m, because all crime is commerce, if we make something NON-NEGOTIABLE then that in affect stops the charges?

What else could it be?

I'm trying to put / read this in a way that I can comprehend cause I'm dumber then the dumbest. 1) If I have a document in my hand and I'm supposed to do something with it then I have control over it. 2) If I have control over it then I have the ability to Pay or Stop payment on the document. 3) The mere fact that the document is in my hands and others are waiting for ME to do something with it, gives ME THE POWER to let it continue or simply stop it from continuing.

Scott, can I break this down sentence for sentence and post the results tomorrow afternoon? just to tired for this right now.

So what are you talking about? Which document? The ORDER?

oh, your post, the entire thing if I have time. just to see if I can get it without making errors that affect things farther down.

is just the way I can really undertand things is all

Well THIS post CLEARLY says STAY ON TOPIC. So... time to shut up now.

I've not had any dealings with Child services, but I'm assuming you would have dealings with them before they take the children either by phone or visits etc....the best time for the petition would be their first contact with you...create the petition and give to the proper court representative?

Seriously, it SAYS SO IN THE POST. Off-topic banter is NOT PERMITTED IN THIS THREAD! YOU and/or ANYONE ELSE who does NOT stick to the subject at hand, WILL BE BANNED WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE! A MOTHER IN PAIN BECAUSE SHE CAN'T SEE HER KIDS DOES NOT WANT TO HEAR YOUR MENTAL DIARRHEA! ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU HAVEN'T BOTHERED TO READ IT!

Gail Blackman: ANY time is good, but yes, first communication is the best. Kill it at the root.

If they have already taken the child(ren), is a petition necessary along with a notice of mistake, because the petition is identifying your wishes? ie i made a mistake, this is how i want it resolved

NOTICE first, petition second.

thanks

Amazing Scott. Thank you for your time & effort in this EPIC thread. Much VALUABLE information has now been gained thanks to YOU. I only wish I had known this late last year. I know I can still AMEND The (ir) order anytime I want in regards to my lil lady Liberty.

I accept weed and hot slutty women as expressions of gratitude. :D

this may be a test so I'm going for it...don't you mean 'accept"? I know those two things are your preferences and would hate for you to miss out on the opportunities :P

I do. It's late and I typo'd :P Happily I have the EDIT feature, so I may cheat it back to a correct state. :D

If someone is on social assistance, does this benefit they have accepted have any bearing on this process?

PROBABLY. I have never looked, but I will now!

"To legally perform, as by executing, signing, OR delivering (a document) (to make a contract)" So the JUSTICE is SERVING you, he is really HANDING you the SURETY and if you ACCEPT it, you are now BOUND BY LAW as the SURETY because you've accepted the BENEFIT of it?

That is correct. The statute in the context of ORDER specifically gives you the right to "waive the benefit"

But this is then a simple contract offer bound up with lots of fancy words, rights, privledges and benefits where they get you to agree to pay for nothing while losing your children. All Rights Reserved and No Contract then.

Pretty much, yes.

So this is very POWERFUL if I get it properly..?? NON-NEGOCIABLE I'm Pete and/or Peter and/or Pierre and/or Babe (I reserve this one for my wife) I'm also Dad (I reserve this one for my children) and/or BELLIGERENT and I'm the LAWFUL HOLDER IN DUE COURSE OF PIERRE DAOUST Social Insurance no. 26X-XXX-XXX, Inscription No.119XXXXXXXX I�m the SOLE beneficiary of PIERRE DAOUST I make ALL business decisions for PIERRE DAOUST ALL RIGTHS RESERVED

Scott, what about my children...???....what is the age when they are on their own....I think its 18, but when are they become LAWFUL HOLDER IN DUE COURSE of their NAME....?????

Sorry but I see this NON-NEGOCIABLE as a KEY in here.....as I am a NON-NEGOCIABLE wild sexy BELLIGERENT....it has no place for negociation....and, in some case, that can be freaking upsetting for any JUSTICE that could try to trap me on some matters...just my tougths on it this morning...

Interesting what Gail Blackman has suggested about social security/ assistance. How does this tie into child LAW ? I can see it but its hazy & need Scott's expertise on that subject

Social Assistance (NOT Employment insurance) is a very touchy thing. You surrender a LOT of rights for the tiny amount of money that is received. It actually changes your status when you "apply" for social assistance. ALL government money, is MONEY OF ACCOUNT, and when your bank turns it into MONEY OF EXCHANGE, some VERY UGLY legal baggage ALWAYS goes along with it. It will take me WEEK to find it all. This is a VERY hard question. You have NO idea...which is why I answer "PROBABLY". ...but now I want to know too. So I'm going to find out.

It's a topic that your research and determinations could help alot... Unfortunately alot of people here in Ireland are finding themselves with no other option but to seek Social Welfare... Accepting a benefit from the State... I often wonder if one is wasting their time asserting their capacity as beneficiary while accepting the benefit of a tender for law by signing one's signature each week... Looking forward to some clarity on the issue... Cheers Scott

I'm on it. Ireland is a whole new level of creepiness. That's where the nobility tests it's shit before deploying it worldwide.

That's what I've come to understand... Since 1922 :(

Fair play Scott... Really appreciate it...

So Scott- is what you're saying, is that if CAS shows up to your door with an ORDER signed by a Judge, saying that they are there to take your kids away..you should say to them- "Oh terrific, today is my lucky day! You have an ORDER for me from a judge, who refused to sign an ORDER letting you steal my kids from me probably because he didnt want to be the reason why some kids got stolen from their parents. GREAT. Now fuck off and get off my property!"

Simple really... innit??

Yes, derek. Pretty much, yes.

Wow...I really like Derek Moran with this attitude...

It's like derek moran is BELLIGERENT!!! Like someone else on here..... ;-)

YEAH!!!...:D...

Ahuuumm.... me too.

Eamon, social assistance is YOURS. TAKE IT. ITS A TRUST ACCOUNT THAT IS RIGHTFULLY YOURS.

...actually Adam, it isn't. The government NEVER gives anything it didn't take from somebody else. EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE on the other hand, is a different story. You paid INTO that benefit, so you are entitled. "Social Assistance" is where you come with NOTHING and trade rights for loose change.

just a little tidbit of info here since im going through this myself. if the other party lies the person or the lawyer it is considered to be priviledged and therefor protected from defamation lawsuits. You can also only get them on perjury if somethign drastic happens such as the loss of a job or an order was made against you. Scott care to weigh in?

Sure. You're an idiot. ...I'm sorry, did you want more? Lawyers are THIRD PARTIES in ANY dispute. The Lawyers ACT AS REPRESENTATIVE of the party. Limited liability. It's why they refer to each other as "my friend". there's no conflict themselves. THE PARTIES have the conflict. When the GOVERNMENT uses a "crown attorney", they are "representing" an "injured party". None of the mythology you are making up has ANY basis in reality. Any other rectally-inspired concepts?

i know that part, but where does the law draws the line. This lawyer is just out of control and whats worse is the justice was accepting it as truth. This was from last time i showed up so since we talked there was no other hearings.

A lawyer ALWAYS has LIMITED LIABILITY. He's a PRIVATE PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION. Wow. Just when I think you couldn't pull out ANY more dumb shit, into your ass you go and pull out, more dumb shit. Amazing. Natural selection should have killed you off by now. ....Wow. Just... Wow.

natural selection kills off the people who cannot adapt. not the dumbest or the weakest. Yes i know that they are protected from an amount of liability. Anyways, the stuff you said about surety and other things, someone i know was desperate and pulled that. got proceedings stayed til god knows when.

Indeed? Hmmm... Of your own free will, would you like me to demonstrate JUST how dumb you are? This is a yes or no question. Should you answer "Yes" I will ask questions that will lead you to your stupidity. You will step in it and you will NOT be able to back-pedal from being the pretender wannabe you are. Those are the terms. Wannna play?

i never said i was a pretender wannabe? im here just to try and figure things out. How is asking me questions that will lead to my stupidity will do anything. i already admitted i dont know everything. What else is there to prove?

@ Scott If my lawyer PLEDGES to something in a conversation (...because I have first hand knowledge and I know A B AND C to be true) their lawyer must accept it as fact, OR, they would be in violation of their Canadian Bar Association Code of Conduct. Lawyers can't call their FRIENDS liars. Yes or No? If yes, does breaking their own codes weaken, or, remove their limited liability shield?.

I'll play

Why WOULD you say it. I'M saying it. You keep passing yourself off as some sort of "expert" and you simply aren't. I see all the other venues, and you just spew dumb shit. HERE you get called out on DUMB SHIT. Want someone who loves dumb shit? Go see carrie-lee. You certainly don't "admit you don't know everything" there!

i dont talk to carrie lee and that was what? 2 years ago? yea there was still alot of stuff i didnt know, what of it. I am here asking questions. If i dont get answers oh well. Im simply here to learn. Try finding me doing recent uadios or videos, you wont find it, because i wen back into researching.

Hey....Im the pro here...if you have dumbshit questions...please address them to me

Oh yes, it's REALLY paid off. You've reached an all new level of made up stupid shit. Would you like me to show you just how stupid THIS is: "if the other party lies the person or the lawyer it is considered to be priviledged and therefor protected from defamation lawsuits. You can also only get them on perjury if somethign drastic happens such as the loss of a job or an order was made against you." You want to see? I can show you after just 3 questions.

enlighten me

Is that a YES? I DID say it's a "yes or no" question.

yes

First this "privileged communication" is bullshit you picked up in american legal shows, and has NO basis in reality. Limited liability means a lawyer can never BE charged with perjury, so you pulled THAT out of your ass too. THE ONLY thing a lawyer can EVER be charged with is the misappropriation of funds in a trust. THAT IS IT. NO OTHER REASON. There is only one crime in Admiralty; Interference with Commerce. BREACH OF TRUST, thus the "privileged communication" between a lawyer and client myth was born. Credulous people like yourself perpetrate this myth. Here in reality, such a thing would conflict with their oath to the LAW SOCIETY. SO first question: Do you know what hearsay evidence is?

1. i dont listen to american shows. i got priviledged from canlii cases when dealing with defamation from lawyers. all cases was dismissed because lawyers were priviledged members or something. The only times lawyers were charged with perjury is if they went out of their way to lie under a sworn oath. Your making alot of very big assumptions, why would i listen to american shows if im in canada? I suspect heresay evidence is your pointing it against me claiming that i heard this and that from this or that person. Rumours.

Again, making shit up and not answering the question. I'll ask it again: Do you know what HEARSAY EVIDENCE is?

Hey, I just figured out how to make this work. I'll just fill in for BOTH sides... Do you know what hearsay evidence is? ...duh, *prattling on with content-free bullshit.* Is that a yes or no? ...*more content-free bullshit*. After 100 or so posts we establish that HEARSAY evidence is third-party testimony and is not admissible. Next I ask "what is a legal fiction", and then the readers would have to wade through/endure more of your content-free bullshit... Leading to... "OBJECTION! By what authority does this LEGAL FICTION admit HEARSAY EVIDENCE to this court? Was this LEGAL FICTION present during the events described, or is this LEGAL FICTION offering the court THIRD HAND TESTIMONY?

...and then you get muzzled for wasting a whole lot of time, and we all live happily ever after.

I really think I'm on to something here...

May I ask the same unanswered question?

I'm referring to my last question Scott. Forgive me, but, I'm itching (pardon the pun) to know the answer.

Just dumbing it right down now Scott. Legal fiction. Pseudonym. CRRAAAZZZYYY.....FUCKIN FUCK....HOW CAN THE LIVING TALK TO THE DEAD?? OUIJE BOARDS?

Hearsay is controversey

Ccontroversey is WAR....

D'ortas LAW.

Lawyers are indemnified against workplace malpractise.

The poms repealed that Law in 2000. Victoria, in the country of OZ, brought that Law in in 2000. We're the only country with it in the world. 96% of our muppet politician's are what???

@ Adam So, despite their own code of conduct, those that hire AND/OR deal with them can never get remedy even if they break all their codes? Is that correct?

LAWYERS.

Yep. Fuckin crazy shit man its like if I go to a mechanic & he services my car but he fucks something in the deal the cars fucked but I cant touch the prick. NOT EVEN WITH A SIGNED CONTRACT BY HIM.

What about the maxim Everything that is done (lawyer limited liability) can be undone? It suddenly doesn't exist?

Scott. Why the fuck is dean Clifford, telling mothers & fathers lies for? Is he fairdinkum? CHILDREN ARE BEING ABDUCTED & ABUSED BECAUSE OF THESE ORDERS.WHY IS HE DOING IT??

Adam Thomas....ask Dean Clifford directly....why Scott Duncan should be the one to answer that question..????

Yep fair call Pierre. I shall. Ho hum. Fuck me. This is not sitting well with me at all. Makes me feel very ill & troubled. Things are really looking weird & fucked up. I don't like it at all.....feel like throttling some 1. This is CHILDREN FFS........AAAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH......LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE YOU FUCKING LUCIFERAN GOAT FUCKERS.

Oh well I guess some 1 gets paid for shoveling the children to them. Some 1 has sold their soul and/or their moral compass. integrity, intent. Compassion.... whats the deal ? Have we all become corrupted enough to allow this insanity to be our lives ? Theres people I need to contact quick smart but will have to wait till morn. This is very important. REMEDY IS AT HAND. MUST SPREAD THE WORD.

Hmmmm. Strange shit. I was UNFRIENDED BY DEAN BUT I WAS PREVIOUSLY A FRIEND.

No kidding !!!!.....lol....:D

you see Adam Thomas, as Scott says often....I'm not QUALIFIED to crictisice Dean' work....I'm simply not qualified....the day I will have done half of what this man did....I may do some CRITICS....

An excellent article Scott. I'm just glad my youngest turned 18 last week and I got through her childhood unscathed. I had a fuckwit cop threaten to call social services when I declined his offer to interview my Daughter regarding an incident she had nothing to do with and had no knowledge of. I was threatened with kidnap of myself too for declining to give my name at the entrance to my own home. The fuckwit cop stepped across the threshold/doorway. I said "stop right there I do not consent to you entering these premises" and fuck me it was like garlic to a vampire he actually jumped back. He said "I'm going to call my Inspector" I said "Call your daddy if you like nothing will change" He radioed his daddy and then fucked off back to his car. His bum fluff faced chum/partner came over from the car and demanded my name. I asked "Am I obliged by law to give you my name?" he replied "Technically no." I said "Technically will do me just fine, goodbye." and closed the door in his face. They sat outside in the car for a while writing identical lies in their notebooks no doubt, then fucked off never to be seen again. :-)

Koechlin v. Waugh 1957(Canada).. Rice v. Connolly 1961(England) = case-law backing not having to give your name or ID, Maximus ;)

Ive heard pigs say shit about I.D. but when ye ask to see the Act they get all floppy in the jaw....dduuuuhhhh....

Derek Moran I had a copy of Rice v. Connolly plus further proof of the right to decline i.d on a table in my lobbly. Also a Noitice of Withrawl of Common Law Right of Access which basically says fuck off or pay for the privilege of trespassing on my property.

Cap'n Scott. Do I now beg fir forgiveness??? But wait, I was unfriended by the GOOD SHIP LOLLY POP so im not on their ship anymore as they UNFRIENDED ME. They must know of my bullshit detector. AQUILAE OR BUST.

so for we lazy brains, as the lawyer is the third party representative his evidence is hearsay, there is no "actual" evidence or claim to answer & thats the only relevance in the court? in a recent case with an electricity company we sent an affidavit to the c.e.o. accusing him or agents acting on his behalf of perjury. we were informed in a one line letter that the case had been dropped.

Smart. OUCH.... Thats gotta hurt.

Admiral Duncan, "...you should never use the word you're defining in a definition." why? it causes and/or creates a particular situation? to be is/and/or not to be?

after i put together the past few weeks of data, i feel like hiding, knowing how much trouble my own mouth can get me if I am not to carefull. you know, it sort of sounds like somethig out of Abbot & Costello's skit "Who's on first" [all this courtroom boondoggle]. Mr. Christian: Admiral, what is the will of the King?

I need to craft the NOTICE OF MISTAKE.

i think this is the thread Cheryl Watson should be checking-out...

I did look for this the other day, thanks...

164. Fair hearing (4) Without limiting the generality of subsection (3), that subsection does not preserve the validity of the proceeding if the failure to comply with the agreement results in PREJUDICE to the DEFENDANT'S RIGHT to a FAIR HEARING. http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90p33_e.htm#BK207

I knew that on April 9, when I appeared in court there would be another Temporary Care and Custody order coming through. That In the past I had not consented to it. In a number of different ways. Then I learned that it was a MISTAKE TO NOT CONSENT to it so I sent in my Notice of mistake and begged forgiveness to and requested to decline it. It was almost 2 weeks but here is another Temp. Care and Custody Order. Am I right in assuming that they just by pased me in court on last Tuesday cause I wasn't there (not supposed to be there till June) and had my mistakes withdrawn again and went ahead with the order or is something else going on?

@Derek Hill- im not sure what to do if your ex has suddenly denied you from seeing your son AT ALL. Maybe someone in this thread going through the same could weigh-in..the perfect guy to ask is Adam Thomas for sure, or Scott

Why not ME ? :D

Writ of Certiorari

At common law, certiorari was a supervisory writ, serving to keep "all inferior jurisdictions within the bounds of their authority ... [protecting] the liberty of the subject, by speedy and summary interposition".

I have something amazingly more simple than this

Prerogative writs The "prerogative" writs are a subset of the class of writs, those that are to be heard ahead of any other cases on a court's docket except other such writs. The most common of the other such prerogative writs are habeas corpus, quo warranto, prohibito, mandamus, procedendo, and certiorari. The due process for petitions for such writs is not simply civil or criminal, because they incorporate the presumption of nonauthority, so that the official who is the respondent has the burden to prove his authority to do or not do something, failing which the court has no discretion but to decide for the petitioner, who may be any person, not just an interested party. In this they differ from a motion in a civil process in which the burden of proof is on the movant, and in which there can be a question of standing.

Scott, is this the correct thinking?

In law, standing or locus standi is the term for the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case.

My advice is DON'T FUCKING GO ANYWHERE NEAR THE FAMILY LAW COURTS. ..ALWAYS DEAL PRIVATE. NOT PUBLIC.

Private has NO JURISDICTION IN PUBLIC.

Here is what I would do, on the private side of course...(sorry, could not resist), Here is what I have done to continu to see my daughter, who is 26 today. 1). First I admitted MY mistakes. 2). I apologized. 3). I agreed on PAYING an Allymoney. 4). I did my part of the contract. 5). I did the best I could to make sure my daughter knows I love her. 6). I did shut-up numerous times on some MINOR stuff. 7). I made sure to be friendly with my ex new boyfriend. 8). I even had a meeting with him alone to avoid ANY bullshit. 9). I accepted the fact that my daughter may need MORE her mother than me. 10). I minded my own business as much as I could. 11). I REALLY, HONESTLY, did the best I could. 12). EVERY case is completely different from one to another. 13). FOCUS on the well being of the child AT ALL TIME 14). This apply to Men only, I have no clue about Weman denied of seeing their child by Men. Good Luck ! :D

my question is this. What could you do if your babys moma refuses to allo0w yout o see the child without involving court.

Are you able to POST on her facebook page?

no and i dont see why i should

I just gave you the reciepee Derek Hill

yea most of that completely useless to my situation

Have you tried it ?....all of it ?

no because again its irrelevant. i CANNOT try it because the situation DOES NOT EXIST

remember the PUBLIC NOTICE discussion we had the other night? Scott mentioned that facebook and Google+ (though i have no idea what Google+ is), are methods of placing a PUBLIC NOTICE, along with the classifieds of a newspaper. Place somesort of an ESTOPPEL against her, barring HER from BARRING you, from seeing your child. POST it on her page. Print off a copy of it if you have to use it later, go get a copy of it NOTARIZED. I dunno..im just thinkin' outside the box here for'ya man as i have no experience with this.

Why not put together some legal documents and send her NOTICE of those...?

heres the thing currently in family court....yea i know didnt know better at the time

but i know i can destroy her at trial so i want to find ways to expediate this

Have you fucked with her to create this baby ?

no shit.

No ?

yes, i fucked her she didnt get off me

So why you say the situation DOES NOT EXIST ?

bf etc....she dont have a bf from qwhat i know. i know the things to look for.

LOL

skip the boyfriend part... :D

yes i already applied the relevant things

Well you are very badlucky because it have a success rate of 97% :D

yes i know, but the WAITING part is painful

like she got fuck all and yet i gotta deal with this bullshit. i get IF BEST 90 minutes a week.

How old is the child ??

16 months

wow!!!....90 minutes a week is enough ?, it's even more than enough

Try & get her To agree PRIVATELY. TRY. TRY. TRY. TRY. TRY......PERSIST. IT WILL MAKE "YOU" LOOK HONOURABLE IN THEM KUNTS EYES....Glint...blink...blink.... But they dont care a fuck about you both because you aren't ADULTS & can't settle anything & you both will be treated as CHILDREN BY THEM KUNTS. They're only concern is for which one of them Despicable, evil to the very core kunts can RAPE YOUR CHILD FIRST....

no its not, its supervised and i cant do fuck all there.

yea...no idea what you are trying to convey here...

what the heck would you like to do that you can't do ??

go to trial and wrap this shit up.

@derek. They're cashing in on your kid as we type...KACHING......KACHING... $TATE....

because that wasnt obvious before?

Is your ex a hooker Derek ??

law clerk ironically for her lawyer

Sorry Derek Hill, I have a tendency of driving people INSANE in here.....it's just like that, here is what will happen to you if you keep reading my stuf.... 1) mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality, cannot conduct her/his affairs due to psychosis, or is subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior. Insanity is distinguished from low intelligence or mental deficiency due to age or injury. If a complaint is made to law enforcement, to the district attorney, or to medical personnel that a person is evidencing psychotic behavior, he/she may be confined to a medical facility long enough (typically 72 hours) to be examined by psychiatrists who submit written reports to the local superior/county/district court. A hearing is then held before a judge, with the person in question entitled to legal representation, to determine if she/he should be placed in an institution or special facility. The person may request a trial to determine sanity. The original hearings are often routine with the psychiatric findings accepted by the judge. In criminal cases, a plea of "not guilty by reason of insanity," will require a trial on the issue of the defendant's insanity (or sanity) at the time the crime was committed. In these cases the defendant usually claims "temporary insanity" (crazy then, but okay now). The traditional test of insanity in criminal cases is whether the accused knew "the difference between right and wrong," following the "M'Naughten Rule" from 19th Century England. Most states require more sophisticated tests based on psychiatric and/or psychological testimony evaluated by a jury of laypersons or a judge without psychiatric training. 4) a claim by a criminal defendant of his insanity at the time of trial requires a separate hearing to determine if a defendant is sufficiently sane to understand the nature of a trial and participate in his/her own defense. If found to be insane, the defendant will be ordered to a mental facility, and the trial held only if sanity returns. 5) sex offenders may be found to be sane for all purposes except the compulsive dangerous and/or anti-social behavior. They are usually sentenced to special facilities for sex offenders, supposedly with counseling available. However, there are often maximum terms related to the type of crime, so that parole and release may occur with no proof of cure of the compulsive desire to commit sex crimes. (See: M'Naughten Rule, temporary insanity)

yea irrelevant

and bwall of text.

Um... was it not CLEARLY STATED in the initial post that this thread SHOULD NOT include banter?

90 mins a week....ooohh fuck me....does the child even know you're it's father?

who is "banter"ing?

hell if i know hes too young. but i am NOT excited about it.

its father Adam Thomas, not it's :D

What's a banter ?

Law clerk = HOOKER = YOUR FUCKED DEREK HILL.

so informative.

you're fucked, not your

shit will I have to give you guys English course ? :D

Hahaha.....your a troll pierre..

YOU'RE!

I do wish ye the very best though Derek. A child needs a father as much as it needs a ma'.

you're a text-tard Adam Thomas :D

Trolling.....for pierre.

That is NOT true Adam Thomas

Almost, not AS MUCH....that is bullshit

Derek hill. You really have to learn how to AMEND the court ORDER to save your ass. The SOURCE INSTRUMENT is what is needed....Finish it off yourself....

I have 5 of these freaking Mongols, I must know something about the subject, fuck !

i don't have the knowledge to carry it out. perhaps that subject can be a thread?

carry out what ?

amending a court order. i dont have enough knowledge to carry that out

Get the RUBBER STAMPS made up.

oh...ok, I taught you were saying that you don't have enough knowledge to spend more than 90 minutes a week with a 16 old month kid....sorry

still doesnt say anything useful for rubber stamps....

You look like a freaking rubber stamp Adam Thomas :D

Go back to the start of The Tender For Law...READ EVERYFUCKINGTHING....

yea mistake is a part of it....im seeing if there is anything else needed.

I'll be back later...I'm as crook as a dog.....I haven't the energy at moment....too sick....

great !! :D

Maybe it's natural selection that is about to take good care of you :D

Where Men got this silly idea that a child need them as much as they need their Mothers ?, are Men suddenly became a bunch of fifi ?

Scott, would you start off an AFFIDAVIT with the very TOP-line reading ALL RIGHTS RESERVED - NON NEGOTIABLE... much like you describe starting off a PETITION with NON NEGOTIABLE as you described in this article?

Forget it, we found it :D

Spoiler: Scott's fucked in public before...

But an affidavit is a sworn truth of facts, whereas a petition is a request to the court. They would be different.

Stuart Stone: might be worth a look WeLove JessicaDawn AndOthers... http://www.matrixfiles.com/The-Solution-to-ALL-Your-Problems.pdf ... basic premise is waiving your human right to be recognised as a person before the law, talks specifically about this issue...worth getting Scott Duncan's input first though cos it might fall into the 'pulling things out of the ass' category

WeLove JessicaDawn AndOthers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0mC9eutSiQ

Adam Thomas: Reminds me of the movie "FIGHT CLUB." When Brad Pitt says " you arr not your drivers liscense etc etc blah blah". The run down dilapidated shit hole of a house they live on is called "PAPER STREET." That movie is not about nental health, its all about YOU, YOUR PERSON, YOUR BIRTH CERTIFICALE & HOW CREDIT IS CREATED.

Derek Moran: My friend knows a guy who had his kids taken by CAS. Then, they returned them. I asked my friend what had happened/changed. His answer? "CAS found out that my friend had LIENED his kids on PPSA.ca" Hmmmmmmmm.....a How-to-Properly-Place/Register-a-Lien-on-PPSA.ca-thread sounds appealing

Scott Duncan: ALWAYS remember it's ABOUT SURETY.. YOU=Surety.

Derek Moran: Im guessing part of this entails making as part of the 'Discovery' producing the original Long-Form-Statement-of-Live-Birth-Record to construe STRICTLY the wording that was used in it to determine whether parents have been DUPED into signing over their kids unwittingly, otherwise- who THE FUCK would ever fill-out that form and REGISTER their kids AGAIN!? (Scott clicked LIKE)

Jason F. LeBlanc: My registration of live birth has a similar format to the pink insurance card of a vehicle..... Hmmmm. And One crucial line that asks.... Citizen ship.... Making me a vessel in commercial water..... Which web then it became my title which them surety security of the BC was created. Just like a car. Making me legal title holder while the govt benefited. My reasoning leads me to the citizen ship entry on live birth registration is the line parent are duped into signing.

Scott Duncan: �ORDER� INCLUDES a REFUSAL to make an ORDER; (�arr�t�, ordre et ordonnance�)...WHAT?

un arr�t� = an order

Since I am Homeschooling my little ones... I received a letter from the "School Board" (I think that's what it's called in English) for both parents of my offsprings person's, to SUMMON them to attend a meeting (all the persons) to have an "end of term" EVALUATION of the students's persons, would a NOTICE OF MISTAKE, for all four persons put an end to this?

Thank you Cheryl Watson for your Personnal Message. Let me share it with the others so anyone in the same situation can benefit from your input. :) Cheryl Watson: "don't you have your own practice of testing and delivering the results to the school board? you are allowed to home school in the system as long as you cover certain subjects and you must have an approved system of evaluation of that...you do not have to go to a meeting if you are following the education act. unless the act says you must......then you can do the notice of mistake or whatever thing you think may work......"

So I would have to send them a Notice of Mistake for Myself and my offsprings. And the father of the offspring would have to send one for himself AND his offsprings as well or just himself. They are both our chattel property, so we should have them named in both our Notice of Mistake. I WISH for some input from the wise ones! :D

It's Notice of Mistake, not N of M..... PLEASE DO NOT FUCK UP EVERYTHING :(

wouldn't their education system also be considered a benefit...waiving the benefit may be helpful too? I know with my daughter, I took responsibility for her education ...the school phoned me once asking if there was anything that I needed help with and then never heard from them again

Who is the SOLE authorized Administrator for these MINOR persons ? :/

Didn't Scott say something about joinder when the kids get registered for school?? Did your kids get registered?

Yes Captain! Modified! :)

Who is the SOLE authorized Administrator for these MINOR persons ? Good question! I'm not sure if it's both ME and Jocelyn or just one of us! But I would say both!

Chris, yes they are registered! :/

They are REGISTERED ? Or they have a PERSON that is REGISTERED ? :/

Fick! :/ Their person is registered! :)

It just takes a split second for your mind to be on it's own and...BAM...Back to brainwash mode! :(

That was a QUESTION, I posed..... :D

they have a PERSON that is REGISTERED

posed? ;)

did you mean, posted or asked? :D

pose: 1 (p?z) v. posed, pos�ing, pos�es v. intr. 1. To assume or hold a particular position or posture, as in sitting for a portrait. 2. To affect a particular mental attitude. 3. To represent oneself falsely; pretend to be other than what one is. v. tr. 1. To place (a model, for example) in a specific position. 2. To set forth in words; propound: pose a question. 3. To put forward; present: pose a threat. See Synonyms at propose. n. 1. A bodily attitude or position, especially one assumed for an artist or a photographer. See Synonyms at posture. 2. A studied attitude assumed for effect. See Synonyms at affectation.

2. To set forth in words; propound: pose a question

My mistake Captain, please forgive me! :)

Gail Marie, I wrote a Notice to let them know that I'm registering my children's persons with the school board for the year 2014-2015. As mentioned by the Quebec's Education System, The program will be met with the following tools (and I listed a bunch in my letter) Blablabla Signed as The Sole Authorised Administrator for JANICK ... And never heard about them all year. Now they sent me a letter saying I have to SUBMIT my child to an evaluation because it is there DUTY to proceed this way according to the art. 15 of the Law on Education.

Chris, I don't remember where "joinder" was written about children. Do you? :/

chapitre M-15 Loi sur le minist�re de l'�ducation, du Loisir et du Sport 15. (Abrog�). S. R. 1964, c. 233, a. 15; 1985, c. 21, a. 73. :/ ?

Dafuq?

is this what they are referring to? (4) a student who receives home schooling and benefits from an educational experience which, according to an evaluation made by or for the school board, are equivalent to what is provided at school.

do you have a copy of the registration?

Education Act 15 . The following students are exempt from compulsory school attendance: ( 1 ) a student excused by the school board by reason of illness or for the purpose of receiving medical treatment or care required by his state of health; ( 2 ) a student excused by the school board, at the request of his parents and after consultation with the advisory committee on services for handicapped students and students with social maladjustments or learning disabilities established under section 185, by reason of a physical or mental handicap which prevents him from attending school; ( 3 ) a student expelled from school by the school board pursuant to section 242; ( 4 ) a student who receives home schooling and benefits from an educational experience which, according to an evaluation made by or for the school board, are equivalent to what is provided at school. A child is excused from attending public school if he attends a private educational institution governed by the Act respecting private education ( chapter E-9.1) or an institution whose instructional program is the subject of an international agreement within the meaning of the Act respecting the Minist�re des Relations internationales ( chapter M-25.1.1) which provides all or part of the educational services provided for by this Act. A child is also excused from attending public school if the child attends a vocational training centre or receives instruction in an enterprise that meets the conditions determined by the Minister in a regulation under paragraph 7 of section 111 of the Act respecting private education. In addition, the school board may exempt one of its students, at the request of his parents, from compulsory school attendance for one or more periods totalling not more than six weeks in any school year, to allow him to carry out urgent work. 1988, c. 84, s. 15 ; 1990, c. 8, s. 3 ; 1990, c. 78, s. 27 ; 1992, c. 68, s. 143 ; 1994, c. 15, s. 33 ; 1996, c. 21, s. 70 ; 1997, c. 96, s. 9

Good question Gail Marie, No I don't! :/

I'll can call tomorrow and ask for a copy.

But having a copy of their registration will not change the letter I got from them!

I would get a copy write new originals on it and void the signatures return to them with a Notice of Mistake and waive the benefits let them off the hook for liability...they aren't worried that your children aren't learning, they are worried they will be held liable ?

their letter is an offer of the benefit they provide to you when you register

:)

"PEREMPTORY NOTICE" (fuck I love this word) :D Thanks for your offer, but I will WAIVE that benefit for now Authorized By: SOLE authorized Administrator. :D

A quarter of a page "Peremptory Notice" ;)

Wait a minute, waive the benefit? I thought you only did that when you wanted nothing to do with them? Does that mean that with, what you suggested, I would do the same process if they send me a registration renewal for my children, next year?

Enforce the obligation on them, to tell you that you are a SLAVE, and that you have NOTHING TO SAY, and NO choice but to OBEY..... Then, you will have a SOLID proof that they keep you in SLAVERY mode, which is not a good thing, because it's ILLEGAL :/

peremptory adj. urgent or commanding not able to be remitted or debated; decisive

You just waive tha benefit... SUMMON them to attend a meeting (all the persons) to have an "end of term" EVALUATION of the students's persons And where have you seen this SUMMON word, on the letter they've sent you ? :/

in French: "..nous vous convoquons..." I translated!

It's an INVITATION :/

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/convocation

They are making you an offer for a meeting, all together, to give you something..... Just tell them: "PEREMPTORY NOTICE" Thanks for your offer, but I will WAIVE that benefit for now With Love. Authorized By: SOLE authorized Administrator.

And see what they say :)

REGISTERED MAIL :P

of course! :)

It's too crazy here....I'll have to get back to this thread later tonight! Pheeww! (Like Pete would say!) :)

I know their first reaction will be : 1). WHAT ? 2). Oh ? 3). Duh ? 4). Well ? 5). What do we do Ginette ? 6). I don't know Yvette !! :( 7). Lets call the LAWYER Ginette. :D

Janick, when you register your children in school is where joinder happened. I think that was in Scotts last article...or maybe the one before, I can't remember exactly

HAHAHAHAH!

Chris, you mean the one about TARA AND SCOTT versus TARA and SCOTT?

I forget where I read it...I just know that I read it

I am just wondering on HOW you will be able to have your children get one of their DIPLOMA, if you don't CONFORM to "their" shit :/

You better buy them a guitar and let them grow their hair right now.... :D HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! :D FFFRREEEEEDDDDUUMMMMBBBB !!!!!!!!!!

Did I just fucked up everything ? :-o

DIPLOMA. An instrument of writing, executed by, a corporation or society, certifying that a certain person therein named is entitled to a certain distinction therein mentioned. 2. It is usually, granted by learned institutions to their members, or to persons who have studied in them. 3. Proof of the seal of a medical institution and of the signatures of its officers thereto affixed, by comparison with the seal and signatures attached to a diploma received by the witness from the same institution, has been held to be competent evidence of the genuineness of the instrument, although the witness never saw the officers write their names. 25 Wend. R. 469. 4. This word, which is also written duploma, in the civil law, signifies letters issued by a prince. They are so called, it is supposed, a duplicatis tabellis, to which Ovid is thought to allude, 1 Amor. 12, 2, 27, when he says, Tunc ego vos duplices rebus pro nomine sensi Sueton in Augustum, c. 26. Seals also were called Diplomata. Vicat ad verb.

DIPROMA: The Japanese version :D

Oh Scott :(

:D

Question: Humm, WHY you want to AVOID that meeting, Janick ?

The question is more: Why do we have to go?

Nope, the question is: WHY you want to AVOID that meeting :P

We know WHY you have to go, you've ASKED for it... :D

First, because I don't see the relevance of it. Since we are registering the persons why do the children have to go? Because like you just posted "I've asked for it". Ok so, How do I UN-register their persons or undo what was done? That's why I thought Notice of Mistake would be a good option to clear things up. I have to register the children's persons. But WE don't have to attend that meeting. (in my book)

Second, I don't have a portfolio all prepared for them. Why should I? The only exams required to get the DIPLOMA are "4e sec. et 5e sec.).

And it wouldn't be a problem for one of them but for the other it's more difficult to learn.

Oh :-\ .... you haven't done the JOB as REQUESTED, so now you don't want to REPORT ?

So I'm giving her time.

I did the job, just different from what they evaluate.

So you haven't done it... :-P

Isn't this all about accounting and surety anyway? So how are they surety for their persons in the education program? Because I registered their persons. And how can I stay in honor and stop this from being what it is right now? .....

what's your point Pete Daoust?

My point is, do NOT neglect your children's future because of some "freedumb" bullshit that still reside inside of you, for having spent to much time with freedumbers....in freedumb groups, they would be 100% with you on this stuff..... Think about it, not for you but for your children... One of my daughter wants to be a DOCTOR, and she is in-line with her goal, I will ADMINISTRATE her person in ACCORDANCE with her goals.....not mine, and that dosen't prevent me on telling her the truth..... That's my point.....just be careful with this stuff :)

I hope I didn't fucked up everything here ! 8|

What makes you think I am neglecting my children's future because I do not see the relevance of attending this meeting? I did take a break when I took them out of the system and I gave them one as well because I needed to figure out what was best for THEM. And being in the school system for numerous years doesn't make them NEGLECTED? I ALWAYS have their best interest at heart. I just didn't know how to start and I know from experience that even if you are one or two years without doing actual HOMEWORK, that it takes a few months to recuperate what is thought in public schools. So my worry was to figure out what to teach and how without fucking them up even more then they were. I took the time and everything is falling into place now. I've been in the FREEDUMMM mode for almost a year with Dean and been in this group for a few months so it's been three kind of brainwashing in three different directions. I am back on track and my convictions on education and how it should be done with respect with what the children are is back on track and has been for a few months. Just haven't gone full throttle yet.

I had/have a learning disability and one of my children has the same challenge. I know that it takes more time for our brains to connect the dots. That is probably why a lot of you who read my posts get a :/ face afterwards! It's not my fault! Was born with it! :D So instead of putting my daughter on medication, just like the school personnel who were assisting her wanted, we took her out!

What makes you think I am neglecting my children's future because I do not see the relevance of attending this meeting? Because you have a learning disability, and I know it takes more time for you to connect the dots :D HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! :D

Pete, what would you do in a situation similar to Janick's? Can you explain the reasons why you would accept such an invitation, and what will you say/do in such a meeting? Maybe that would help Janick a bit.

My "DUTY", as an ADMINISTRATOR is, "take care" of these PERSON'S interest. Janick quote: I ALWAYS have their best interest at heart So the question is: Is it, in these person's BEST interest to go to that meeting ? Or is it better for these persons that I do not go to this meeting.? You've used JANICK PAQUETTE to APPLY for that TEACHER's position, right ? That has NOTHING to do with my dad's duties, IT DOSEN'T MEAN I CAN'T TELL THE TRUTH TO MY OFFSPRING :P

Mackximus, The TRUTH is the TRUTH.... I am NOT against Janick Paquette in here, I am just telling the TRUTH.... In these freedumb movement, they advertise at large this home schooling thing....but they don't THINK about it, they just parrot bullshit and they want to teach freedumb stuff to these children.... The ONLY one thing I can't stand with PUBLIC education, is the OBEDIENCE concept they teach kids......well, my kids KNOWS this, it took me 10 minutes to teach them, and they caught it so fucking fast :D As far as the PERSON, they happen to have, I will GIVE them the information on it, and THEY will decide on HOW to DEAL with this, not me :P My kids has their OWN blood flowing in their veins.....They have their OWN life.....that's how I see it, but it dosen't mean Janick need to see it that way....I AM JUST DISCUSSING this shit, she can do what she wants, it won't change ANYTHING in MY life :) Home teaching is a serious huge job, it's not a joke....

And she did APPLY for that job... :P

Janick was ready to send a Notice of Mistake on this..... Tell me, WHERE IS THE MISTAKE ? :/

She applied for the benefit. :(

She KNOWS the truth about this, so now she has three options :D 1)."PEREMPTORY NOTICE" Thanks for your offer, but I will WAIVE that benefit for now Authorized By: SOLE authorized Administrator. 2). Go to that meeting. 3). I have NO IDEA :D The three options are viable, she needs to pick the one that will fit these kids's persons BEST INTEREST. This is what difference The Tender for Law, from these freedumb groups :P :D

No, she literally applied for the JOB, Mackximus Minimus And that JOB comes with "benefits" :D

And one of the benefit is: The school board wants to make sure the JOB is well done, for these PERSONS best INTEREST :P

Don't forget these persons has SURETIES, and the STATE wants to make sure these persons will produce something later on, so they can BUY BACK these debts... :D

So, yes, you're right Janick, it's ALL about SURETY and ACCOUNTING :D

Ok, I think I have DONATE enough here, I'll leave Scott Duncan clean the stainshit I might have done here, if there's any :/

Or maybe Tara Duncan :D , last time I have made a HUGE stainshit in here, she made one heck of a WONDERFUL correction, on which I have "benefit" from :)

You're right about the Notice of Mistake, I did apply for the teacher's job and THAT wasn't a mistake! But the mistake was to think that we have to register persons to do commerce like, doing business with the "School board" and that we have to comply to there rules when there rules do not apply to my children but to the person. So what the heck is wrong with this picture. They are mixing the two, in my book.

All your input is very enlightening and makes things clearer. As to why they operate the way they do. IF there are no shitstains, :P .

Bumping these to the top for the newbies.

Pete, I've been searching for Peremptory Notice exemples on the internet but all I see are Premeptory challenges or calendars or writ or all kinds of Peremptory stuff but no notices. Do you have a reference to this kind of Notice?

I invented it :/