; 6 Toull. D. 33; Heinnec.,

Antiq. lib. 3, t. 23, n. 19; silence and inaction, facts and signs are

sometimes very strong evidence of cool reflection, when following a

question. I ask you to lend me one hundred dollars, without saying a word

you put your hand in your pocket, and deliver me the money. I go into a

hotel and I ask the landlord if he can accommodate me and take care of my

trunk; without speaking he takes it out of my hands and sends it into his

chamber. By this act he doubtless becomes responsible to me as a bailee. At

the expiration of a lease, the tenant remains in possession, without any

objection from the landlord; this may be fairly interpreted as a sign of a

consent that the lease shall be renewed. 13 Serg. & Rawle, 60.

4, The learned author of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, in

his 44th chapter, remarks, "Among savage nations, the want of letters is

imperfectly supplied by the use of visible signs, which awaken attention,

and perpetuate the remembrance of any public or private transaction. The

jurisprudence of the first Romans exhibited the scenes of a pantomime; the

words were adapted to the gestures, and the slightest error or neglect in

the forms of proceeding was sufficient to annul the substance of the fairest

claim. The communion of the marriage-life was denoted by the necessary

elements of fire and water: and the divorced wife resigned, the bunch of

keys, by the delivery of which she had been invested with the government of

the family. The manumission of a son, or a slave, was performed by turning

him round with a gentle blow on the cheek: a work was prohibited by the

casting of a stone; prescription was interrupted by the breaking of a

branch; the clenched fist was the symbol of a pledge or deposits; the right

hand was the gift of faith and confidence. The indenture of covenants was a

broken straw; weights and, scales were introduced into every payment, and

the heir who accepted a testament, was sometimes obliged to snap his

fingers, to cast away his garments, and to leap and dance with real or

affected transport. If a citizen pursued any stolen goods into a neighbor's

house, he concealed his nakedness with a linen towel, and hid his. face with

a mask or basin, lest he should encounter the eyes of a virgin or a matron.

In a civil action, the plaintiff touched the ear of his witness seized his

reluctant adversary by the neck and implored, in solemn lamentation, the aid

of his fellow citizens. The two competitors grasped each other's hand, as if

they stood prepared for combat before the tribunal of the praetor: he

commanded them to produce the object of the dispute; they went, they

returned with measured steps, and a clod of earth was cast at his feet to

represent the field for which they contended. This occult science of the

words and actions of law, was the inheritance of the pontiffs and

patricians. Like the Chaldean astrologers, they announced to their clients

the days of business and repose; these important trifles wore interwoven

with the religion of Numa; and, after the publication of the Twelve Tables,

the Roman people were still enslaved by the ignorance of judicial

proceedings. The treachery of some plebeian officers at length revealed the

profitable mystery: in a more enlightened age, the legal actions were

derided and observed; and the same antiquity which sanctified the practice,

obliterated the use and meaning, of this primitive language."

Copyright

Under British law, the appearance of signatures (not the names themselves) may be protected under copyright law.[5]

Under United States Copyright Law, "titles, names [...]; mere variations of typographic ornamentation, lettering, or coloring" are not eligible for copyright;[6] however, the appearance of signatures (not the names themselves) may be protected under copyright law.[7] It has been deemed illegal to publish signatures[clarification needed] in Canada.

Signature. The act of putting down a man's name at the end of an instrument to attest its validity, the name thus written. A "signature" may be written by hand, printed, stamped, typewritten, engraved, photgrpahed, or cut from one instrument and attached to another, and a signature lithographed on an instrument by a party is sufficient for the purpose of signing it; it being immaterial with what kind of instrument a signature is made. Smith v. Greenville County, 188 S.C. 349, 199 S.E. 416, 419. Maricopa County v. Osborn, 60 Ariz. 290, 136 P.2d 270, 274. And whatever mark, symbol, or device one may choose to employ as representative of himself is sufficient, Griffith v. Bonawitz, 73 Neb. 622, 103 N.W. 327, 339

AUTOGRAPH. One's handwriting.

under the heading "sign" ... The word "subscribed" is more restricted than the word "signature". The word "signature" in its origin involves merely a sign, the word "subscribed" involves a writing. The signing of a written instrument has a much broader and more extended meaning than attaching one's written signature to it implies. When a person attaches his name or causes it to be attached to a writing by any of the known methods of impressing his name upon paper with the intention of signing it he is regarded as having "signed" in writing. Hagen v. Gresby, 34 N.D. 349, 159 N.W. 3,5, L.R.A. 1917B, 281

[Glass]

My first impressions are that the forum is heavily moderated by Mods that abitrarily ban whomever they decide they don't like. Not necessarily only agents/trolls either.
After learning how to school trolls on GIM and here, I was really surprised to see members getting banned for simply disagreeing with a theme. They need thicker skin over there. Not too much freedom for a forum based on free and living men.

But I will continue to check it out. I hove only checked out the noob portion of the forum, not the more advanced topic sub forums.

Thanks for the lead either way!

I haven't really got caught up in forum politics. I prefer just to read and agree with people I agree with. I don't like to openly disagree with people. It creates controversy. It's best to go about your business and let others mind theirs IMO.

I did have some disappointment that after 3 years a lot of people have made little progress there. I also thought there were one or two moderators who were anti freeman information. Seemed like it had become hijacked like the suijuris web sites and GIM1 & 2. Same kind of infiltration. I don't think it's anywhere near as bad though.

There is good research there. I assume you have looked at the CoR stuff? Seen Menards CoR? Made one up yourself?

a CoR is simply the re-writing of your contract with the organisation calling itself the Govt. Hatha just poked the Strawman thread where I mentioned contracts based on palani's post to you in this thread. Contracts occur explicitly and implicitly. Often a contract comes in to existance by aquiescence. If you send a CoR, chances are you will get no response. This is good. This is aquiescence.