FRAUD Case Citations!

Posted by: "Ed Curtis"   edatthebenson

Tue Aug 8, 2006 1:34 pm (PST)

I'm fighting for my life people, visit my site and help me TELL THEM! READ THIS SITE!

Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137
The Constitution of these United States is the supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law.

Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105
No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it, and attach a fee to it.

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, 373 US 262
If the state converts a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.

U.S. v. Bishop, 412 US 346
If you have relied on prior decisions of the supreme Court, you have the perfect defense for willfulness.

Owen v. Independence, 100 S.C.T. 1398, 445 US 622
Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a Constitutional right, from liability. For they are deemed to know the law.

Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 1974 Expounds upon Owen

Byers v. U.S., 273 U.S. 28
Unlawful search and seizure. Your rights must be interpreted in favor of the citizen.

Boyd v. U.S., 116 U.S. 616
The court is to protect against any encroachment of Constitutionally secured liberties.

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436
Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation, which would abrogate them.

Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425
An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.

Miller v. U.S., 230 F.2d. 486, 489
The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.

Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S. 742, 748
Waivers of Constitutional Rights, not only must they be voluntary, they must be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness.

If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being a gift of ALMIGHTY GOD, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.
Samuel Adams, 1772

United States v. Sandford, Fed. Case No.16, 221 (C.Ct.D.C. 1806)
In the early days of our Republic, prosecutor was simply anyone who voluntarily went before the grand Jury with a complaint.
Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958).
No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.

United States v Dougherty, 473 F 2d 1113, 1122.
The court states, ...Judge Miller, joined by Judges Prettyman, Danaher And Bastian, stated that the pro se right is statutory only, and therefore (a) defendant must assert the right in order to be entitled to it and (b) in any event no reversal was required since no prejudice could be discerned The Government says the pro se right is statutory and subject to extensive qualifications,discerning in the decisions seven factors on the basis of which the pro se right may be partially or entirely denied.

A bill of attainder is defined to be a legislative Act which inflects punishment without judicial trial
...where the legislative body exercises the office of judge, and assumes judicial magistracy, and pronounces on the guilt of a party without any of the forms or safeguards of a trial, and fixes the punishment.
In re De Giacomo, (1874) 12 Blatchf. (U.S.) 391, 7 Fed. Cas No. 3,747, citing Cummings v. Missouri, (1866) 4 Wall, (U.S.) 323.

US v Will, 449 US 200,216, 101 S Ct, 471, 66 LEd2nd 392, 406 (1980) Cohens V Virginia, 19 US (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5LEd 257 (1821)
When a judge acts where he or she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason.

Mattox v. U.S., 156 US 237, 243.
We are bound to interpret the Constitution in the light of the law as it existed at the time it was adopted.

S. Carolina v. U.S., 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905).
The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now.

United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876).
The people of the United States resident within any State are subject to two governments: one State, and the other National, but there need be no conflict between the two.

Grosjean v. American Press Co., 56 S.Ct. 444, 446, 297 U.S. 233, 80 LEd 660
Freedom in enjoyment and use of all of ones powers, faculties and property.

ARGERSINGER v. HAMLIN, 407 U.S. 25 (1972)
The right of an indigent defendant in a criminal trial to the assistance of counsel, which is guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment is not governed by the classification of the offense or by whether or not a jury trial is required. No accused may be deprived of his liberty as the result of any criminal prosecution, whether felony or misdemeanor, in which he was denied the assistance of counsel.
U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F.2d. 1021; U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F. 2d. 297, 299, 300 (1977)
Silence can only be equated with fraud when there is a legal and moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading. We cannot condone this shocking conduct... If that is the case we hope our message is clear. This sort of deception will not be tolerated and if this is routine it should be corrected immediately.

Morrison v. Coddington, 662 P. 2d. 155, 135 Ariz. 480(1983).
Fraud and deceit may arise from silence where there is a duty to speak the truth, as well as from speaking an untruth.

In regard to courts of record: If the court is not in the exercise of its general jurisdiction, but of some special statutory jurisdiction, it is as to such proceeding an inferior court, and not aided by presumption in favor of jurisdiction. 1 Smith's Leading Cases, 816

In regard to courts of inferior jurisdiction, if the record does not show upon its face the facts necessary to give jurisdiction, they will be presumed not to have existed. Norman v. Zieber, 3 Or at 202-03

It is interesting to note the repeated references to fraud in the above quotes. Therefore the meaning of fraud should be noted:

Fraud. An intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right. A false representation of a matter of fact which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. It consists of some deceitful practice or willful device, resorted to with intent to deprive another of his right, or in some manner to do him injury (Emphasis added) Blacks Law Dictionary Fifth Edition, page 594.

Then take into account the case of McNally v. U.S., 483 U.S. 350, 371-372, Quoting U.S. v Holzer, 816 F.2d. 304, 307
Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit includes the deliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation. A public official is a fiduciary toward the public, and if he deliberately conceals material information from them he is guilty of fraud.

My quest to find the *(&^$^%# that thinks me there property! open for debate!
test'; " type=text/css>


**NZ-FATHERS-Coalition** BIG 2 - DEMO/Picnic-PARLIAMENT Wellington -

Posted by: "Jim Bailey"   handsonequalparent

Tue Aug 8, 2006 1:38 pm (PST)

* **NZ-FATHERS-Coalition**


* BIG 2

* DEMO-/-Picnic-PARLIAMENT Wellington

* BOTHERING-/-HELEN at home in Auckland and others

* Sunday

* 3-Sept-06


* Keep BOTHERING those who damage our
**Whole-NATURAL-Biological-FAMILES** directly/Indirectly

* LINK > Auckland
<,2106,3757544a12855,00.html> Lawyers may be off the hook - We will see - Well they did not seem to keen to negotiate at the meeting - Jimmy Bagnall and I stayed till the bitter end to be told we would be contacted - Keep BOTHERING

* Many others damage our FAMILIES keep BOTHERING

* We must stop FAMILY Carnage endorsed by NZ Law and Social Policy and perpetrated for Narcissistic gain by many.

* The 300,000 Kids without DAD and some without MUM must be rescued from STATE ENDORSED ABUSE.

The Auckland BOTHERING crew have decided to BOTHER Helen and others onFATHERS Day 06

We are hoping that all, Taupo and North will join us

Most certainly there will be many billets around Auckland

Just let us know

And the promise of the best **BBQ-Wined & Beer Down** yet, maybe
-((-Govt-Funded at Central??-))-

Javan is with me so I can only offer the 2 couches and hospitality

This assumes I come out of court in Tauranga on the 31st a free man

It is supposed to be only a preliminary hearing, however as some of you know preliminaries can easily turn into the real thing and I am sure some MP's, Judiciary and Lawyers would just love to show their power to control and limit our BOTHERING.

Thus restrict our FREE SPEECH under the guise of "Operating a Vehicle on a road in such a manner as to be liable to cause annoyance to any person"???

I am hoping that all south of Taupo including you South Island colleagues will descend on Parliament on FATHERS-Day-06.

Someone from Wellington needs to take this on board and Co-Ordinate

I know Craig-J would be more than willing but he is limited by his
resistance to the internet.

Onward in Coalition <>

Jim Bailey - JimBWarrior


Posted by: "Brian or PJ"   thecourtwatcher

Tue Aug 8, 2006 1:40 pm (PST)


Public Law 93-579 states in part: "The purpose of this Act is to provide certain safeguards for an individual against invasion of personal privacy by requiring Federal permit and individual to determine what records pertaining to him are collected, maintained, used, or disseminated by such agencies." The following questions are based upon that act and are necessary in order that this individual may make a reasonable determination concerning divulgence of information to this agency.

Fill out the form completely.

Do not leave any question blank.

It will be considered a trespasser of the law, to intentionally remain

Public Servant Information

1. Full Legal Name:

First__________________ Middle____________ Last ________________

2. Legal Business Address (No P.O. Boxes)


City __________________________State _______ Zip ____________

Department Information

3. Name of Agency by which public servant is employed:


City __________________________State _______ Zip ____________

Supervisor's name:

4. Mailing address


City __________________________State _______ Zip ____________

Public Servant Duty

5. Will public servant uphold the Constitution of the United States?

G Yes G No Please describe any felonies which where committed against

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

6. Did public servant furnish proof of identity?

G Yes G No Please describe any felonies which where committed against

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

7. What was the nature of proof?

G Yes G No Please describe any felonies which where committed against

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

8. Will public servant furnish a copy of the law or regulation which
authorizes this investigation?

G Yes G No Please describe any felonies which where committed against

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

9. Will the public servant read aloud the portion of the law
authorizing the questions he will ask?

G Yes G No Please describe any felonies which where committed against

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

Class of Felony:

Nature of Investigation

10. Are the answers to the questions voluntary or

G Yes G No Please describe:

11. Are the questions to be asked based upon a
specific law/regulation, or are they being used as a discovery process?

G Yes G No Please describe:

12. What other uses may be made of this information?

G Yes G No Please describe:

13. What other agencies may have access to this

G Yes G No Please describe:

14. What will be the effect upon me if I should
choose not to answer any part or all of these questions?

G Yes G No Please describe:

Basis for Investigation

15. Name of person in government requesting that
this investigation be made.

G Yes G No Please describe:

16. Is this investigation 'general' or is it

G Yes G No Please describe:

17. Have you consulted, questioned, interviewed, or
received information from any third party relative to this

G Yes G No Please describe:

18. If so, the identity of such third parties:

G Yes G No Please describe:

19. Expected Results of Investigation

G Yes G No Please describe:

20. Do you reasonably anticipate either a civil or
criminal action to be initiated or pursued based upon any of the
requested information?

G Yes G No Please describe:

Agency Information:

21. Is there a file of records, information, or
correspondence relating to me being maintained by this agency?
______________ Public Record Number.

22. Is this agency using any information pertaining
to me which was supplied by another agency or government source?

List of all such agency's _________________________________

Address of Agency__________________________________________

Record Number at Agency ___________________________________

Will a Duces Tecum be filled? . G Yes G No


23. Obstruction of Justice failure to provide
evidence will dismiss the case and will cause a tort to be filed against
you for color of law violations: Do you understand?

G Yes G No ______ Please initial that you understood question.

24. If any request for information relating to me is

from any person or agency, you must advise me in writing before
releasing such information. Failure to do so may subject you to possible
civil or criminal action as provided by the act.

I swear (affirm) that the answers I have given to the foregoing
questions are complete and correct in every particular.

Signature: ___________________________________________________

Date: ________(month)_________(day)___________________(year)


1. All public servants have taken a sworn oath to uphold and
defend the constitution. Was there a violation of Constitution G Yes G

> > SUBCHAPTER II > 552a Records maintained on
individuals Complied? G Yes G No

3. TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 31 > 641
<> Public money, property
or records Complied? G Yes G No