Login form
Main » Articles » Articles

Court Tactics: Fight For Your Rights

** ”Please take into account the following before hiring an attorney for a criminal matter, or any other matter. First we must ask to what or whom is an attorneys first duty? Perhaps it would help if we consult the latest (2009) Corpus Juris Secundum (C.J.S.) legal encyclopedia, volume 7, section 4 for the answer: – An attorney’s first priority is to the courts and the public, not the client. As a client, you are considered a "ward” to the court. A  war is anyone who is considered as an infant or as an adult who is NOT of sound mind or intelligence.”**

Going to court is like getting a divorce. It’s the last option you face after trying to salvage the situation. Before being drug into the courts, where they can use legalese, and where you have to challenge jurisdiction, and literally be an expert in sovereign tactics in order to win,….it is far better to win your case before ever reaching the courts. When going to court, you will be presented with phrases like , "Do you understand?”, "How do you plea?”, "Have you ever broken the law before?”. These are all attempts to create verbal contracts.

However, let us remember, that all human beings, including yourself, have the unlimited right to create contracts, both written and verbally. That right can be offered and extended to the judges as well. Before reaching the courts, it is wise to submit affidavits, plea documents, motions to dismiss, and so forth. That way, IF you are summoned to court, you can file yourself to appear as in a "Special Appearance”. And once you show up, if you have already submitted the recommended then you can use legalese against them, and force them into your own legal contracts by asking the judge….

"Did you receive my affidavit?”  ….”Do you understand what has been stated in my affidavit?”.

If the judge says, "Yes, I received your affidavit, and I understand it.” If he says this, then he is stating that what you have said within this affidavit is TRUE. If the judge says, "I did not receive your affidavit”, or "I do not understand your affidavit”, then you can ask for a recess until the affidavit can be found, or you can make a claim that the judge cannot understand your written statement, therefore, according to case law See Bates v. State, 620 So.2d 745. 746 ,   (ANY AFFIDAVIT LEFT UN-REFUTED MUST BE ACCEPTED AS TRUTH).

Prove to the courts that the flesh and blood "you” is not the same as the corporate fiction written on the birth certificate.

Consider having a trial by declaration- Do not appear in court.

Before I go into any type of defense that can be used, we must first understand "jurisdiction.”

- Equity Law, which once controlled America’s Corporate Courts, has been replaced with Admiralty/Maritime Law, pursuant to Title 28 of the United States Code and the Judiciary Act of 1789. This is the Law of Merchants and Sailors. Under Admiralty/Maritime Law, the courts presume you owe the mortgage or the tax or that you committed a crime defined as a Criminal Statute and it is your obligation to prove you’re innocent! This means, you’re guilty until you prove you’re innocent, which is the same standard and procedure used in a Military Court Martial. Haven’t we always been told that "You are innocent until proven guilty?” 

Lies, Lies and more Lies! We are not free men; we are slaves, and bound to our Masters by adhesion contracts and secret Trusts. The goal of the Masters and their agents, our elected officials, is to keep the people oppressed and subservient to them. As the Masters’ agents, they utilize propaganda techniques through government-controlled schools, churches, the media and mind control by force and or the threat of force through the courts and police enforcement. Police officers in America have been pumped full of more bullshit than a manure spreader and because of their trust, public school conditioning and training, they haven’t the ability to see what is going on. Many have been conditioned by previous military service not to think for themselves but just follow orders, which makes many of them as dangerous as a Terrorist! Now ask yourself – who are the
real Terrorists in America? Guess what? The Constitution isn’t for the Police either, and still they are forced to swear an oath to defend it. The more regulations, statutes and codes created, and the greater the number of regulatory officers and agencies created to enforce them, the greater the Masters’ control over their slaves; and that is mind control by force and threat of force, by the very people we rely on, to protect and serve!
At some point in history the foreign Agents in control of our Federal Government, decided that they needed to create Federal Police Agencies to protect them. I can’t blame them! If I were a part of a conspiracy that could result in the American people hanging me for Treason, I’d want bodyguards, too. Now, if you are one of these public officials, how do you justify the employment and expense of bodyguards, when nobody is trying to injure you, and you don’t want anyone to know that you are committing Treason? Instead of confessing your motives, you must find a way to accomplish your objective and blame it on someone else.-
* excerpt from

When fighting any statue, code, or ordinance in court where Corpus Delicti cannot be found, it is unwise to appear in court, as you are contracting yourself to their jurisdictional  and their maritime rules. Just as if you purchase a movie ticket from a theater  or visit the residency of a property owner, you are indiscriminately agreeing to wishes of the property honor, and may or may not be contracting with certain terms.  There are basically two ways to fight codes and statues. 1. Challenge Jurisdiction- do not enter a plea unless the courts can place you under the jurisdiction of Corpus Delicti.  2. Defend yourself in court with Constitutional and/or common law arguments preferably as a plaintiff with your counter-claim.

Challenges To Jurisdiction
A. Special Appearance

1. Traditional View
Since presence is one way of asserting jurisdiction over a party, without special appearance, any appearance in court, even to challenge jurisdiction, would invite a court to assert jurisdiction over the party. With special appearance a party appears only to challenge jurisdiction. If the challenge is successful, the case is dismissed, and the suit must be re­filed with a new assertion of jurisdiction. If the challenge fails, the party is still present to challenge the merits of the case.

2. Modern View
Special appearance has been superseded by federal and other courts. In these courts, a defendant may now challenge jurisdiction by filing a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction without being subject to jurisdiction for filing the motion. Many courts also allow a special appearance for in rem and quasi in rem actions.

Collateral Attack A defendant defaulting on an action may collaterally attack a default judgment asserted in another jurisdiction on the grounds that the first action was asserted in a forum without proper jurisdiction. This often occurs where an award granted in one jurisdiction is to be enforced in a second jurisdiction.

Using Logic and Corpus Delicti principles in Court

Corpus Delicti- 

In essence Corpus delecti of crimes refers to a palpable harm. Where there is no violation of an established right there can be no wrong.

Rights are of two kinds and they are of the person jura personarum and to control external objects, jura rerum.

Wrongs are also of two kinds and they are either public or private. Public wrongs are called crimes or public offenses whereas private wrongs are called torts and either involve the breach of a duty of care, a wrongful trespass against the person or property of another and breaches of agreement or contract.

In every instance there must be a palpable harm or injury to the rights of another coupled with mens rea or guilty mind or in the alternative an element of negligence so severe as to be called criminal.

( A typical layman defense against a traffic ticket or License infraction) -

There are dozens of court cases stating that Traveling is a RIGHT, not to be impeded by
government. Travelers who use automobiles should have the same rights as the pedestrians and bikers who use the roads.  In fact, most of the roads are paid for via the GASOLINE TAX. Everytime you fill up your tank, you are helping to pay for the roads, therefore you are entitled to use them. When making your case in court, you have to state case studies, court upholdings (common law), and most importantly, use logic. In this case there are several basic defenses you could mount if you were fighting a speeding ticket for example. (or any victimless crime)

    1. Who is the victim in this case? I would like to call him/her to the stand. Since the state is not a person, then there can be no logical plaintiff.

    2. What property was damaged and/or what property was stolen? Was anyone hurt? If there is none, then I cannot be expected to reimburse anyone.

    3. The officer used his emergency lights when he pulled me over, however, there was no emergency. Black’s law dictionary defines an emergency as – n. a sudden, unforeseen happening which requires action to correct or to protect lives and/or property. Since there was no lives being endangered the officer violated his oath of office. Sir, isn’t it considered illegal for an officer to flash his emergency lights when there is no emergency?

    4. The courts have asked me to pay my fines in Federal Reserve Notes. Article I section X, Clause I of the US constitution states that only gold and silver can be used when solving any debt. To ask me to pay in Federal Reserve notes violates the constitution, and by asking me to do so, all government parties involved have violated their oath of office to uphold the US constitution.

    5. Am I property holder to these roads? Have I not paid for them by purchasing gasoline and being subject to the gasoline tax? Does my contribution grant me a right to travel upon them , since I am a shareholder in the property?

    6.    Have you read our State’s constitution (to officer)? What does Article I section II state? . If he cannot answer you will say, "If this officer cannot even recite the second article, located at the very beginning of our states constitution, then how is he fit to enforce such laws if he is not familiar with our local oaths? " Article I section II states that – government being instituted for the common benefit, the doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind-
    Wouldn’t the courts and our jurors agree that many of our laws are arbitrary to our lives, liberty and property? Black’s Law Dictionary describes Arbitrary as, "adj. not supported by fair or substantial cause or reason.”
    ————————————————————————————————-(According to 6th Amendment you have a right to a trial with a jury of your peers- However, be advised when pleading to a jury)

Now, at this point the courts may be very angry with your arguments, or they may be shuttering in fear. These are just "basic” defenses. If you are involved in a court case that has no jury, you can appeal a decision and ask for a jury trial. This way, if common law does not sway the judge, then perhaps you can appeal this message to "We the People”. When fighting a charge in the presence of a jury, making heart felt speeches can be a good or bad thing, as long as you do not linger or ramble. Remind the jurors that they too have been subject to victimless crimes. Remind them that they have the power of Jury Nullification. They have the power to set you free, even if the courts, the judges, and the laws do not agree. The jury has the power to decide whether a law is just or unjust.

Having a jury trial may seem like a no-brainer because you are appealing to normal citizens who may sympathize with you, and have the power to nullify a law, even if you have admitted to breaking it. However there are some drawbacks towards having a jury trial.

    1. Jurors are picked from a large lottery of people. The jury is selected by the courts. Each potential juror is interviewed to make sure that he will not show bias towards a certain issue. A juror who expresses strong pro-marijuana beliefs, will probably not be selected to serve during a case which involves marijuana. The District Attorney’s goal is to build a jury that sympathizes with the courts.

    2. After you have made your case to the Jury, the District Attorney will address the jury and remind them of our so called "laws”. He will do his best to feed the jurors propaganda in order to intimidate their sensible consciousness.

    3. Jurors are selected from all walks of life. The average citizen is very politically unaware and uneducated on common law, the constitution, and civil liberties.  The average US citizen does not know what the Patriot Act or the NDAA is, nor do they know that Barack Obama and George Bush, even though being from different parties, agree on many issues that attack our civil liberties, and both have committed atrocious war crimes. The average juror is a subscriber to the mainstream.

If you choose to appeal to a jury, your approach will be opposite to that of a trial where no jury is found. When going solely against the state, you will have to play word games, and use many examples, cite laws, and reference case studies. You will have to learn the language of legalese. Remember, the police and the judges are masters of legalese. They will use anything you say against you, and contort your context as if you were indeed a criminal, even if you’re not. Consider that many innocent men have confessed to terrible crimes after being interrogated, threatened, or tortured under the Patriot Act. Remain silent when dealing with police. You have the right to plead your 5th amendment rights.

The FBI often calls my telephone due to my political activities, asking me to visit their offices for an interview. I always decline. Remain silent. Save your words for court.

Now back to the topic at hand…, when dealing with a juror, it is a balancing act. You will have to seem intelligent and professional by stating case studies, common law, constitutional law, and use slight legalese terms in order to impress. However, you will always have to simplify things into layman’s terms, speak to the heart of the jury, and romanticize your plight. In short, mimic the behaviors of a politician. Get to the heart of the jury, make them not only think, but BELIEVE, that you are indeed the good guy in this case. Call into question the supposed evidence used against you. Attempt to not only make the jury sympathize with you, but also implant seeds of doubt into their minds. Make them question the validity of the case all together.

Depending on your personality, and the case itself, it can be better or worse to have a jury.  In most cases, I would say, having a jury would be an advantage, since Nullification is available, whereas without a jury, the discretion is in the hands of the judge alone. Also be forewarned about stating case studies and common law. Here is a typical response and answer that you can give when a judge shoots down your efforts to cite common law.

"Judge, by what authority do you overturn the standing decisions of the United States supreme Court? You sat on the bench while I read that case law. Now how do you, a District Court Judge, have the authority to overturn decisions of the Supreme Court?” He says, "Oh, those were old decisions. They no longer apply.” I say, "Those cases are standing decisions. They have never been overturned. It matters not how old they are; my honor, you have no right to overturn a standing decision of the United States Supreme Court in a District Court.”      You may be in danger of being held for contempt at this point. But, do not be afraid to hold the judge accountable to his oath of office and remind him of his limited powers, especially as a district magistrate/Judge.  Be sure to be as respectful as possible. Do your best to make friends with the judge, even compliment him on his service, but remain diligent and steadfast in your defense. It’s a delicate balance of standing your ground, while not being insulting.

*Considering that Obama-Care is 2,700 pages long, The Patriot Act being 363 pages long, and with our Federal Law-book containing thousands upon thousands of codes, regulations, and ordinances, most politicians do not read legislations, before voting on them. Judges and police officers are just as ignorant. And who can blame them? There is no way any human being could memorize so many "laws”. Our US constitution is less than 50 pages long, and it tells us how to run our entire country, yet a simple bill regarding property rights can often be in the thousands. We need law reform, and we need it now! A good way to do this is to force our politicians to read a bill in its entirety before they are allowed to vote. Very few politicians actually read bills they vote on. Congressman Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich and Justin Amash, being the few exceptions.

Jurisdiction- UCC, and Admiralty law – *All credit goes to Howard J Freeman

Advanced Defenses



By Howard J. Freeman



"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.”

Since we often deal with usurpation of power by the hirelings of government, it is not a single lawless action that we must contend with, but rather a 180 degree turning in the ”order of power” making the sovereign citizens, under "de jure” government, into subjects of the bureaucrats in our present "de facto” government.”

We all know that true "law” leaves everyone free to do as one pleases so long as there is no damage done to life, liberty or property of another. Upon a sworn complaint of damage by a fellow sovereign citizen, one may be brought into a Court of Law and ordered to pay for proven damage to another. That is where true law ends. When we come upon something ”called” law which compels us to perform in some specified manner, we know that what is ”called” law in that instance, is "not true law,” but that it properly comes under what our Constitution terms as "equity.” Equity Jurisdictions are authorized in our Constitution, and they stem from our unlimited right to contract.


An Equity Jurisdiction compels performance upon the exact letter of any contract obligation. So any statute, ordinance or regulation which compels us to perform in a specified manner must, of necessity, involve a contract of some kind: be it written, oral or implied. It is around "implied” contracts that licensed attorney legalese has worked to "use our Constitution” to destroy our rights declared to be inalienable rights by the Constitution and unalienable by the Declaration of Independence, the Supreme Law of the Land and of the Law of Nations. The Constitution is still an obstacle in the path of those who seek complete and absolute mastery over the citizens of this nation. The obstacle in the path is, that State Statutes or City Ordinances that compel performance around a contractual base of American contractual law must be considered "Civil” Statutes or "Civil” ordinances to be enforceable in an Equity Jurisdiction, and Article III, Sec. 2, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution states that any Civil controversy in which a State is a party, cannot be tried in a State Court, but that the U.S. Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in such cases. So, States and Municipalities, in order to try violations of State Statutes or Municipal Ordinances in their own Courts, have to declare that said violations are of a "Criminal” nature, since State and Municipal Courts are empowered with a Criminal Jurisdiction to hear offenses against the people of the City. It is in this area that the Sixth Amendment approach to a jurisdictional challenge is effective, and it works as follows:


Suppose you are stopped for not using your car’s seat belts in a State which has a statute that compels performance in the fastening of seat belts in any moving motor vehicle. It is foolish to talk to the arresting officer; demand of him only that you be tried in a Court of Record. At arraignment in such a Court the Judge will read the charge, and the State Statute that you supposedly violated. He will call the Statute Law, but you know that it is not true law, because it compels performance, but let the Judge have his say because your chance will come later. After the Judge reads the charge, and the "law” you violated, he will ask if you understand the charge against you. Always say "No.” The Judge will then ask what it is about that simple charge, that even a fool could understand, yet you do not understand? Tell him that the Sixth Amendment to the U. S. Constitution requires him to inform you of the ”nature” and "cause” of the action against you. Ask him: "Judge, is the action against me in this Court a Civil Action, or a Criminal Action?” The Judge, now answering under your Sixth Amendment authority to ask, will tell you that the action before his Court in this particular case is a Criminal Action. Now, while you have the Judge responding to your first question, ask him the question, that he does not want to answer.

Question #2 is as follows:

"Judge, I need further instruction regarding the ‘nature’ of this charge pending against me in order that I may properly defend against it. As you know, Judge, there are two separate and distinct, Criminal Jurisdictions authorized for this Court by the U. S. Constitution: One is for Criminal Action under a Common Law Jurisdiction, and the other is a Condition of Contract violation under the Criminal Aspects of an Admiralty Jurisdiction. As you well know, Judge,the defenses for a Criminal Action under a Common Law Jurisdiction are distinctly different from the defenses under an Admiralty Jurisdiction. Which Jurisdiction: Common Law or Admiralty, is this Criminal Action pending against me to be tried under?”

There are four possible responses that you will receive from the above question. I will cover all four:

Response #1:

"This is a Crime against the People of this State so it is a Criminal Action under a Common Law Jurisdiction.”

With that response, you now repeat into the record of the case as follows: "Thank you Judge, let the record of this particular case against this particular individual (include your name) show that this Court has gone on record as stating that the pending Criminal Action in this case is to be tried under a Common Law Jurisdiction.” If the Judge does not dispute you at this point, you have set a Common Law Case in concrete, and no future Court can alter that fact.

Now you can ask that the case be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, since there is no injured party in this case to give the Court a cause of action under a Common Law Jurisdiction. Also, in a Common Law Jurisdiction, you have ALL of your rights from the Magna Charta through the Constitution, and it is a felony under 18 U.S.C. Section 241 for any Judge to deny you any right guaranteed by the Supreme Organic Law of the land (under said Criminal Action under a Common Law Jurisdiction, which is now established in the record of the case.)

You may put the Judge on Constructive Notice of the above law, which if violated after Constructive Notice of same, causes the Judge to lose his immune status as a judge, opening him to trial as an individual on the felony charges.


Response #2: (of the Judge to question #2)

"I am sorry. I am not here to advise you on the law. If you want answers to such questions, I advise you to contact a licensed attorney.”

YOU: "But, your honor, the Constitution requires this Court to tell me the nature of this Criminal Action pending against me. How can I properly defend myself, which I am lawfully entitled to do, if I am not told the type of Jurisdiction the case is to be heard under?

THE JUDGE: "I told you before, if you want answers to legal questions of this nature I advise you to secure the services of a licensed attorney.”

YOU: "Thank you, your honor, I would like the record of this case to show that this court has refused my request made, under the authority of the Sixth Amendment to the U. S.Constitution, to be informed of the ‘nature’ of the jurisdiction by which this Criminal Action is to be tried, and would like the record to show that the Criminal Action pending against (your name) is a Criminal Action under a secret jurisdiction known only to licensed attorneys making it impossible for one to defend himself in Propera Persona.”

Response #3: (of the Judge to question #2)

THE JUDGE: "This case is to be tried under Statutory Jurisdiction.”

YOU: "Thank you, your honor. I am not acquainted with the Court rules for such a Jurisdiction. I will, however, accept such Jurisdiction if this Court, prior to trial date, will provide me with, or tell me where I can find a book containing the Rules of Criminal Procedure for Statutory Jurisdiction.”

Since there are no such rules published, the Judge will advise you to obtain the services of a licensed attorney. At that point, speak into the Court Record as listed in Response #2 that the Court intends to conduct a Criminal Action against you under a secret jurisdiction known only to licensed attorneys.


Response #4: (of the Judge to question #2)

THE JUDGE: "This case will be tried under an Admiralty Jurisdiction.”

YOU: "Thank you, my honor, but, as you know, an Admiralty Jurisdiction depends upon a valid international contract in dispute. I am not aware of having entered into any such contract and so I deny that any such contract exists. Will you have this prosecuting attorney prove into the record of this case that a valid international contract exists as a fact of law, and that I am a party to said contract, and that my being a party to said contract obligates me to obey this State Statute #___” etc.”


Most prosecuting attorneys would be at a loss to offer such proof. This takes the problem off the Judge’s back, and places it on the back of the prosecuting attorney (where it belongs!). Failure of proof of Admiralty Jurisdiction on his part is ground to have his action dismissed by the Court. Should you run into a learned prosecuting attorney, who would dare to expose the legalese by which the order of power in the United States has been turned upside down, allow him to proceed with his proof, which will be along this fashion:

"Your Honor, in 1933 the American People, being sovereigns in this country, voted Franklin D. Roosevelt into the position as their spokesman and president. In order to accomplish the task desired of him, Mr. Roosevelt had to spend more money than the sovereign citizens were willing to pay in taxes. This made it necessary for the people’s representative to borrow bank credit from the International Banking Houses. It was written into that loan contract that the loans of bank credit, in addition to the interest (usury) upon them were to be repaid in gold coin. By the year 1938 the International Banking Houses had extended their credit to the United States in excess of the gold coin, available for repayment of same, thus the former sovereign citizens of the Nation, through Mr. Roosevelt their representative, could no longer meet their contract obligations to pay their international debts in gold coin, and they lost their sovereign status under the Common Law, because of this default on the debt to the International banking houses, and the Bar Associations accommodated the situation by blending "law” with "equity” in 1938 in such a way as not to alarm the American citizens over their newly acquired servile status. As every licensed bar attorney knows, the rules of equity are quite different from the rules of law. American equity compels performance upon the letter of a contract obligation, or in the interest of the creditor in case of financial default, but it allows a jury trial for controversy above $20.00, and it outlaws debtors prisons.

However, the equity jurisdiction of International default on debt is tried in Admiralty Courts, which do not recognize any of the constitutional protections of American Equity Courts, since they are international. A Jury in an Admiralty Court is only advisory to the Chancellor (called Judge) who may rule contrary to a jury verdict if he wishes. Also Admiralty Courts impose Criminal penalty on those who fail to perform. The legislative bodies in America today, no longer pass Public "law” statutes, pursuant to the limitations upon such statutes by National and State Constitutions, but rather our legislative bodies in America are now the Sovereign, over the Courts and Executive officers, as well as over all of the so-called citizens, and their function is to pass Public "policy” statutes in the interest of the nation’s creditors, which civil statutes contain Criminal penalties under an Admiralty Jurisdiction. In this particular Public Policy Statute requiring the fastening of seat belts, the defendant is charged with a Criminal Action for his failure to perform within a public policy statute written in the interest of the Nations’ Creditors, who feel they want this man protected from his own careless behavior because dead men pay no taxes, and the nations’ Creditors need this man’s labor to help pay the International debt, which is in default. This Court has an Admiralty Jurisdiction over the person of this defendant in this Criminal Action, because he failed to perform according to the contract for the repayment of the nation’s debt.”

Your answer to the above is to challenge the validity of a contract to which you were not a direct party and you inform the Court that the validity of the international Contract, upon which this case rests, must be settled before the trial on issues may begin.


Category: Articles | Added by: JennaRose (2013-02-20)
Views: 3783 | Comments: 14 | Rating: 0.0/0
Total comments: 1
1 HeidiceW  
formal written marketing research proposal

Name *:
Email *:
Code *:
The Spoonfed Truth Facebook
All Laws Exist In A Fiction
Gullibility Factor Test
Who Is Running America
The Truth About The British Monarchy
Requirement For Consent
Corporate Government
Dispatch of Merchants
A Primer On Martial Law
How We Give Our Power Away
The Mark of the Beast
Freedom From De Facto Laws
  • Build Freedom
  • Freedom School
  • Four Winds
  • Sovereign Education
  • Foundation Of Truth
  • Search
    Copyright MyCorp © 2023 Create a free website with uCoz