Wesley Snipes is currently doing a three-stretch in McKean Correctional Institution.
is he? hahahaha!! brilliant!
this seems to be the rhetoric that the Freeman movement revolves around:
Just stumbled accross this page and thought I’d add to the topic. It’s good to see police talking about this, even if some are a little closed minded about it. But believe me it’s in your interests to know about it! From my understanding it’s quite simple. Common law is law developed by judges through decisions of courts and similar tribunals over hundreds of years, rather than through legislative statutes or executive branch action. It basically says don’t damage others property, don’t harm your fellow man, don’t breach the peace and don’t use fraud in your contracts. Everything else we think of as ‘the law’ is statutes and acts and are rules made by the government, as you hopefully know.
The court system can only enforce these statutes and acts with the ‘consent of the governed’. That is to say, if a man is in court for say driving through a red light and in court he doesn’t give is consent to contract (more about that in a bit), the court has no power whatsoever to punish him for the ‘crime’, provided no other party has been harmed.
This also applies to the police, as the enforcers of the law. You can go to the effort of sending a ‘notice of intended prosecution’, but if he knows his Common Law rights there’s little the legal system can do and you’re wasting your time.
It all boils down to contracts. Whether you are aware of not, when you read someone their rights, in the eyes of the law you are offering them a contract. By agreeing to or not disputing this offer they are agreeing to the terms. As far as the courts are concerned when you ask ‘do you understand these rights’ you are asking them if they agree to ‘stand under’ them, which is a legal term. If they say ‘no’, you have no right to force the law on them as you do not have their consent. There’s also ‘tacit’ consent, where consent is assumed unless denied, which is how it usually works because most people don’t know they have the right to say ‘no’.
Because they are built on the same system, things that can void a contract in commerse can void a contract in law. For example if a policeman is asking someone to sign a document against their will, they can sign it ‘under protest and duress’ and that would void any contract that the signature would have made, because no contract can be entered in to without the consent of both parties. Judges are only too aware of this, but most police don’t seem to be.
As for the ‘person’ vs ‘human’ thing. In the eyes of the law the word person has a different meaning to that of most people, as do many other words (about 44,000 as far as I know), in fact it’s different language called Legalese. The legal definition of the word ‘Person’ is ‘Legal Fiction’. This legal fiction is brought about by the creation of a birth certificate. It is done to enable the government to act upon the human. For example, if a child has no birth certificate the local authorities are unable to remove the child from the parents. If someone, say a Freeman, becomes aware of this and knows how the legal system works they can stop the system applying acts and statutes to them. As you hopefully know, the police need a surname and a date of birth to act on someone. The reason is this links the man to the Person and allows them to act on the Person. If the surname isn’t given there is no proof of the Person so there’s nothing to act on. There is also no law that says someone has to give them their name.
Now for the part you, the police, should really be aware of. If a Freeman has been such for a while, the chances are he or she will have filed several Claim Of Right’s and maybe a Fee Schedule. The Claim Of Right is what it sounds like; it an official claim for the right to be able to do something. If they have submitted a CoR and no-one contests in within a set period, no-one can stop them from doing it in the future, as long as it’s not against Common Law. So if someone has a CoR to drive without a licence, they can and no-one, not even a judge can stop them.
This is where the Fee Schedual comes in. If the police stop said fellow and attempted to arrest him having been told he had a CoR to do what he was doing and a fee schedual was in place, that policeman could lawfully be in for a large bill. If the fee schedual says he charges £1000 per hour in handcuffs, the officer arresting him would be liable for the bill and would lawfully have to pay. Not the force or the government, the officer!
All this is why, for everyones sake, you need to know about all this. You will find that most Freemen are gentle, peaceful people and if you are too there will be no conflict. Remember, you took an Oath to uphold the law of the land, that’s common law. If someone claims common law jurisdiction and you don’t listen, you dishonour yourself and the Oath you made to the Queen 😉
Quoted from here: UKPoliceOnline
