Complaint Review: STATE OF NEVADA OFFICIALS - Nevada
- STATE OF NEVADA OFFICIALS Nevada United States
- Category: Criminal Justice System
STATE OF NEVADA OFFICIALS Attempted Murder; Kidnapping; Retaliation; Fraud; Theft, etc Nevada
*Author of original report: COMMERCIAL AFFIDAVIT v.s. Cynthia Castillo: Public Record / Widely Advertised
*Author of original report: PROOF OF SERVICE VIA EMAIL TO SECRETARY OF STATE OF NEVADA
*Author of original report: FURTHER PROOF OF SERVICE BY EMAIL OF FEDERAL HABEAS CORPUS RELATED TO THIS REPORT!
*Author of original report: Federal Habeas Corpus [Re.: Shelldekai: Helfrich] Mailed Monday the 25th, 2019
*Author of original report: CORRUPT STATE OF NEVADA OFFICIALS Attempted Murder; Kidnapping; Retaliation; Fraud; Theft, etc.
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
Click here now..
Notice & Demand With Rescission/Withdrawal Of Signature
Nunc Pro Tunc 08/24/1994
WIDELY ADVERTISED PUBLIC RECORD
NOTICE TO AGENTS IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS
NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS IS NOTICE TO AGENTS
SILENCE IS ACQUIESCENCE; ACQUIESCENCE IS ESTOPPEL; YOU HAVE THIRTY (30) DAYS!!!
March 24, 2019 - 12:40 EST
To the Secretary of State, Governor; and other officials,
To whom this may concern.
I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, one of the people domiciled on the land, now declares on and for the record, I am the authorized signature for (PETER JASON HELFRICH(c)082494) the usufruct trust created for my benefit at my birth, by the United States. This usufruct trust which was created without my knowledge and without my consent; (due to the 1933 bankruptcy) the United States use of the trust has been of great harm to me (PETER JASON HELFRICH(c)082494). So with no other option left I must demand pursuant to the following law, the secretary of state send notice of Peter - Jason: Helfrich standing/status to the courts.
8 U.S.C. § 1502 : Certificate of nationality issued by Secretary of State for person not a naturalized citizen of United States for use in proceedings of a foreign state.
FOR THE RECORD: "The Partner (Government) of my Partner (PETER JASON HELFRICH(c)082494) is NOT my (Peter - Jason: Helfrich) Partner, applies herein and is in FULL FORCE AND EFFECT."
The Secretary of State is authorized to issue, in his discretion and in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by him, a certificate of nationality for any person not a naturalized citizen of the United States who presents satisfactory evidence that he is an AMERICAN NATIONAL and that such certificate is needed for use in judicial or administrative proceedings in a foreign state. Such certificate shall be solely for use in the case for which it was issued and shall be transmitted by the Secretary of State through appropriate official channels to the judicial or administrative officers of the FOREIGN STATE in which it is to be used.
19 Corpus Juris Secundum § 883, [t]he United States government is a FOREIGN CORPORATION with respect to a state.
8 USC § 1101(a)(21), [t]he term "national" means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state."
8 USC § 1101(B)(22), [t]he term "national of the United States" means (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States. This highlighted section of law is I, John/Jane Doe, who is not a 14th Amendment US citizen bound by statutes, codes, and regulation thus not subject to the jurisdiction.
American national ≠ national/citizen of the United States. These are TWO distinct status’ within the American system. The latter is a free American National; the former is a voluntary slave subject to the jurisdiction thereof created by section 1 of the 14th Amendment. It is a FEDERALLY CREATED capacity/title that owes allegiance to it and is a subject/citizen of the United States.
That I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, am not a Government employee nor is Peter - Jason: Helfricha part of the body politic.
I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, have signed no such contract knowingly, and I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, have the 11th Amendment immunity. Since such per ponderous fraud has been being done against me. I, Justin Edward Nolan, must and am rescinding/withdrawing my signature from all documents; and demanding the dissolution of the Usufruct Trust; as first and for most, the usufruct was created without my knowledge, more importantly without my parent’s knowledge at my birth; hence no full disclosure has taken place.
I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, hereby demand the return of all e quitable assets, monies, land patents, and so forth, as any claim of contract is null & void under law. I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, have been forced in to this action by the officials of "Massachusetts" who have repeatedly refused to arrest corrupt officials (judges, lawyers, prosecutors) and obstructed my access to a grand jury to prosecute the criminals who repeatedly break law. I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, will lay out the clear sedition and treason being committed by members of the Communist BAR/lawyers Guild, (deemed such by the 81st Congress in 1950 lawyers guild report) while the international bankers who created the BAR, Guarantees the rigged vote, never allows a competent official in office. While they, (the international bankers) and the UN, (another banker creation) are controllers of the courts. On December 9, 1945, the International Organization Immunities Act relinquished every public office of the United States to the United Nations. This law makes all public officials foreign citizens, barring them from judicial power. All public officials are administrative agents of the US Corporation. They have no judicial power whatsoever.
The courts; have been under and is UN controlled. While the courts, are operated and controlled by the communist BAR; which helps to destroy America by leaning the trust and creating sureties which make the national debt appear larger than it is and there by also destroy the American People’s FREEDOM with fraudulent claims of crime. When there is no corpus delecti which is required for a crime to exist.
Another troubling issue Black's Law Dictionary provides the following definition: Capitis Diminutio Maxima; (meaning a maximum loss of status) – The very highest, or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man's condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.
This is the very action the BAR and it’s members claims upon the American people due to our names being written in all capitalized letters on the certificate of birth/receipt for the Usufruct trust. This action shows a clear mental insanity to believe one can be made another’s slave through capitalized letters upon a receipt/certificate. If any American made such a claim; to purport the ability of making one their slave; by capitalizing another’s name, that natural and/or private person would surely be deemed mad/insane and lock away, for the safety of society; as there is no telling what such a person might do. Please see the attach copy of certificate of birth. This action being done purports to make a living man’s status the same as a corporation as only corporations are put in all capital letters in law. In effect this creates a corporate soul for the living man if he uses this to contract or do any other things in the world, the law society claim his status to be that of a corporation. This means he is now CIVILITER MORTUUS meaning one who is civilly dead; one who is considered as if he were naturally dead, so far as his rights are concerned.
Verses one being, Capitis Diminutio Minima (meaning a minimum loss of status). The very lowest; or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man's family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation [pride] of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) [of his own right, not under any legal disability] or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. [Parental authority] It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom.Law, 144.
Or one being Sui Juris: "Of his own right; possessing full social and civil rights; not under any legal disability to act for one’s self. (See Emancipation: Majority) [Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Ed., pg. 1434] & in their Propria Persona = Lat. 'In ones own proper person.' To present, one’s self in court without assistance of an attorney, at least 'on the record.' Often shortened to 'in pro per.’
Yet a further question who gave the members of the law society the right to bastardize the English written language then not tell the people in front of them the words being used may or may not mean what one believed them to mean. This deception clearly causes fraudulent entrees upon the court record. . This is a direct violation of 18 U.S. Code § 3501 - Admissibility of confessions; also a violation of 29 USC sec 401-531 as plaintiff has been denied his right to be Propria Persona as attorneys are forced on everyone. All these actions violate peoples Unalienable rights ~ Things which are not in commerce, as public roads, are in their nature unalienable...
THE NATURAL RIGHTS OF LIFE AND LIBERTY & THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS ARE UNALIENABLE. ~Bouvier's 1856
-Statutes, codes and regulations are not law, merely a point in fact of law, and statutes, codes, and regulations are the law of Government, not man. Please see the following case cites.
-"A "Code’ or Statute’ is not a Law," (Flournoy v. First Nat. Bank of Shreveport, 197 La. 1067, 3 So.2d 244, 248),
A concurrent or ‘joint resolution ‘of legislature is not "Law," (Koenig v. Flynn, 258 N.Y. 292, 179 N. E. 705, 707;
Ward v State, 176 Okl. 368, 56 P.2d 136, 137; State ex rel. Todd v. Yelle, 7 Wash.2d 443, 110 P.2d 162, 165).
All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/Creators in accord with God’s Laws. "All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process of Law."
(Rodriques v. Ray Donavan, U.S. Department of Labor, 769 F.2d 1344, 1348 (1985)); …lacking due process[of law], in that they are ‘void for ambiguity’ in their failure to specify the statutes’ applicability to ‘natural persons,’ otherwise depriving the same of fair notice, as their construction by definition of terms aptly identifies the applicability of such statutes to "artificial or fictional corporate entities or ‘persons’, creatures of statute, or those by contract employed as agents or representatives, departmental subdivisions, offices, officers, and property of the government, but not the ‘Natural Person’ or American citizen Immune from such jurisdiction of legalism.
"The Common Law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land. The codes, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are "not the law."
(Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn 2d 261), They are the law of government for internal regulation, not the law of man, in his separate but equal station and natural state, a sovereign foreign with respect to government generally.)
With such overwhelming case law there is no question about the fact of the claim made here statutes are not law. Plaintiff/the court now challenges prosecution and Magistrate to prove the statutes apply to John/Jane Doe. I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, deny being a government employee. If the prosecution or state or Magistrates wish to say different then prove I have been a paid employee of federal or state Government produce the pay roll records. Add in the fact Peter - Jason: Helfrich, is not a part of the body politic.
The Clear Fraud; Sedition, And Treasonous Acts Of The BAR
This fraudulent, /seditious, & treasonous act, of the Courts’/BAR members telling plaintiff and defendants alike, that the Court; was appointing an attorney, in plaintiff’s/defendants benefit. This fraud is an outrage and now known to be patently false/a lie on its face. Please see the following it explains far better the fraud/sedition, and treason. That an attorney’s presence is to put one in the state court’s jurisdiction, so they can prevent one from challenging the jurisdiction putting the people at the magistrates non-existing mercy as the BAR’s clear objective is the over throw of America’s form of Government by convicting the people of fictional crimes to remove their right of gun ownership, so the American people can be Concorde and enslaved without a shot fired. Even case law denotes the truth. Please see:
The U.S. Supreme Court observed in its unanimous decision in Kay v. Ehrler, 499 U.S. 432, that a lawmaking body may instead prefer to discourage attorneys from electing to appear in Propria Persona because such self re-presentation may often conflict with the general public and legislative policy favoring the effective and successful prosecution of meritorious claims. The high court observed that 'Even a skilled lawyer who represents himself is at a disadvantage in contested litigation. Ethical considerations may make it inappropriate for him to appear as a witness. He is deprived of the judgment of an independent third party in framing the theory of the case, evaluating alternative methods of presenting the evidence, cross-examining hostile witnesses, formulating legal arguments, and in making sure that reason, rather than emotion, dictates the proper tactical response to unforeseen developments in the courtroom. The adage that 'a attorney who represents himself has a fool for a client' is the product of years of experience by seasoned litigators.. Id. at 437-438
An appearance may be in "Propria Persona" and need not be by attorney.
Obs. 'In his own person.' It is a rule in pleading those pleas to the jurisdiction of the court must be pleaded in Propria Persona, because, if pleaded by an attorney, they admit the jurisdiction, as an attorney is an officer of the court, and he is presumed to plead after having obtained leave, which admits the jurisdiction).
This ruling is clear proof the attorneys only role is to fraudulently aide the BAR member/judge’s court in getting jurisdiction. The following rulings explain the criminal acts in much greater detail the rulings shown; leave no doubt of the subversive actions of the bar and its member’s intention of destroying America from within. Please see the following:
"The attorney’s first duty is to the courts...not to the client." U.S.v Franks D.C.N.J. 53F.2d 128). Here again people have been repeatedly told the attorney is for their benefit to insure a fair and impartial hearing; this is clear fraud.
"Clients are also called "wards of the court" in regard to their relationship with their attorneys."Spilker v. Hankin, 158 F.2d 35, 58U.S.App.D.C. 206. This ruling clearly shows the attorney’s presence does not guarantee a fair and impartial hearing but rather secures/guarantees defendants or plaintiffs are at the mercy of the Magistrate. The preponderance of fraud will only grow as you will see.
(Wards of court. are Infants and persons of unsound mind). Davis Committee v. Loney, 290 Ky. 644, 162 S.W.2d 189, 190.
Did you get that? An Attorneys first duty is not to the people they are supposedly representing, and when you have an Attorney you are either considered insane or an infant.
This is an incredible fraud/sedition & treason being perpetrated on the American people, by members of the BAR who perform such fraud/sedition treason daily there is no doubt, who the real criminals are now!?! This violates 18 U.S.CODE§2384-SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY and is clearly sedition against the American people and the United States of America. The BAR members repeatedly ignores the Constitution of the United States in open court violating Title 18 USC 2381 Capitol Felony Treason. They claim that saying our paper work is fugitive allows them the right to ignore the US Constitution.
I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, hereby also demand that with the above stated law the Secretary of State notify the clerk in case numbers CR 7411 A, CV 37593 A, in "Nye County" , "Nevada" , of my, Peter - Jason: Helfrich's standing, as an American National with 11th Amendment immunity.
It is no wonder as to why the 81st congress deemed the BAR/lawyers guild a Communist Organization in 1950; in the congressional report on the lawyer’s guild. When one reads the report it becomes quickly understood the BAR was acting in support of Adolph Hitler, as the BAR was caught red handed, shipping ammunitions, & attacking the American public school system, in order to dumb down American children. Yet despite all the facts members of the BAR are still practicing their fraudulent/seditious & treasonous acts daily & even seem proud, of their historical ties with the world’s 2nd largest mass murderer in history Adolph Hitler 1st being the International Bankers of course, which the present financial crisis has shown the historical connections here as well, being the BAR was founded and started by the bankers who can be shown to have a death toll over 100 million people directly, as a result of actions taken by the international bankers from WW 2 ‘till today. So it’s clear, the BAR and its members seek not justice, but domination, and the death, of all who will not be put upon bended knee, to them, and their creators (The International Bankers).
18 U.S.C. § 4. Such activity has been a federal crime since the First Congress, for "the common law recognized a duty to raise the `hue and cry’ and report felonies to the authorities. . . . It is apparent from this statute, as well as from our history and that of England, that concealment of crime and agreements to do so are not looked upon with favor. Such conduct deserves no encomium." Branzburg v. Hayes,408 U.S. 665, 696-97 (1972) (citation omitted).
Misprision of Felony involves both knowledge of a crime and some affirmative act of concealment or participation, and the Courts have concluded that ‘misprision of felony’ is a crime of moral turpitude because it necessarily involves an affirmative act of concealment or participation in a felony, behavior that runs contrary to accepted societal duties and involves dishonest or fraudulent activity. The Supreme Court observed that: Concealment of crime has been condemned throughout our history… Although the term "misprision of felony" now has an archaic ring, gross indifference to the duty to report known criminal behavior remains a badge of irresponsible citizenship.
THE FOLLOWING IS PART OF WHAT IS ON PAPER WORK WHICH HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE COURTS AND BAR MEMBERS THEY HAVE SAID THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO ABIDE BY THE CONSTITUTION FEDERAL LAW OR SUPREME COURT RULINGS.
1st claim and fact.
The FACTS OF LAW already say child support has been declared unconstitutional. So for the defendant’s cause of action against plaintiff/the court. There is no jurisdiction in the matter, as child support was declared unconstitutional in (STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS C7-97-926 C8-97-1132 C7-97-1512 C8-98-33, Filed June 12, 1998). The decision was up held in the Supreme Court. (STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT C7-97-926 C8-97-1132 C9-98-33 C7-97-1512,) Filed: January 28, 1999. This alone constitutes that no jurisdiction could exist. Because child support was found to be lacking, any provision for the separation of powers act in the US Constitution in both the Federal and the state law.
The following rulings state this applies to the instant case. Mills v. Duryee, 1t1 U.S. (7 Cranch) 481 (1813), the United States Supreme Court ruled that the merits of a case, as settled by courts of one state, must be recognized by the courts of other states; state courts may not reopen cases which have been conclusively decided by the courts of another state. Later, Chief Justice John Marshall suggested that the judgment of one state court must be recognized by other states' courts as final. Also Ableman v. Booth 62 U.S. 506 where the higher court stated the lower courts were bound by all federal court rulings. As well Howlett V. Rose, 496 U.S. 356 (1990) Federal Law and Supreme Court cases apply to State court cases. (Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1) (1958)--States are bound by United States Supreme Court Case decisions. Also Article 4 of the U.S. Constitution states that each state shall give full faith and credit to the other states laws this would include case law.
Plaintiff/the court (challenges the jurisdiction under Article 1 sec. 8 clause 17, & demands to know the nature & cause of the action) also pursuant to Indiana trial rule 12 .(B) (1) Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, 12 (B) (2) Lack of jurisdiction over the natural/private person, 12 (B) (8) The same action pending in another state court of this state. Since, the plaintiff/court is challenging the jurisdiction, of the Magistrate. So plaintiff decided to see what case law on this matter denotes. (Basso v Utah power & light company 495, F 2d 906 910) Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time and must be proven not assumed.
(Latana v Hopper 102 2d 188) (Chicago v New York 37 F SUPP 150) The court must prove on the record all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted.
Further more the following laws have not been met or upheld to allow jurisdiction please see the following:
1. No information/charging document has been lawfully issued to obtain the appearance of any Defendant in this matter as required pursuant to IC 35-34-1-2. Without the existence of lawful information/charging document, plaintiffs/the court makes only a special appearance before this Magistrate to inform the Magistrate of error in this matter.
2. Plaintiffs/court has not been served an information/charging document supported by any first hand material fact witness, affidavit of probable cause, or ANY instrument from which any reasonable natural/private person could determine probable cause, thereby initiating the court's jurisdiction in compliance with IC 35-34-1-2 and in compliance with the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendment protections. See State v. Kaahaaina, 2001 Haw. App. LEXIS 204 (Haw. Ct. App. Oct. 17, 2001) Holding that the State failed to properly initiate the criminal proceeding against the defendant because the defendant was never formally charged orally or by written complaint supported by sworn statement or affidavit and thus failed to initiate jurisdiction in the District Court. Plaintiff hereby demands a verified criminal complaint if none exist Magistrate/commissioner has no choice but to dismiss the matter with prejudice.
3. Without sufficient and lawful process as directed per IC 35-34-1-2; at minimum, the court's jurisdiction cannot be invoked and, therefore, no matter is before this court and this matter is void AB INITIO. This failure to follow IC 35-34-1-2 violated the Defendant’s due process rights. See State v. Kaahaaina, 2001 Haw. App. LEXIS 204 (Haw. Ct. App. Oct. 17, 2001) Holding that defendant was improperly charged because the information charging document used by the officer failed to comply with HRS § 805-1 and HRPP Rule 7 (d).
4. This state court is without jurisdiction, precludes the judge from making an offer of a plea to the defendant in error without, in so doing, putting fraud upon the Magistrates court..
5. The Prosecutor in this matter knew or should have known that without the issuance of sufficient process, there is no charge or complaint against the falsely accused or defendant.
6. The person acting as magistrate in this matter, who has had this matter brought before him/her in this court, knew or should have known that the court is patently, unambiguously, and wholly without jurisdiction because the insufficiency of process used in this matter precludes initiating the court’s jurisdiction.
7. In light of the facts before the court, the person acting as judge must act minister ally and should, sua sponte, dismiss or remove this matter from the court with prejudice as it is void AB INITIO.
Therefore, the Nye County Court, STATE OF NEVADA is given mandatory judicial notice under rule 201 of the FRCP by plaintiffs/court, in light of the foregoing lawful and valid facts, that there is no matter before this court and that any and all parties who pursue any trial of this matter are acting in fraud and misrepresentation and in violation of clearly established law, procedures, rules of evidence, and of the rights of this court in error.
FACTS WHICH MUST BE ADDRESSED
1. Claimant has identified themselves as STATE OF NEVADA; therefore this court is improperly set due to the fact that in All Cases … in which a State shall be a Party, The Supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction.
2. Should this court allow this action to be brought before it, the proceeding will be biased, bigoted, warped, lopsided, and in violation of the laws of due process in that the Respondent cannot receive a fair and impartial hearing before a court wherein:
a. The "law", complete with monetary penalties and pseudo "criminal" penalties, was manufactured by the claimant/state;
b. The court belongs to the claimant/state;
c. The judge receives remuneration from the claimant/state;
d. The judge is subject to the regulatory agencies of the claimant/state;
e. The witnesses are on the payroll of the claimant/state;
f. For Magistrate to hear the case would violate subject matter jurisdiction and be a conflict of interest as the magistrate represents the state and the state is the claimant "unlawfully" see Hoke v Henderson 15, N.C. 15,25 AM DEC 677." That statute which would deprive a person of person or property without a regular trial according to the use and custom of common law would not be the law of the land." There is a common law principle which states that for there to be a crime, there must first be a victim, corpus delecti. In the absence of a victim there can be no crime. The state cannot be the victim nor can the state sue on behalf of another.
3. If the STATE OF NEVADA insists on being a party to the action, then let it bring its action in the court of original jurisdiction which is set forth in Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution for the United States of America, to which the claimant/state is contractually bound.
One need only look to the American Jurisprudence to see what has been decided prior on any unconstitutional law and the duties of a court officer.
American Jurisprudence 2nd 1964 vol. 16 CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
§ 177 Generally statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted. Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it. A contract which rests on an unconstitutional statute creates no obligation to be impaired by subsequent legislation.
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it. Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby. It is said that all persons are presumed to know the law, meaning that ignorance of the law excuses no one; if any person acts under an unconstitutional statute, he does so at his peril and must take the consequences. Pg. 403 – 405
16Am Jur 2d., Const. Law Sec. 70:
"No public policy of a state can be allowed to override the positive guarantees of the U.S. Constitution."
63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247
"As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer.  Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts.  That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose behalf he or she serves.  and owes a fiduciary duty to the public.  It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual.  Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official which tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy.
2nd claim and fact.
Plaintiff’ Peter - Jason: Helfrich is the court as defined in the following. (COURT = The person and the suit of the sovereign the place where the sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, where ever that may be.)
Black’s law dictionary 5th edition page 318.
Being plaintiff has a counter claim, plaintiff/the court has suit which means, plaintiff is the court. With this fact now proven and as clearly denoted in the maxims of law that following applies here. Rights never die. [Bouvier’s 1856 Law Dictionary. Also It is a general rule that the sovereign cannot be sued in his own court without consent and hence no direct judgment can be rendered against him therein for cost, except in the manner and on the condition he has proscribed.
40 La. Ann. 856," Bouvier’s Law Dictionary Vol. 1(1897). So clearly the magistrate needs consent of the private/natural person. The court does not and will not consent.
"Bouvier's Law Dictionary (1914),"Maxim,"p.2149, (No legislative body or man can convey any authority or jurisdiction he does not possess over common Rights vested by God in another. Because legislative powers are limited, all powers derived from legislative acts are limited). The Court has now established the fact it cannot be sued in its own court & consent is needed The Court has not consented to the Magistrate. Thus no authority exists for Magistrate to make any order.
"The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the "citizenship" to the agencies of government."
City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944
At the revolution the Sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects ......and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." Chisholm v Georgia, 2 Dall. 440, at pg 471; The Basic principle here is if one doesn’t agree with the body politic they cannot be held liable to the body politics suggestions as to what they should do. Unless a jury of their peers decides it is such an atrocious act they must do it, a jury of 12 peers. One’s peer is above all one who thinks in similar terms and understands who they are an American National not a US Citizen, and understands what law is. Yet the people are regularly told we have no right of trial by jury. This is a clear sign on the wall America has become; and is a Communist Country. Because of the treasonous bars actions; its failure to hold members accountable; and their subversion of true law.
The history shows clearly these same tactics was used in Germany; during WW2 by the BAR in Germany. There however the BAR members paid for their treason to the German people. Little known fact of WW2 was Hitler executed all but three BAR members, who escaped Germany. Two of which died shortly after, of their ordeals endured while escaping. One should always keep in mind how history repeats due to man’s inability to learn from the past.
Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, should think it clear, that I, Justin Edward Nolan, will not consent, nor have I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, ever consented willfully. Consent has always been obtained by threat and intimidation. Which violates 42 U.S.CODE§3617 INTERFERENCE, COERCION, OR INTIMIDATION.
The laws broken thus are too numerous to mention here; as some 84 different laws are applicable. A question all should ask. If you must threaten and intimidate people, breaking law; to get what you desire. Then how are "you" any better than the real criminals of the world, or are those doing this just that; "the real criminals of the world"?
NOTICE AND DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST!
The mere suggestion of, including but not limited to, Notice, warrant, arrest and kidnapping, or any other action by any foreign Crown Temple B.A.R. Agent as Pro-Se-Cutis, Magistrate, "Judge" in a black robe moves against me without an injured party bearing an affidavit of the harms done them by me, or a lawful international contract with me, or proof with records of payroll for my employment with their Private Member Association, or any attempt to enforce commercial codes/statutes/color of law, or to coerce me into the Office of the Person, or use an off-shore I.R.S. Trust trafficked JOHN HENRY DOE person, or use impressment, or barratry, or criminal conversion, or legalese, or dog-latin, or any other similarly related derivation of the "business-as-usual" trafficking by the Crown Temple B.A.R. and/or their armed Contractors with badges, or be called a Sovereign citizen, simply because I know the crimes and harms done Me, SHALL BE PROSECUTED by Me.
The prosecution against them for their crimes shall include, but not be limited to, international tort claim, international law NOTICE OF CLAIM/LIEN, ultimately leading to the admission and intent and conspiracy to perpetrate crimes against me, shall also include full loss of their Estate, be reported by international public notice to all credit report agencies, insurance carriers, bond agents, every Secretary of State across the land, every BAR Association, and every Mainstream MEDIA and alternative MEDIA source, for their crimes, and shall be with their fully informed consent for daring to move forward with their piracy against me. My prosecution will be without the United States, against them in their private capacity as criminals act, and NOT in any de facto court where they might benefit from the help of fellow BAR Agents.
Hereof, fail not to respect this warning. I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich have learned of all your despicable crimes and counterfeiting of securities. I, Peter - Jason: Helfricham not, including but not limited to, an en legis fictional person, slave, citizen, denizen, subject, strawman, U.S. person, state employee, taxpayer, corporate entity, debtor, or property of any bank or attorner/broker. Any attempt to enforce color of law or wrongfully prosecute me ever again shall instantaneously become the recipient of one or more lawful claims against them by me for 22.5 million real dollars each, meaning each offender and each individual crime. Crown Temple B.A.R. Attorners were born on this land, grew up on this land, and have families and friends on this land, yet they work in the shadows like rats to rob, rape, pillage, and kidnap, and commit Human Rights Violations against formerly fellow Americans for the unjust enrichment of the Bloody Crown. I have no words that can adequately describe their devotion to darkness and mayhem against our country and people. For the life of me, I cannot fathom the deep human sickness required to traffic American people, persons, and babies for FEDERAL RESERVE Instruments of DEBT. If I get dragged into a court or jail by anyone, after I’ve harmed no one, I shall use all my resources to make them pay heavily for their dirty crimes. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED! You are to CEASE AND DESIST from your crimes against me, immediately, or you agree to lose all that you have. The wisest suggestion I can offer is for you to burn that filthy BAR Union Card and throw it in the toilet for a more respectable position in your life. Lose the career of crime. If you cannot stop yourselves, I’ll do it for you. You need to find something to do beside ruin lives. We do not need the B.A.R. on this land.
I, Peter - Jason: Helfrich, declare, swear and affirm under penalty of perjury that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information herein is true, correct, and complete.
---------------------------MORE TO COME; THIS IS A WORK IN PROGESS----------------------------------------
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 03/27/2019 09:36 AM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/report/state-nevada-officials/ficials-attempted-murder-1476063. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.