THE CESTUI QUE VIE TRUST

and what to do about it......

What is a “Ces tui Qui Trust” (pronounce set-a-kay) and why should you care? In 1666, in London, during the black plague, and great fires of London Parliament enacted an act, behind closed doors, called Cestui Que Vie Act 1666. The act being debated, the Cestui Qui act, was to subrogate the rights of men and women, meaning all men and women were declared dead, lost at sea/beyond the sea. (back then operating in admiralty law, the law of the sea, so lost at sea). The state (of London) took custody of everybody and their property into a trust, the state became the trustee/husband holding all titles to the people and property, until a living man comes back to reclaim those titles and can also claim damages.

The rule of the use of CAPITAL LETTERS used in a NAME: when CAPITAL letters are used anywhere in a NAME this always refers to a LEGAL ENTITY/FICTION, COMPANY or CORPORATION no exceptions. e.g. John DOE or Doe: JANE (PASSPORT, DRIVER LICENSE, MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE and BIRTH CERTIFICATE) CEST TUI QUE TRUST: (pronounced set-a-kay) common term in NEW ZEALAND and AUSTRALIA or STRAWMAN, common term in USA or CANADA, is a LEGAL ENTITY/ FICTION created and owned by the GOVERNMENT whom created it. I repeat owned by the GOVERNMENT. Legally, we are considered to be a FICTION, a concept or idea expressed as a NAME, a symbol. That LEGAL PERSON has no consciousness; it is a juristic PERSON, ENS LEGIS, a NAME/word written on a piece of paper.

Legal Definitions Person: A human being is not a person because he is a human being, but because rights and duties have been ascribed to him. The ‘person’ is the legal subject or substance of which rights and duties are attributed, Black’s Law Dictionary, Not a human being, but the human being invisible coat.

Application: Means to ‘beg, plead, petition, implore, entreat or request‘.

Must: Legally can be synonymous with ‘may’. Has two senses. Imperative or a directive. One creates obligations, the other defines conditions. Always a ‘directive’ when used with ‘apply’.

Submit: To agree to another’s will or to leave to another’s discretion. Form of surrender. Always voluntary. Implies lawful right to fight.

Registration: To sign over all chattel content for safe keeping. always voluntary. Abandons complete ownership for partial.

Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization) — In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man’s status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications. Capitis Diminutio Minima (meaning a minimum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John Doe) — The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man’s family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation [pride] of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) [of his own right, not under any legal disability] or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. [Parental authority] It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom.Law, 144. Capitis Diminutio Media (meaning a medium loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John DOE) — A lessor or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man loses his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights. Capitis Diminutio Maxima (meaning a maximum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. JOHN DOE or DOE JOHN) — The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights. Idem sonans is a legal doctrine whereby a person’s identity is presumed known despite the misspelling of his or her name. The presumption lies in the similarity between the Phonology, or sounds of the correct name and the name as written.

Nom de guerre is an assumed name. This traces back to 1666; London is a state, just like Vatican is a state, just like Washington DC is a state. The Crown is an unincorporated association. Why unincorporated? Its private, the temple bar is in London, every lawyer called to the “bar” swears allegiance to the temple bar. You can’t get called, without swearing this allegiance. The Crown already owns North America and everything in it. Your only way out is to reclaim your dead entity (strawman) that the Crown created, become the beneficiary of the cest tui qui trust and remove yourself from the admiralty law that holds you in custody.

A little history….

When London burned the subrogation of men’s and woman’s rights occurred. The responsible act passed…CQV act 1666 meant all men and women of UK were declared dead and lost beyond the seas. The state took everybody…and everybody’s property…into trust. The state takes control until a living man or woman comes back and claims their titles by proving they are alive and claims for damages can be made. This is why you always need representation (lawyer) when involved in legal matters, because you’re dead. The legal fiction is a construct on paper, an estate in trust. When you get a bill or summons from court it is always in capital letters, similar to tomb stones in graveyards. Capital letters signify death. They are writing to the dead legal fiction. A legal fiction was created when someone informed the government that there was a new vessel in town, based upon your birth. Birth certificates are issued at birth, just as ships are given berth certificates. Your mother has a birth canal, just like a ship. All this information relates to how the general public are still legally tied. Through admiralty law, through this ancient legal construct we can be easily controlled. Learning about your legal fiction helps you to unlock yourself. Otherwise, you are just a vessel floating on the sea of commerce.

Parents are tricked into registering the birth of their babies. In about 1837 the Births, Deaths and Marriages act was formed in UK and the post of registrar general was established. His job was to collect all the data from the churches which held the records of birth. Regis — from queen or crown. All people are seen to be in custody of, ”The Crown”. This allows people to function in commerce and to accept the benefits provided by state. So, we are in custody. Worldwide — under the IMF the majority of people are fed, sheltered and provided for, however, now it is the system that is benefitting while many are suffering, are poorly fed, and housed, and water is contaminated. Many people are now getting sick and dying as a result — not to mention that as people evolve, they now seek to be independent of any system that seeks to control or oppress. We have legally (not lawfully) elected representatives. We have to understand who we are as men and women and how we can relate in the system.

The City of London is a Centre for markets, where merchants work. So there is mercantile law, derived from Admiralty. Look at the symbols in the City of London that relate to Admiralty. Our national banks are not our banks. The private shareholders from the private banks own the banks. It is all private, not public as we are led to believe. “OF” also means “without”, eg. The bank without England. Private banks issue private currency. With WWI a change happened where money was not backed by gold or silver anymore, it is now based on peoples labor. People are now pledged to the IMF as the surety to pay back the creditors in the global bankruptcy. Men and women are not bankrupt, they are the only source of credit. The public is bankrupt. Regarding the currency that gets issued at the Bank of England, the people are the gold or the treasure. The government issues bonds or treasury bills that are bought by investors, based upon the people. This is why the borders are now open, and why the government seeks to enroll the illegal aliens into the system by issuing drivers licenses to them. Each person is worth a substantial amount in new credit! In California, the people complained that the “undocumented Mexican immigrants”, aka “illegal aliens”, were causing violence, crimes, vandalism, etc. and the cops and the courts were doing nothing about it. It seemed as if “illegal aliens” were the problem. But, the District Attorney said, “Anything short of murder we won’t prosecute.” If only the people knew what he meant, they would shift their rage from the “illegal aliens” to the DA and his ilk. “Undocumented” means there is no trust account to charge, which is why the government wants them all to have driver licenses. The DA won’t prosecute because he can’t; there is nothing and no one to charge. Men and women cannot be charged; only trust accounts can be charged and, since there is no account, due to no documents to create them, there is no way to make money off these “immigrants”. Murder is a different story. This means the “illegals” took someone out of the commerce game, someone with an account, and so, in that case, the DA will prosecute.

You need to understand the bankruptcy before you can understand the judiciary. You need to accept the bankruptcy. We have accepted the claim to accept the summons. There is an obligation to accept any liability which has been created. All you can do is accept the bankruptcy. We are operating in admiralty. A not guilty plea dishonor’s the bankruptcy. The strawman, aka legal fiction is always guilty. It needs to be accepted for value. Barristers and solicitors make a living out of creating controversy. By creating a controversy, you become liable for the case. Honor and dishonor. To remain in honor, you have to accept a claim and settle it. Then you add conditions. I accept on proof of claim and proof of loss. This gives the liability back to them. The legal fiction is always guilty. Only in the high courts, can the real man or woman appear. Games are played on courts; hence the name court…is a game with actors (acting on acts). It has to be treated as a game and just business. Court room dramas are misinformation.

In the public, we are operating in bankruptcy and you receive benefits. It takes a lot of time, effort, and study to use these tools. You have to be prepared to go fully through the process, get the right tool out of your toolbox at the right time. People need to learn how to act as creditors. In summary… Money is backed by labor. We cannot exchange it fairly for gold or silver. Capitalization of “name” means a dead entity, a legal fiction. Know who you are! You are not your strawman or dead fictitious entity. Learn how to become a creditor in commerce.

COURT: Who’s Who and What to Say: I suggest you never voluntarily go to court. Live men and women are not meant to be in any place designed solely for the business of fictional entities. When we attend court, we are deemed dead, in fact, they cannot deal with us until we admit to being dead…a legal fiction…a trust. Never use or accept titles in law situations. Titles in court are legal persons: judge, prosecutor, defendant, bailiffs, cops, and attorneys. Live men and women are not recognized, so it makes sense to send in a dead person — an attorney — to handle our cases…except for one thing: they have been indoctrinated into the legal BAR system and have sworn an oath to that system. If you can find one to do as you say, then you will prevail, but most of them would rather hang onto their BAR cards than behave honorably. The only thing that dead, fictional entities want from us is our life energy, and the only way they can get it is by our agreement. Without us, they cannot function, so, they are desperate to get us into court, to have us pay the debt which they created by charging the trust with a crime or infraction. Since common law courts no longer exist, we know that the case never has anything to do with “facts” or live men and women and so, anyone who testifies (talks about the facts of the case) is doomed. ALL courts operate in trust law, based upon ecclesiastical canon law — ritualism, superstition, satanism, etc. — which manifests as insidious, commercial law and we are in court to take the hit, if they can get us to do so. They use every trick in the book — intimidation, fear, threat, ridicule, rage, and even recesses, in order to change the jurisdiction, when they know they are losing, in order to make us admit that we are the name of the trust. When we do so, we are deemed to be the trustee — the one liable for administering the trust. Ergo, until now, it has been a waste of our time, energy, and emotion to go to a place where it is almost certain that we will be stuck with the liability. We all know from our indoctrination, programming, and schooling that judges are impartial and have sworn an oath to this effect. This means he must not favor either plaintiff or defendant. But, our experience reveals that he does, indeed, favor the plaintiff, indicating a glaring conflict of interest — that the prosecutor, judge, and clerk all work for the state — the owner of the CQV trust. So, as the case is NOT about “justice”, it must be about the administration of a trust. They all represent the trust owned by the state and, if we are beneficiary, the only two positions left are Trustee and Executor. So, if you detect the judge’s partiality, although I doubt the case will get this far, you might just want to let them know that you know this. If you consider court as entertainment and if you can stand the evil emanating from its officers, the fear and angst oozing from the walls, and the treacherous atmosphere, then go, knowing that under trust law we cannot be the trustee or the executor of a trust, whilst being beneficiary, as that would be a conflict. The position of beneficiary may lack clout, but the other positions hold liability. Since state employees want to be the beneficiaries of the trust, the only way they can do so is to transfer, to us, the liability which they hold, as trustees and executors, because they also cannot be both the administrators and beneficiary of the trust. So, trusteeship and executorship, i.e.: suretyship, becomes a hot potato and everyone wants to toss it so s/he can be beneficiary of the credit from the trust.

When we were born, a trust, called a Cestui Que Vie Trust (“CQV”) was set-up, for our benefit. Evidence of this is the birth certificate. But what is the value which must be conveyed to the trust, in order to create it? It was our right to property (via Birth into this world), our body (via the Live Birth Record), and our souls (via Baptism). Since the state/province which registered the trust is the owner, it is also the trustee…the one that administers the trust. Since they, also, wanted to be beneficiary of this trust, they had to come up with ways to get us, as beneficiary, to authorize their charging the trust, allegedly, for our benefit (via our signature on a document: citation, application, etc.), and then, temporarily transfer trusteeship, to us, during the brief time that they want to be the beneficiary of a particular “constructive” trust. This means that a trust can be established anywhere, anytime, and the parties of the trust are quickly, albeit temporarily, put into place. But, since a beneficiary cannot charge a trust — only a trustee can do so — it is the state that charges the trust, but they do so for their benefit, not ours (albeit occasionally we do reap some benefit from that charge but nowhere near the value which they reap. Think bank loan…we reap a minute percentage of what they gain from our authorization). So, the only way, under trust law, for them to be able to charge the trust is to get the authorization from the beneficiary — us, and the only way for them to benefit from their charge is to get us to switch roles — from beneficiary to trustee (the one responsible for the accounting), and for them to switch their role — from trustee to beneficiary because no party can be both, at the same time, i.e.: within the same constructive trust. They must somehow trick us into accepting the role of trustee. Why would we do so when the trust is for our benefit?…and how do they manage to do this? Well, the best way is to get us into court and trick us into unwittingly doing so. But, if we know what has transpired, prior to our being there, it is easy to know what to say so that this does not happen.

The court clerk is the hot shot, even though it appears as if the judge is. The clerk is the trustee for the CQV owned by the state/province and it is s/he who is responsible for appointing the trustee and the executor for a constructive trust — that particular court case. So, s/he appoints the judge as trustee (the one to administer the trust) and appoints the prosecutor as executor of the trust. The executor is ultimately liable for the charge because it was s/he who brought the case into court (created the constructive trust) on behalf of the state/province which charged the CQV trust. Only an executor/prosecutor can initiate/create a constructive trust and we all know the maxim of law: Whoever creates the controversy holds the liability and whoever holds the liability must provide the remedy. This is why all attorneys are mandated to bring their checkbooks to court because if it all goes wrong for them…meaning either they fail to transfer their liability onto the alleged defendant, or the alleged defendant does not accept their offer of liability, then someone has to credit the trust account in order to off-set the debt. Since the prosecutor is the one who issues bogus paper and charges the trust with an infraction, it is the Prosecutor/Executor (“PE”) who is in the hot seat. When the Name (of the trust), e.g.: JOHN DOE, is called by the Judge aka Administrator aka Trustee (“JAT”), we can stand and ask… “Are you saying that the trust which you are now administrating is the JOHN DOE trust?” This establishes that we know that the Name is a trust, not a live man. What’s the Judge’s first question? “What’s your name?” or “State your name for the record”. We must be very careful not to identify with the name of the trust because doing so makes us the trustee. What does this tell you about the judge? If we know that the judge is the trustee, then we also know that the judge is the Name, but only for this particular, constructive trust (numbered court case). Now, think about all the times that Judges have become so frustrated by our refusal to admit to being the Name that they issue a warrant and then, as soon as the man leaves, he is arrested. How idiotic is that? They must feel foolish for saying, “John Doe is not in court , so I’m issuing a warrant for his arrest” and then, the man whom they just admitted is NOT there is arrested because he IS there. Their desperation makes them insane. They must get us to admit to being the name, or they pay, and we must not accept their coercion, or we pay. Because the Judge is the trustee — a precarious position, the best thing to say, in that case, is “JOHN DOE is, indeed, in the court!” Point to the Judge. “It is YOU! As trustee, YOU are JOHN DOE, today, aren’t you?!” During their frustration over our not admitting to being a trust name — the trustee and/or executor of the trust, we ought to ask who they are. “Before we go any further, I need to know who YOU are.” Address the clerk of the court — the trustee for the CQV trust owned by the state/province, “Are you the CQV’s trustee who has appointed this judge as administrator and trustee of the constructive trust case #12345? Did you also appoint the prosecutor as executor of this constructive trust?” Then point to the Judge: “So you are the trustee”, then point to the prosecutor, “and you are the executor? And I’m the beneficiary, so, now we know who’s who and, as beneficiary, I authorize you to handle the accounting and dissolve this constructive trust. I now claim my body, so I am collapsing the CQV trust which you have charged, as there is no value in it. You have committed fraud against all laws!” Likely, we will not get that far before the Judge will order “Case dismissed” or, even more likely, the PE, as he clings tightly to his checkbook, will call, “We withdraw the charges”. We have exposed their fraud of the CQV trust which exists only on presumptions. The CQV has no corpus, no property, ergo, no value. Trusts are created only upon the conveyance of property and can exist only if there is value in the trust. But there is no value in the CQV trust, yet, they continue to charge the trust. That is fraud! The alleged property is we men and women whom they have deemed to be incompetent, dead, abandoned, lost, bankrupts, or minors, but that is an illusion so, if we claim our body, then we collapse the presumption that the trust has value.

They are operating in fraud — something we’ve always known, but now we know how they do it. Our having exposed their fraud gives them only three options:

1. They can dissolve the CQV trust — the one for which the clerk of the court is trustee and from which s/he created a constructive trust — the case — for which s/he appointed the judge and prosecutor titles which hold temporary liability — trustee and executor, respectively, but they cannot dissolve the CQV or the entire global system will collapse because they cannot exist without our energy which they obtain via that CQV trust.

2. They can enforce the existing rules of trust law which means, as trustee, they can setoff their debt and leave us alone. Now they know that we are onto their fraud and every time they go into court to administer a trust account; they will not know if we are the one who will send them to jail. The trustee (judge) is the liable party who will go to jail, and the executor (prosecutor) is the one who enforces this. This is why they want us to take on both titles, because then, not only do we go to jail but also, by signing their paper, we become executor and enforce our own sentence. They cannot afford to violate the ecclesiastical canon laws, out of fear of ending their careers, so they are, again, trapped with no place to run.

3. They can dismiss the cases before they even take the risk of our exposing their fraud…which also makes no sense because then their careers, again, come to a screeching halt. What’s a court clerk to do!? Pretty soon, none of these thugs will take any cases because the risk is too great. This will be the end of the court system. ‘Bout bloody time, eh? Knowledge — not procedure — is power.

The means by which we have attempted to assuage our problems, inflicted upon us by the PTW (powers that were) have all been superficial, compared to the origins of all the black magic, superstition, satanic ritualism, trickery, mind-control, and clandestine practices. Under commercial law, dating back to the Code of Ur-Nammu — around 2100 BCE — the use of another’s property without permission puts one into dishonor and makes him liable for any debts. So, our using UCC forms, bills of exchange, AFV, or bonds, and altering documents of the Roman System can create penalties, as this is trading and/or using the property of a corporation we do not own…the birth certificate proves that the “name” is, in fact, the property of the corporation which issued it. We can do all the paper perfectly but, in the end, they say, “Sorry; you’re not one of us.” But now, we get to inflict fear onto them. When we are forced to court, knowing that the Judge acts as the Trustee and the prosecutor acts as Executor of the CQV Trusts is empowering. It gives us two choices: 1. If we wish to expose the fraud of presumptions, by which the CQV trusts still exist, then the court is the perfect opportunity to have them dissolved or to prove the fraud because the Trustee is sitting on the bench. Dissolving the first CQV, dissolves them all; or, 2. we must know that everything the judge says — even if it sounds like a command, order, or sentence — is actually an offer which we can choose to decline: (“I do not consent; I do not accept your offer”). This is a fundamental principle of testamentary trusts…the beneficiary can accept or decline what the trustee offers.

A Cestui Que Vie Trust is a fictional concept. It is a Temporary Testamentary Trust, first created during the reign of Henry VIII of England through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540 and updated by Charles II, through the CQV Act of 1666, wherein an Estate may be effected for the Benefit of a Person presumed lost or abandoned at “sea” and therefore assumed “dead” after seven (7) years. Additional presumptions, by which such a Trust may be formed, were added in later statutes to include bankrupts, minors, incompetents, mortgages, and private companies. The original purpose of a CQV Trust was to form a temporary Estate for the benefit of another because some event, state of affairs, or condition prevented them from claiming their status as living, competent, and present, before a competent authority. Therefore, any claims, history, statutes, or arguments that deviate in terms of the origin and function of a CQV Trust, as pronounced by these canons, is false and automatically null and void. A Beneficiary under Estate may be either a Beneficiary or a CQV Trust. When a Beneficiary loses direct benefit of any Property of the higher Estate placed in a CQV Trust on his behalf, he does not “own” the CQV Trust; he is only the beneficiary of what the Trustees of the CQV Trust choose to provide. As all CQV Trusts are created on presumption, based upon original purpose and function, such a Trust cannot be created if these presumptions can be proven not to exist. Since 1933, when a child is borne in a State (Estate) under inferior Roman law, three (3) Cestui Que (Vie) Trusts are created upon certain presumptions specifically designed to deny, forever, the child any rights of Real Property, any Rights to be free, and any Rights to be known as man or woman, rather than a creature or animal, by claiming and possessing their Soul or Spirit. The Executors or Administrators of the higher Estate willingly and knowingly: 1. convey the beneficial entitlements of the child, as Beneficiary, into the 1st Cestui Que (Vie) Trust in the form of a Registry Number by registering the Name, thereby also creating the Corporate Person and denying the child any rights to Real Property; and,

2. claim the baby as chattel to the Estate. The slave baby contract is then created by honoring the ancient tradition of either having the ink impression of the baby’s feet onto the live birth record, or a drop of its blood, as well as tricking the parents to signing the baby away through the deceitful legal meanings on the live birth record which is a promissory note, converted into a slave bond, sold to the private reserve bank of the estate, and then conveyed into a 2nd and separate CQV Trust, per child, owned by the bank. When the promissory note reaches maturity and the bank is unable to “seize” the slave child, a maritime lien is lawfully issued to “salvage” the lost property and is monetized as currency issued in series against the CQV Trust.

3. claim the child’s soul via the Baptismal Certificate. Since 1540 and the creation of the 1st CQV Act, deriving its power from the Papal Bull of Roman Cult leader Pope Paul III, 1540, when a child is baptized and a Baptismal Certificate is issued, the parents have gifted, granted, and conveyed the soul of the baby to a “3rd” CQV Trust owned by Roman Cult, which has held this valuable property in its vaults ever since. Since 1815, this 3rd Crown of the Roman Cult and 3rd CQV Trust representing Ecclesiastical Property has been managed by the BAR as the reconstituted “Galla” responsible, as Grim Reapers, for reaping the souls. Each Cestui Que Vie Trust, created since 1933, represents one of the 3 Crowns representing the three claims of property of the Roman Cult: Real Property (on Earth), Personal Property (body), and Ecclesiastical Property (soul). Each corresponds exactly to the three forms of law available to the Galla of the BAR Courts: corporate commercial law (judge is the ‘landlord’), maritime and canon law (judge is the banker), and Talmudic law (judge is the priest). What is the real power of a court ‘judge’? Given what has been revealed about the foundations of Roman Law, what is the real hidden power of a judge when we face court? Is it their superior knowledge of process and procedure or of magic? Or is it something simpler and far more obvious? It is unfortunate that much of the excitement about Estates and Executors has deliberately not revealed that an Estate, by definition, has to belong to a Trust — to be specific, a Testamentary Trust or CQV Trust. When we receive legal paper or have to appear in court, it is these same CQV Trusts which have our rights converted into the property contained within them. Instead of being the Trustee, or the Executor, or Administrator, we are merely the Beneficiary of each CQV Trust, granted only beneficial and equitable use of certain property, never legal title. So, if the Roman Legal System assumes we are merely the beneficiary of these CQV Trusts, when we go to court, who represents the Trustee and Office of Executor? We all know that all cases are based upon the judge’s discretion which often defies procedures, statutes, and maxims of law. Well, they are doing what any Trustee or Executor, administering a trust in the presence of the beneficiary, can do under Roman Law and all the statutes, maxims, and procedures are really for show because under the principles of Trust Law, as first formed by the Roman Cult, a Trustee has a wide latitude, including the ability to correct any procedural mistakes, by obtaining the implied or tacit consent of the beneficiary, to obviate any mistakes. The judge is the real and legal Name. The judge is the trust, itself. We are the mirror image to them — the ghost — the dead. It is high sorcery, trickery, and subterfuge that has remained “legal” for far too long. Spread the word.

ROLES of PARTIES to the TRUST If we were to act as anything other than the beneficiary of the Cestui Que Vie (CQV) trust, we could assist in settling these matters but, as the Clerk is the Trustee of the CQV trust, s/he has appointed the judge as trustee and the prosecutor as executor of the constructive trust (case #…), so it is their job to settle the accounting. The prosecutor charged the trust account with some infraction, and created the debt, so it is he who is liable for repaying and balancing it. They break their own rules, by their fraud of failing to perform their duties. Saying, “I will appeal this, as a matter of law, to a higher court, if court rules are broken” means the judge won’t get his commission, based upon his fraud. TRUSTEESHIP Since no one can be trustee of both the CQV (BC) Trust and the Constructive Trust (Case#….), at same time, they do a “bait and switch”. They use the CQV trust to create a temporary, constructive trust — the case. The matter/case is a trust apart from, but attached to, the CQV trust. The bonds are added to the constructive trust, at the clerk’s office.

THREE FORMS of COURT 1. UCC, equity, commerce: it’s all about property rights 2. Maritime, Canon: only now can the judge cite for contempt, impose fines, jail time, etc. 3. Talmud: the judge returns as priest. Most do not go this far, as, by now, he already knows that we know, and so he knows it’s over for him.

RECESS When the judge calls for a recess, it means he is going for a bigger stick. He intends to change courts. We ought to say, “I do not consent to the form of court being changed. For and on record, I object to judge changing the form of court from Equity to Canon/ Admiralty. If you insist, I’ll reassert my rights upon your return.”

FORECLOSURE The clerk is the Senior Ecclesiastical Officer and can assign Title over to the bank. We are the tenant, the mortgage is the lien/lease/loan. We do not and cannot ‘own’ anything. The bank does NOT want us to pay the mortgage which is the interest, aka rent, because they want us to be delinquent, i.e.: incompetent in performance — which is the main point of the contract — in order that we lose our claim. When we pay some form of rent, even if only $50 a month, we change our status from ‘delinquent’ to ‘competent’ and this allows us to remain in honor which is the entire matter. They do not want us to behave honorably. The bank/court cannot force us to leave property, yet, we must address our “standing”. Then we can use their procedure against them. We must challenge the CQV Trust. If one gets to court re: foreclosure: “As a tenant in this matter, with only ‘right of use’ of property, I ask for a stay as I haven’t exhausted my administrative options.” They must forgive, in open court, or they have lost their Ecclesiastical authority. A woman told the attorney for the bank, “Just so you know, we will be coming in at a superior, property-holder, competent position and we know and understand the three forms of court.” The attorney rang her later and said the case is dropped.

PLEA When asked how we plea, we can say, “I wish to ask, as a matter of law, are you presiding as Trustee of this matter — the Constructive Trust — case #1234?” If a negative response, “Without seeking an appeal to another court, as a matter of law, I merely ask, are you presiding as administrator of CQV trust, from which the Constructive Trust is created?” It is not good to mention “contract” because they DO have a contract…with our parents, which is how the CQV trust was created. JAIL There are 3 CQV trusts: name, flesh, soul. Due to this, we have no property rights, so they can ‘lawfully’ hold us, but if a friend of one who is incarcerated establishes himself as competent, he can demand that his property be returned. So, he changes his standing and demands his property be returned, as he has a higher claim. I know of a woman who was being transported from jail to prison. When she arrived, she was asked her name. As a body, she was worthless to them; they needed the name and they needed her to BE the name. She surprised them by saying, “If you don’t know who I am, how can you imprison me?” …and they let her go because she refused to give them the name of the account which they intended to charge and against which to float the bond.

ALLOCUTION This is the time when the judge must quote all law he is using to sentence, and it is also when we can comment on their offer of sentence. You are free to decline. Anything done or signed under duress has no legal standing. To “comply” under duress is not the same as to “consent”. “I state, for and on the record, that I was under threat of physical assault, so I signed. Now, I am lodging my appeal to a higher court, as a matter of law, because all I said or did was under duress and therefore unlawful. I was psychologically and physically abused.” If we, as beneficiary, accept the sentence, aka benefit, then they make us executor which means that it is we who enforce our own sentencing.

COURT I still will not go to court. No one has the authority to tell me what to do. What’s the worst that can happen to the representative, when he can prove he is someone other than the trust/trustee. We must show our competence by asking questions, politely. We can stand at bar and say, “I have an important paper to give to clerk. May I ask, with respect, as a matter of law, before I cross bar, what role each of you is playing here today, with respect to the trust which is being charged.” Ask a second and THIRD time. “As a matter of law, is the Prosecutor acting as Executor of the Trust and are you acting as Trustee of the Trust of this matter?” They’ll likely be rude, but don’t sink to their level. “Respectfully, it is a matter of law for me to know the roles we’re all playing and then I’ll be willing to cross the bar and engage.” If you don’t answer, “I’ll be lodging an appeal and I appeal now that this matter be suspended so I can request an interlocutory argument and have this question answered. ” The judge does not want the case appealed because, if it is over-turned, then he will pay, from his own trust account which is his commissions. We are of absolutely NO value to them until we give them details of an account which they can charge. They cannot gain from us unless we give them the name of a trust to charge. The name, not we, is the only value we can offer. “Are you JOHN DOE?” “I couldn’t possibly be a trust account.” We do not require a name for anything other than commercial purposes — school, services, doctor, memberships, bank account, benefits, etc. This is why they are so adamant that we carry “ID”. What if we had nothing to identify the trust? Their system would crash if they couldn’t get any of us to BE the trust, in order to authorize them to use it. They would starve to death. We, as just plain-old men and women, without names, are no good to them. We are not slaves via our bodies; we are slaves, only via the account. In California, the people complained that the “undocumented Mexican immigrants”, aka “illegal aliens”, were causing violence, crimes, vandalism, etc. and the cops and the courts were doing nothing about it. It seemed as if “illegal aliens” were the problem. But, the District Attorney said, “Anything short of murder we won’t prosecute.” If only the people knew what he meant, they would shift their rage from the “illegal aliens” to the DA and his ilk. “Undocumented” means there is no trust account to charge, which is why the government wants them all to have driver licenses. The DA won’t prosecute because he can’t; there is nothing and no one to charge. Men and women cannot be charged; only trust accounts can be charged and, since there is no account, due to no documents to create them, there is no way to make money off these “immigrants”. Murder is a different story. This means the “illegals” took out of the commerce game someone with an account and so, in that case, the DA will prosecute. Wait until the people of California figure out that the real “problem” of the “undocumented Mexican immigrants” is, as always, “ALL ABOUT MONEY”. What about the cost to repair and compensate? Well, it comes from the Public Trust, as does everything else which requires public funding. They want us connected to ‘Named’ trust accounts which make up the Public Trust, solely to confiscate our cash. This is tantamount to “uninsured” drivers or people without passports. We don’t really require car insurance or passports because all payments for injuries come from the public trust which WE have already funded. Causing us to believe that we are “personally liable” is how they steal our cash. I think the real question is, how can we render worthless the CQV trust account, so there will be nothing for them to charge, even if they do track down the account? If we all did this, it would end this insane system. They would prefer to keep it alive but the only way to do this, once we threaten to kill the accounts, is to begin to behave honorably and follow their rules. “To find your life you must lose it”.