The Tender For Law

Volume 3

Jul 23, 2013 7:12 PM

Brenda Larson

I had to race back home to let everyone in on the newest situation that has just developed. I had gone to the court house yesterday to get a copy of my family court order, a certified true copy, and they tried handing me a copy that I sent back to the court house that I had declined. Then the court administrator came out and stated that I couldn't have a copy because of some marks that had been put on it. So I had to wait till today to see what the judge would say about it. So anyways I stopped in today at the friendly neighbourhood court house and asked for a true copy of the family court order. The clerk is a little miffed and goes to the back and comes back out with the file. Any ways I wasn't paying much attention at first, but then I noticed her put an envelope down, and then she started comparing two documents page for page. Then she grabs a stamp and starts to stamp it and I said no, if that is going to be your certified true copy that isn't it. I want a true certified copy of the order. Well it is a mirror copy of the original and it has not been tampered with. It is the exact same thing except it has not been tamper with. Well the original one has been tampered with or destroyed so I can't get you a copy of that but this is just as good. I said no. I want a true certified copy of the original, I can't give you that because it is damaged. I said I guess that I�m not going to get one then. I had notice that the sheriffs in the court house were acting a little weird but wasn't paying attention. So as I'm walking out of the administrative office and into the lobby, an RCMP officer says Brenda. And of course I�m so used to answering and I said yes. And of course right after that I realized again what I had done. I'm officer so and so and I have a court order to take your daughter into custody. Is she with you? I said no. Do you know where she is? I said no. Was she with you last night? I said am I under arrest? No. Well then I'm free to go then? I said bye. And walked out of the court house. He also handed me a faxed a few times copy of the ex parte order to pick the kid up, anywhere in Nova Scotia. So my next move is to go to the next town over and pick up a true certified copy of the EX PARTE ORDER FOR SECTION 29 OF THE CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES ACT and get my handy dandy void stamp out and start stamping like a mad woman. And I should also drop copies of the ex parte order voided and with notices of mistake to the court house and community services and still debating the RCMP detachment.

Read Comments

Pete Daoust

You should equped yourself with hidden audio/video recording device, EVERYTIME you address a PUBLIC SERVANT, you should ALWAYS start with: I RECOGNIZE AND FULLY ACCEPT YOUR OATH OF OFFICE, now, give me a true certified copy of that order please ................... Shift this in 5th gear Brenda Larson, and remind them that you've recognized and accepted their oath of office, If they make you loose your TIME by acting without Respect, Honor, Dignity and Integrity, you should bill them, and lien their bonds.... I know it's a bit drastic, but stealing children is a bit drastic too.

Pete Daoust

And Brenda Larson, make sure you learn how to transfer these recordings into a format that allows you to send these recording via emails......would be a great thing to emails these recordings to some OFFICIALS that have, as a duty, to serve us.

Robert Cormier

I'd make a complaint in writing to the RCMP. A PRESENTMENT allowing X amount of days to investigate and report back to you in writing. Not as an appeal to your rapists, but rather to demonstrate (in part) that you have exhausted your ability to achieve an administrative remedy to these shenanigans. Perhaps followed by a NOTICE OF DEFAULT, giving them 10 more days to remedy and provide justice. Then LIEN, LIEN, LIEN! Thinking out loud.

Pete Daoust

Criminal Code Section 337

Public servant refusing to deliver property

337. Every one who, being or having been employed in the service of Her Majesty in right of Canada or a province, or in the service of a municipality, and entrusted by virtue of that employment with the receipt, custody, management or control of anything, refuses or fails to deliver it to a person who is authorized to demand it and does demand it is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

These PUBLIC SERVANT all have an oath of office. :D

Brenda Larson

Robert Cormier, I already have defaulted affidavits for 5 RCMP officers (including staff sergeant, 2 cpls, 2 constables). And I was also told by the staff sergeant that if I tried to serve any more of my paper work at the detachment that he would sue me personally. Not that I am worried, but nothing really scares them. I think that it is time to start some court action. Just not too sure how to proceed, but I think that I will start with a test case of the failure to file a writ of habeas corpus for me would be a good one to start of with.

Robert Cormier

Although it's CLUBHOUSE rules, you can then see a JUSTICE, and with proof in hand, provide your evidence that these people (JOHN DOE !, JOHN DOE 2, etc.) on such and such dates, (bring your recordings) were guilty of criminal behaviour, on such and such dates. Record that conversation too. As I said, this is just my thoughts, and, it is an appeal to your rapists, and, as such you will likely not be well received. Yet, should you "find yourself in trouble" for putting liens on bonds, you will have proof that you exhausted your administrative remedy.

Robert Cormier

If they are threatening you it is because you are hitting a nerve. It's a sign that you are doing something right. Do you have their threats in writing? Recorded? It is my understanding (until I am corrected) that it is illegal to threaten legal action as a means of controlling someone. They can sue you, or not. They can't threaten to sue. It's a big no no.

Brenda Larson

This is what my bestest buds had to say at the always friendly community service office in lieu of my visit with my youngest daughter this morning: The reason why I want to talk to you is that you are aware based on the events of yesterday that we have people and the police out actively searching for Cat because she has run from the foster placement. And we have credible information that she is at your place. So we are wondering where she is. And what you can tell us about that. I�m here for a visit with Carole. I understand that but we have care and custody of Cat, and there is currently an order to locate and detain her, which is an order through Child Welfare, that gives the police the authority to be able to search for her and detain her until she is found, so that we can ascertain her safety. And because she is in the care and custody of the agency, it is imperative that we find out where she is, so that we can make sure that she is safe. That doesn�t mean that we will be taking her some place, that means we need to know where she is. So that we can say that we know that she is safe. And it is important for you to know that we do have credible � that we know that she is with you. What that means is that you are breaching court order, which is against the law and it also means that you are harbouring as runaway. Right, so there is going to have to be some consideration made as to where that leaves you, as far as legally. So the police are going to be very involved with that, continue to be involved in searching for her and in determining if there is a role that they have in charging you with harbouring a runaway. Right, because that is against the law. So I need to know where she is. Am I going to have a visit with Carole or not? Your not going to have a visit with Carole. Why not? Well what would you think about that? What do you mean? It is my right to have a visit with her. It�s Carole�s right to have a visit with her mother. It�s her right first and foremost to be save. And last week, there was not one but two attempts under fraudulent circumstances to take her back. Right, so the agency has all that information that you tried to serve a paper, that is not a legal document on people who do not have care and custody of Carole, to have her returned to you. And that is against the law and in fact that is what some might consider kidnapping. Right, so that is very serious. So when we have someone that is not working with the agency, and attempting to go behind our backs and behind the backs of the law, you certainly cannot expect to have access with her. No? OK. So there will be no more access until things change, and we need you to tell us where Cat is at. As long as we don�t know where she is, then we can�t put a plan in place for her to ensure that she is safe, then we are going to be continued to rely on the assistance of the police and to determine if there is any other recourse that we can have under the law, to gain access to your home or to locate her in some way. You have to know that the police and family court, takes this very seriously. Family court judge ordered her in the care and custody of the agency, so for that not to be happening, a family court judge is not going to be very pleased. Right, so I not saying at this point, we would like to talk to Cat, and determine what the best plan for her is, clearly she wants to be at home or clearly she doesn�t want to be in the care of the agency. If that is the case I am certainly happy to sit down and talk to her about it is she does want. But I need to lay eyes on her and I need to do that today. She has in essence been missing for a week. I�m sure that you are familiar with missing persons and amber alerts, any and all reasonable actions a police officer and child welfare worker can take, in order to locate a child. We do take this very seriously. So I need to tell us where she is. I�m done. I guess so that I�m not going to have a visit, I won�t be back until you notify me and let me know that I can have a visit again. That is really unfortunate Brenda.

Pete Daoust

mmhhh....You should tell this Bestest that your child is YOUR property, and Bestest will be charge under section 337 of the Criminal code very soon, and you should tell Bestest that you want your property tout-de-fucking-suite. PERIOD. and, of course, record all this....That is ALL you need to say to BESTEST, You DON'T consent to ANY of her bullshit.

Brenda Larson

This is the letter that I dropped off to them last week. July 17, 2013

Antigonish DCS 229 Main Street Antigonish, Nova Scotia

Attention:

I am a human being with inherent unalienable rights attached, I am not the legal person. I have pointed out to you and your agency that I don�t consent or contract with you. On numerous occasions I have declined and not consented to the Temporary Care and Custody Order. You have kidnapped my offspring and held them in detention without proof of claim. I have asked for such evidence and you have failed to produce it. I have asked for you to produce evidence that I am contracting with you or consenting and you have failed to produce it. You have failed to produce evidence that I have harmed or injured my offspring. The worst part is that when you took them into your �care� did you do due diligence in establishing that my offspring where harmed in any way? No, and you have produced no such evidence. As a matter of FACT you chose to take 42 days to take them for a medical, although you claim that you took them in 30 business days. You at the onset of the Protection Application, had an opportunity to court order an assessment and chose not to. Where is your evidence that my offspring were emotionally harmed? You have none. All of your actions are unlawful. I now advise you that this morning I have voided the Temporary Care and Custody Order. I DEMAND that you return my offspring immediately to their mother and father before you cause any more damage or injury. YOU HAVE NO LEGAL OR LAWFUL RIGHT TO KEEP MY OFFSPRING.

Ceit Butler

I think perhaps you should take your letter, and a law dictionary, and look up EVERY word that you used, and understand exactly what you're saying. You're claiming NOT to be a legal person, but then using descriptive titles that say you ARE.

Such as, "Human Being", which Ballentine's 1948 dictionary defines as "a monster".

"Offspring", which Black's 2nd defines as: "the term is synonymous with "Issue"",

Lei Gh

I asked for a true original. They refused unless I paid $30. Told her about CCC 337 and 336. I asked to see the original. Had it in my hands then tore it in half. She was not happy and asked me to leave after calling sherriffs for me. :)

Ceit Butler

I may be wrong here, but wouldn't voiding it be more effective? Technically, hasn't it only been destroyed, but not invalidated? Would they not be able to simply print out a NEW copy from the digital record? Whereas a VOIDED order is still in existance, it's just become invalid?

Derek Hill

yes, but in order to print off a new one from their digital records they must state the reason

"Party has ripped up the original order" is what comes to mind..Not sure what that means to someone else but to me, means she DGAF!!!

Ceit Butler

That's why I'm thinking writing NEW ORIGINAL on the top, and then using your VOID stamp is a more effective route. The NEW ORIGINAL means just that...that IS the original document now, and because it's whole, it stays in the record, as VOIDED, and becomes the NEW original document.

Ceit Butler

We tried just voided an order in my case, but without writing NEW ORIGINAL on the top. When I came back to pick up my CERTIFIED COPIES, the CLERK had just re-printed the final page, and re-signed it herself.

August le Blanc

Kate Butler has had direct instruction from several members here including the founder of this group. I would say that she is in the category of always right... that still doesn't mean you should stop thinking for yourself... Leigh OftheHouseof Collins

Ceit Butler

No no, I am FAR from "always right". I'm not even CLOSE to being there yet. Hence the reason I'm stating this is what "*I* am THINKING", not saying it is fact. These are just the conclusions that reasoning is bringing me, personally, to.

Ceit Butler

If my thinking is correct here, destroying the document leaves nothing physically in the case file, and nothing to stop them from printing out another copy. But by VOIDING that copy, and writing NEW ORIGINAL on it, the digital copy becomes null and void as well, because the VOIDED copy IS the updated and current document now, and remains in the case file now as a record.

Ceit Butler

I just did...I'm afraid it was fairly uneventful. The order was discreetely stamped, I asked the clerk for CERTIFIED COPIES afterwards, (the clerks were all flustered over the VOID stamp), and a week later I received a phone call to pick them up. When I did, the back page had simply been reprinted, but now had the CLERK's signature, in place of the Justice's.

Ceit Butler

This was quite awhile ago. It's also one of the main reasons that I'm still in the planning stages now, and am taking my time with it. I want to make sure I know EVERYTHING ahead of time. This is war, (metaphorically speaking, of course!), you CAN'T just run in, guns blazing. You need a strategy. You need to plan ahead, EVERY detail, and have back-up plans, and back-up plans FOR your back-up plans.

August le Blanc

There is great empowerment being the Director of a PRIVATE trust... They have to deal with you on your terms when it comes to Trust Property... a ppsa is $20. To start a corp depending where and what either numbered company or Named company between $ 375 and 475..

A PPSA makes the leinee trust property, accompanied by public notice ( bill of exchange) that includes a rate for unauthorized use when it comes to your child why not say like 10 mil for unauthorized use along with kidnapping , unlawful confinement, harming TRUST property in any fashion will subject you to the full recourse of the the law CIVIL and CRIMINAL.... Public servants are bound to section 32 of the constitution ratified in '82....

A Private trust puts them in there proper place as TRUSTEE''s... and public servants.

The Front of a bill of exchange IE: invoice= CIVIL

The Back is CRIMINAL... once public notice has been given... it's your LAW....

Ceit Butler

No, this was before I knew about NEW ORIGINAL. The order was VOIDED, and CERTIFIED COPIES ordered. When I picked the CERTIFIED COPIES up, the last page, containing the Justice's signature that should have been VOIDED, the CLERK had simply replaced that page from the digital record, and SHE had signed it.

August le Blanc

I have been thinking about this for a while now... Clerks in a way are one of the most powerful tools at ones disposal, if we have the proper standing.

Like a king if you are the director of a PRIVATE trust and viva voce command a praecipe for action or order them to provide you with the proper forms of Praecipe... To order a Writ that is applicable to any situation. The whole trick I think is to stand ones ground and use the authority of the PRIVATE Trust...

Thoughts from the edge of sanity ;-)

August le Blanc

well it is a court... like in the days of The KIng holding court... everyone there is a trustee and the justice holds surety until you consent by responding to their questions without establishing proper standing... they want to pass the hot potato of SURETY to you in any sneaky underhanded way the can think of, creating joinder... If one is the only one with standing... logically it would lead to the ability to order the clerk to what is required at that particular moment... like holding them accountable.

VOIDING orders and establishing new originals seems the simplest way to circumvent ALL of that....

You have to go to the clerk to do anything with your court file... so OWN it, with a lien as well....

Brenda Larson

What I did was ask for certified true copies of the new court order, got those in my hot little hands, took it out to the car stamped it with my handy dandy little void stamp then went to the nearest photocopying place and asked for colored copies of the order. Then went to the post office stuck the voided new original true certified copy in the envelope and sent it register mail back to the court house, so that way I will have a record of them receiving it. When I went there this afternoon, right away the clerk running out to the back and a sheriff came out to the front. And I now that if I just tried to hand the family court clerk back that document she will refuse it. So that way after they get it, I don't care what they do with it I have delivered it and proof of it.

Derek Hill

Scott Duncan, just to clarify, when you put in the affidavit notice of mistake are you turning it to the court as in the documents are no court property? i only ask because someone sent me an audio doing it and clerk said it was court property.