Derek Moran rocks !! :-D

"His group is not as SOCIAL as mine".....there - i fixed that for you "Social" includes shit-stains; :D :D

Not sure I'll need this, but in case I do... thanks Derek! Awesome info!

Maybe one day you'll have to kick your boyfriend in the balls Janick Paquette......copy and paste, just in case :-D

Thats all Ceit Butler, Janick...and a lil' thank you to Lou TOO ;)

even if you do sign as suggested, you still signed and might aswell be X with witnesses. never sign anything. autograph. oh but they wanted my autograph. i thought they wanted my autograph? didn't they just want my autograph, i am famous you know... lack of understanding negates surety. thats why "i do not understand the nature and cause of these proceedings" is one of the questions you need to memorize, and when they try providing you with councel you hit the councelor/lawyer with the chris evan objective (the question that makes the lawyer shit and decline the case). "Do you have any pre-existing oaths or obligations to uphold the Laws of the State of Massachusetts which this case is being brought under?" and the lawyer could not acccept the judges request to take the case.

a maxim of law is, he who lacks understanding is not present.

When you sign "By:_________" you are signing FOR the name, not AS the name. You are just administrating for the LEGAL PERSON.

Pete can tell you more about that. :p

"...and when they try providing you with counsel..." I think Scott covered that by simply saying to state: "I DO NOT CONSENT, and i WAIVE ALL BENEFITS" Lawyers cost ALOTTA money these days, so thats a nice BENEFIT they are OFFERING to you - OR, as Dean Kory would say: "Dammit your Justice, i have to attorn MYSELF- it's not the court's to TAKE/ACCEPT, its MINE to GRANT/GIVE" ;)

Uh-oh..... :/ I just had a really bad thought. Any chance Scott fell overboard feeding the 'House-Duck?' :( Signed, Fukishima-sized-CARP *note to self: need to appeal-to-my-rapist and APPLY for a Hunting (notice i did not say FISHING)-Licence to help curb the CARP-population in Lake Ontario*

BY:________________ CEO of SFC Inc BY:__________________ CEO of 9111-1111 Quebec Inc BY:________________________ Director of Fucks the Puppy Inc BY:______________________________ Sole Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST 26X-XXX-XXX BY:__________________________________ Nobody, for the moment :P

I tried that in court!...Judge Chester said"Well If you don't know who you are ,you have nothing to worry about than!"

Maybe that's why I so love administering the person I happem to have in MY pocket........you get to have the LAST word, all the time.... :D You get to FUCKING win, all the time... HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Just added this to my desktop-notepad-mosaic, Ceit, your the first non Scott Duncan one up there!

For Mackximus: Derek Moran: Kate- can you share in a nutshell, what you stated was your STATUS to the court, in your Affidavit-of-Status? Ceit Butler: I stated that I: -would attend court on this date under a SPECIAL APPEARANCE with restricted capacity of SUI JURIS, -DO NOT consent to be recognized as a LEGAL PERSON (of ANY class) and/or PRO SE LITIGANT and/or ANY other LEGAL FICTION, -have NO INTENT to CONTRACT Witt the COURT, not have any knowledge of any existence of a VALID CONTRACT with the COURT, -that I DO NOT consent to be addressed as a "YOU", being a party of SURETY. -that my name is PRIVATE and NOT derived from ANY information from ANY PUBLIC document, therefore I waive SECTION 2.1 of the CHANGE OF NAME ACT OF ONTARIO, -if you proceed against the LEGAL PERTAIN (PERSON), and it is convicted, then you must soak (speak) to the holder of the title document, the STATEMENT OF BIRTH, for satisfaction of any financial and/or legal obligations, which holder, I understand is THE GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO. Ceit Butler: (Make that last one "LEGAL PERSON", not "PERTAIN". Stupid predictive text software) Ceit Butler: Speak!

Person�s name 2. (1) For all purposes of Ontario law, (a) a person whose birth is registered in Ontario is entitled to be recognized by the name appearing on the person�s birth certificate or change of name certificate, unless clause (c) applies; (b) a person whose birth is not registered in Ontario is entitled to be recognized by, (i) the name appearing on the person�s change of name certificate, if the person�s name has been changed under this Act or a predecessor of it, or (ii) in all other cases, the name recognized in law in the last place with which the person had a real and substantial connection before residing in Ontario, unless clause (c) applies; and (c) a person who adopted a name on marriage before the 1st day of April, 1987 is entitled to be recognized by that name unless the person subsequently changed that name under this Act or a predecessor of it. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.7, s. 2 (1). Saving (2) Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to affect a change of name effected under a right that existed at law before the 26th day of June, 1939. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.7, s. 2 (2). Surname and forename (3) A person�s name may not be changed under this Act so as to include no surname or so as to include no forename. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.7, s. 2 (3). http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_90c07_e.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xcB-BOdxk9Q

In regards to your 'fancy-certificate-permit' thread i NOTICED you POSTED, Mackximus...i do recall a rather simple, straight-forward question, that Lou Manotti tried to instill into me at Dean's seminar for them: "What evidence do YOU have, that any of YOUR CODES apply to ME?" And...if i have misinterpreted the words of Lou Manotti in ANY way, then that would be a MISTAKE- and i want the court-of-Lou to FORGIVE ME. :D

yes.....put the burden of proof on the one making the claim!! I am being called a PERSON, which in Massachusetts "shall include corporations, societies, associations and partnerships." I asked how they claim I fit the definition. :-D They haven't provided a response for some reason.

I'm offended at being called a person. That smears my good name. I've now been injured. Time for a claim for damages against the man or woman who did it.

It may be a mistake. hehehe But I am with you Bildo!

pffft!

"What evidence do YOU have, that any of YOUR CODES apply to ME?" ooh i like that... questions deflect surety.

Just in case Ceit goes bye-bye and her GOLD disappears, too... Ceit Butler: I didn't even get to say a word! I walked up, laid out all my documents and the Crown immediately asked for a dismissal of all charges Bildo Schmildo: Exactly which docs did you lay out? Ceit Butler: They didn't even ask me for my name! The Crown asked if they could address Kathryn Butler's matter next as she saw I was there. I walked up and started to prepare everything and the Clerk paged my ex husband. The Crown stated that he had declined to attend, meaning there was no valid claim from a living man, no signed complaint and no charging instrument. We sent several documents which let them know that I was aware of these egregious errors. They paged him once, probably hoping he would show, and then asked for immediate dismissal. Ceit Butler: I had previously submitted an AFFIDAVIT OF STATUS, and NOTICE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE COURT which I required answers to in order to proceed, and gave them ten days to respond. When they didn't, I served a NOTICE OF FAULT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE, with an additional five days to respond. When that time elapsed, I served a NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND CERTIFICATE OF NON-RESPONSE (attaching ALL previous submissions to each new document as EXHIBITS). A little disappointed and annoyed, I was all ready for a good battle! Derek Moran: can we get a look at what these documents look like, Scott/Kate? > AFFIDAVIT OF STATUS...NOTICE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE COURT...NOTICE OF FAULT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE...NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND CERTIFICATE OF NON-RESPONSE (attaching ALL previous submissions to each new document as EXHIBITS) Derek Moran: Well- ChiefRock did say at the seminar last Sunday, that when he was in court once, he told the Justice- "Public jurisdiction doesnt have any authority over private agreements" and the reply from the Justice was- "You're right." So i guess what happened in court with Kate today is an example of that? Kate- can you share in a nutshell, what you stated was your STATUS to the court, in your Affidavit-of-Status? Ceit Butler: I stated that I: -would attend court on this date under a SPECIAL APPEARANCE with restricted capacity of SUI JURIS, -DO NOT consent to be recognized as a LEGAL PERSON (of ANY class) and/or PRO SE LITIGANT and/or ANY other LEGAL FICTION, -have NO INTENT to CONTRACT Witt the COURT, not have any knowledge of any existence of a VALID CONTRACT with the COURT, -that I DO NOT consent to be addressed as a "YOU", being a party of SURETY. -that my name is PRIVATE and NOT derived from ANY information from ANY PUBLIC document, therefore I waive SECTION 2.1 of the CHANGE OF NAME ACT OF ONTARIO, -if you proceed against the LEGAL PERTAIN, and it is convicted, then you must soak to the holder of the title document, the STATEMENT OF BIRTH, for satisfaction of any financial and/or legal obligations, which holder, I understand is THE GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO. Ceit Butler: (Make that last one "LEGAL PERSON", not "PERTAIN". Stupid predictive text software) Ceit Butler: Speak! Eamonn O Brien: First off, well done Kate and everyone involved... I wasn't following the story but seems like a great result... When you say STATEMENT OF BIRTH are you referring to the BC? Ceit Butler: No, the STATEMENT OF BIRTH is the original long form your parents filled out. The government retains the original so that they have COPYHOLD over it. Eamonn O Brien: Copyhold ~ a former tenure of land in England and Ireland by right of being recorded in the court of the manor... So by their having copyhold they are recorded as being the holder/possessor thus have surety? Ceit Butler: They hold LEGAL TITLE to the LEGAL PERSON, and yes, that makes them SURETY for it. Ceit Butler: That, and the fact that my ex husband declined the invitation to participate. The questions mentioned the lack of a signed complaint, lack of impartial third-party witness and the fact that there was no charging instrument. It would be one thing if I was not aware of these facts, but the fact that I obviously was...I think they tried one last attempt at getting him in there and when that failed, they folded. Derek Moran: "... no charging instrument..." - is this referring to the 'Constructive Bond/Trust' they set-up in advance for these types of cases? Ceit Butler: No, they HAVE to have a signed charging sheet. A citation, something that states WHAT you have been charged with, and containing an official signature. It should have been Page 1 of the disclosure. The closest thing it contained was an "information" page stating the charge, the cop's name, the date was just "This____day, Dec. 2012" and there was NO signature from a Justice at the bottom, Ceit Butler: They didn't even have a signed statement from the ex, just the police notes and a video statement that they didn't include in the disclosure. Ceit Butler: They gave me the Disclosure at the bail heating. The top page listed a bunch of conditions on it and stated that "by accepting this disclosure, you agree to the following...". At the bottom, it CLEARLY states that "if you do NOT accept these conditions, you should immediately return atoll these materials to the Crown and arrange for disclosure in another manner or seek an order of a Court of Competent Jurisdiction." And the Office of the Crown's address below, so we mailed the fucker back with a Notice of Mistake stapled to the front. Next appearance, the Crown tried to hand it to me WITH my Notice of Mistake still attached Stapling it on makes it PART of the document now. Pierre Eleveneightfivetwo: I have processed my first BoE, the right way yesterday, and a young lady just called me, saying she have NO IDEA what I am talking about July 5 at 12:08pm � Like They don't EVEN know that what they've sent me is a bill of exchange, they never heard about The BoE ACT.

"-if you proceed against the LEGAL PERSON, and it is convicted, then you must speak to the holder of the TITLE document, the STATEMENT OF BIRTH, for satisfaction of any financial and/or legal obligations, which the holder, I understand is THE GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO." ..Gold, Jerry- GOLD!

"Are YOU DEAN KORY?" "You must speak to the HOLDER of the TITLE DOCUMENT, the STATEMENT OF BIRTH, for the LEGAL PERSON DEAN KORY, for satisfaction of any financial and/or legal obligations if it is convicted, which i understand, is THE GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO."

a counter offer.

Ceit Butler, the approach detailed in this thread.. do you still generally advocate this approach?------- Even for those with less experience? I'm pretty sure I keep hearing folks advocate not going to court, in fact, being ADAMANT to stay away from the court. The man who currently holds these 5 pieces of paper, Part 3 Summons.. doesn't want to do anything stupid.

I'm looking for a bit of guidance.. I may need to call that 416 number..

No, ESPECIALLY for those with less experience. I was lucky; I had the assistance of two VERY experienced people, and Simcoe is a small town and they were not prepared for a fight. Your instincts are correct, Scott is FAR more qualified to answer your questions than I. :p

Yes. Had I not asked, I would've treated my summons' like you treated your initial Disclosure documents.. ... and then proceeded from there.

To be clear, the PERSON is listed on the Summons. But it was placed in MY hands. The child inside of me is hoping someone will tell me it's as simple as OFFER and ACCEPTANCE. Contract law? ChiefRock Sino General? :D

Also, now is probably NOT the best time to call as the Admiral is still in the midst of a project and is pretty focused on that.

Yup, thanks.

Civil, or criminal, Rodrigo Dan Darius?

Traffic offences.

How much money?

I didn't add all of it up.. ..this is the hard part. Failure to identify self. Expired sticker. Fail to stop for police. Fail to carry insurance card. Fail to have valid insurance.

It's a shit-stain.

What fuck are you doing driving? :/

It's a SURETY and ACCOUNTING matter. You have some time in the group. What are you afraid of?

You want to talk about this?

Yes. My paperwork was not handled like it should've been. Everything has been corrected effective yesterday. However, there are still these 5 pieces of paper.

Yes. ..and I'm still here. I'm just thinking too slow that's all.

How did they finalized joinder, did you ended-up talking?

Not by consent. I was on "automatic". I was seconds away from work. so I kept driving.. Therefore:Fail to stop for Police. ..parked as I usually did, and proceeded to walk.

You can guess what happened next.. I've seen enough videos to know what could've happened that night. It's a shit-stain. I have people who love me.. and I could've fucked that up.

By the end there were 6 cop cars. I clearly picked a slow night...

If I continue with the story. It will seem like I am seeking to induce pity. I don't want that..

Have you asked the question, and found the answer to WHY you did all this? :/ I am curious. I am NOT trying to bash you. Apparently I sound "harsh" when I write. Like I give a crap.

I made sure to tell them "I don't consent to this." I kept repeating: "I dont understand". They asked if I have a fear of cops. I said: Yes. They asked why.. I told them the truth.. "I've watched too many videos where cops harm people".

Have you asked the question, and found the answer to WHY you did all this? I am curious.

I didn't need to partake in this to find out the answer. I knew before. I am prone to BELIEF.

ALL belief is EVIL, yet most don't realise they're still prone to it.

When you don't keep your paperwork in order for a few weeks, it's easy to "not keep your paperwork in order" for a few more.. BELIEF: that we are somehow special; that bad things won't happen to us..

:/ *shit-stain deleted*

(Sorry, that's not be deflecting responsibility, that's me deflecting surety..)

You, somehow, feel GUILT about this incident, right?

I'm not re-reading all my comments. Do I sound like I don't?

The answer is Yes.

I think your problem is that you are STILL very attached to believing you are the PERSON. And you also believe in "authority." You are still not aware of who you are. But that is fixable! :D It takes balls, but is not impossible.

The PERSON you happen to have received a SUMMONS. From what you have learned here so far, what are your options to handle matter?

I know I am not the PERSON. ..the PERSON received the summons. Prior to receiving any guidance instructing me differently, I would probably decide to file a Notice of Mistake. As I stated earlier I probably would staple it on top of the 5 Summons'.. I would send them REGISTERED MAIL to the COURT CLERK and the PROSECUTOR.

Also, prior to any guidance instructing me differently, I see the benefit of creating an AFFIRMATION OF STATUS. And a NOTICE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE COURT. Also, colour photo-copy of both sides of the Birth Certificate Bond for Proof of who the Surety is.. I have read we also do this as providing CONSIDERATION. I will admit I don't totally understand it... ...which begs the question, why do it then? :/

To finish the answer to the question about JOINDER, they took a wallet from me.. the wallet had a license in it, and ownership information on the car.

Unless I'm mistaken, I've read if there is no response in 15 days they DEEM the PERSON to not dispute the charges...

Where did this transcript come from lol

The original post? It's one of Derek Moran's copypasta-thread-jobs from last year.

*shrugs* I dunno Scott - isnt "the BIRTH CERTIFICATE BOND" something Ceit used when she went to court?...this is where i remember it from :/ "And responding to "You" is the biggest one. Let them know right from the start that as the Sole Beneficiary of the BIRTH CERTIFICATE BOND, you wish to solely be addressed as "insert regular old first name here". And ANYONE who doesn't address you by THAT NAME ONLY, EVERY time that they speak to you, you respond "Are you addressing me? As the SOLE BENEFICIARY, I wish to solely be addressed as:___" "

No, she CREATED a SURETY BOND she could lien

Ahh.

She could call it anything she likes!

She could have called it a DEREK MORAN IS A FUCKING IDIOT Bond, but that would just confuse people.

This group is not a "walk in the park"...i appreciate the "tough love". :)

Created a surety bond ?:/

Oh it is so. You are like that with EVERYTHING I'm involved in.

Wow, Derek is still immerse in that swamp of bullshit. If he does not become an attorney, and makes money of this, he is NEVER going to get ANYTHING from it, other than helping folks looking into the wrong direction.

I've noticed lots of folks who wash out of this group lack a basic self awareness. A complete inability to accept what anyone says because of offended program.

A Derek Moran syndrome

48 hours. He couldn't make it 48 hours. Dean Kory couldn't make it 45 MINUTES Derek Hill lasted 20 minutes (He holds the record), so Derek Moran's not the worst. He is however the slowest learner.