Nov 10, 2013 12:13 AM

Name of judge who made this order: honourable chief justice bla bla bla - HAHAHAHAH honourable - now that's a FUCKING good one!

I love the way the chimp justice passes the buck to the clerk = CLERK, PLEASE find some fucking reason to NOT enter these documents into the record!

It's like I suspect - all your private home made shit - notices, affidavits and the like (hereinafter: it) are AGAINST public policy and these pricks WILL NOT see any of it in THEIR arena.

Will they see it and acknowledge it if you submit it in camera (private) under seal through a 3d party? who the fuck knows...

I'd like Scott's opinion on filing shit in the private side so it actually gets recognized and not simply thrown aside by these self serving assholes...

There's so much bullshit on the web, it's hard to decipher between what is reality or what is some idiot's vision of how things actually are as HE sees and/or dreams them TO BE.

I think I'm burning out. Way too much law through way too many gurus....

If you read this, I think Justice Rooke is requesting a PRIVATE letter with regards to your knowledge before accepting this paperwork.

Surfing for porn was soooo much easier than surfing for truth...

Who is this Justice Rooke and what does he have to do with me? One can always speak one's Law in their battlefield [court] if one is FORCED into that field.

Ok, to further on this thing, being the non-acknowledgement of Affidavits of commercial argument... Blake?

It's clearly a filter system being set up and who can blame them, if every man and his dog finds a magic one trick pony formula but has no depth of knowledge - due diligence unlocks EVERY door.

There is an easy counter offer to every offer...gotta learn the WHY not just a HOW or two:-)

It's all a test after you implement your prefferd HOW method...so make sure your up for it, as it can get quite theatrical.

That's when the WHY kicks in when things get fluid and spontaneous

"Your preferred HOW method" should be in-line with PROCESS'S and FORMAT'S deemed acceptable, this IS HOW things get done.

Just read that document....WOW!!!! Just shows that we don't belong there

It's nothing without us though:-)

Like seriously... if one has questions, why are they ignored by "notary marks"? Wow...

Yes Jessica - public policy with a dollop of form...

Its not like there are $1 stamps on each corner and blood thumbprints all over, for Jebus sakes...

Notice all points are basically the minutiae that people get lost in. Stick to surety and settling the account and at least it'll look like public policy and reassemble the relevant form.

yep

But seriously it's a filter / offer

Pre court filter

In hope you'll default and cop a summary judgment

The cool thing is... If you do as Scott suggested through a duly authorized third party IE a corporation, it actually doesn't do any of the things that will threaten recognition. It enables recognition. Even down to taken name. It doesn't create controversy...

Do it in a modern acceptable method, back it up, it is not your creation, they rule over their creation. Establish a trust, be recognized by recognizing them proper process enables recognition. the in blood stuff may have been acceptable 100 years ago, today it is more advanced technologically, it is crucial to be recognized. the name, fuck arounds, identify you in a category that is considered well worthy of an court order. I notice that none of the aforementioned disqualifiers in the above document are what Scott has taught. I will review to confirm accuracy If we Do as was shown and discussed, the process will not disqualify the applicant. It still can all be handled registered mail. Am I missing something? Besides the fact we need to think for ourselves now?

They required a "letter" which would "challenge the action" of refusing documents. I'm not really playing that game. To ignore any questions which negate understanding would be a breach of the Public Trust and FRAUD... no challenge.

Scott has said exactly that when notices and affidavits are ignored...

So then what? Hold your ground with the clerk one would think... To not be considered a free dumber. Not to be in Dis honour in their eyes. Not to create controversy. Use a corporate seal to sign documents as One of two signatures, other as an officer of the corporation responsible to its share holders... For the Sole Beneficiary. If challenged have a rebuttal ready. I may have missed that thread ... need to review notes now...

Its a PRIVATE letter to the Justice

Ah...

Your supposed to READ, boobies youruncle :D

yeah yeah... :-D

@Beverly. That is an interesting pdf. Do you know if it is applicable here in Australia, its States and Territories, as well as New Zealand and the UK? We are aware that many people are now using many of those unacceptable formats.

Colin, this Justice created this order, apparently for vexatious litigants and for free-dumbers... specifically for the courts here. It wouldn't apply anywhere else.

Thank you, Beverly. Nevertheless, it is handy to have to ensure we get the paper-work correct. Clerks of the Courts/Registrars, here, are known to just reject documents for filing, but do not return them to the author/originator ...most likely they shred them ... consequently, Magistrates don't see them, leaving the accused/defendant sitting in court like a 'shag on a rock'.

it's applicability is limited to the jurisdiction in which it has been issued.

If you send something to the court registered mail they received it. If you go to court Colin dont you take your paperwork? If the justice says he ain't seen nothing show him the receipt and document, if he can't handle it, ask if he'd like to recuse himself or motion mistrial or just enforce the private record between the parties.

RE: "Notice all points are basically the minutiae that people get lost in." The difference between being heard or NOT heard, making the record or wearing out the clerk's shredder is hardly a little thing.