The most difficult obstacle for Mankind to overcome is not the inherent evil and corruption within the system that has enslaved us; neither is it the standard, cognitively dissonant refusal of the courts and legal professions to acknowledge the validity of our claims against the corporatist state. In my own experience, by far the greatest obstacle to overcome is discerning the difference between information which the external objects of our senses lead us to believe and that which resonates internally as unfettered truth in the heart.
In November 2008 CE, I was one of three Freemen [also known as men who were born free] who organised and presented a conference in the English city of Derby, with the openly stated aim of sharing the information we had gleaned for the benefit of the greatest number. I have never talked to anybody who was present on that wonderful day in the freezing midlands of the Isles of Britain who did not gain something from participating in the event.
We were very careful to make those present [and those watching the unauthorised Google video, which was released in breach of a verbal agreement that errors and omissions would be removed before it was made public] aware that our research was ongoing, and for all intents and purposes, much of what we were presenting relied heavily upon the validity of the theories of other researchers, such as Robert Arthur Menard, Mary Elizabeth Croft and Winston Shrout, all of whom are North American based.
Much of the content at FreeThePlanet.net is the result of diligent endeavours to find evidence in support of those legal and commercial theories we presented, some of which I have been unable to corroborate, with all due respect to those individuals named above, each of whom deserves immense respect and admiration for their efforts to teach people ways to free themselves from fraudulent debt and government tyranny. There is no ‘but…’.
However, despite relentless claims to the contrary by a coterie of researchers who have taken the contrary position, I have found no compelling evidence to suggest that:
a. The U.K. Birth Certificate represents any form of negotiable instrument.
b. There is a pre-paid treasury account in every registered U.K. citizen’s name.
c. Registration, application and submission are always a subjugation of rights.
d. Placing a commercial lien on one’s legal person establishes Secured Party Creditor status for the real flesh and blood representing the capitalised name.
e. The Uniform Commercial Code [UCC] can be enforced in every jurisdiction.
f. The Queen/Crown/Vatican is the actual owner of all citizens’ property, including the capitalised name on the Birth Certificate.
g. We are all presumed to be legally dead until we assume the office of the General Executor of our estate.
All researchers of these subjects appear to spend much of their time wading through the metaphorical treacle more commonly known as mis-and-dis-information. The barely researched opinions of those who stake a claim for the attention of strangers, as well as their peers, are too often accepted by the research community as self-evident truths, simply because the hypothesis presented is constructed by somebody who appears to be an authority figure, in such a way that appeals to the longing inside us all for the seemingly unattainable; that we will reach a stage in our own research when we can confidently proclaim to anybody who is interested that we now understand how the mechanics of the system operate and we can finally obtain remedy as a result.
Those few who indefatigably achieve even a semblance of understanding are highly likely to conclude that the system was carefully designed to protect the interests and posterity of those who created it. Those who do not comprehend this essential truth are all too often consumed by the desire to prove that remedies are easily obtainable within the system, if only people would conduct themselves according to the tenets of largely the largely unproven theories of well-meaning researchers and teachers.
Several prominent legal researchers have recently claimed that when we attend a legal proceeding the courts cannot claim jurisdiction over flesh and blood, so they have to trick or coerce us into admitting that we are a legal fiction; a trust; a naturally dead human being, responsible for the liabilities of the name attached to it.
Where is the actual material and/or statutory evidence supporting the claim that we are deemed dead by admitting to being responsible for ‘the name’ when we appear in court?
I have been delving deeply into the abyss of information available online for several years now and I have never been able to find any credible evidence to validate this theory, whilst the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 seems to have been fatally misinterpreted in reaching this ultimately unsustainable conclusion.
From the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666:
“Cestui que vie remaining beyond Sea for Seven Years together and no Proof of their Lives, Judge in Action to direct a Verdict as though Cestui que vie were dead. If such person or persons for whose life or lives such Estates have beene or shall be granted as aforesaid shall remaine beyond the Seas or elsewhere absent themselves in this Realme by the space of seaven yeares together and noe sufficient and evident proofe be made of the lives of such person or persons respectively in any Action commenced for recovery of such Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners in every such case the person or persons upon whose life or lives such Estate depended shall be accounted as naturally dead, And in every Action brought for the recovery of the said Tenements by the Lessors or Reversioners their Heires or Assignes, the Judges before whom such Action shall be brought shall direct the Jury to give their Verdict as if the person soe remaining beyond the Seas or otherwise absenting himselfe were dead….”
From Bouviers Law Dictionary:
__“CESTUI QUE TRUST, A barbarous phrase, to signify the beneficiary of an estate held in trust. He for whose benefit another person is enfeoffed or seised of land or tenements, or is possessed of personal property. The cestui que trust is entitled to receive the rents and profits of the land; he may direct such conveyances, consistent with the trust, deed or will, as he shall choose, and the trustee (q. v.) is bound to execute them: he may defend his title in the name of the trustee. 1 Cruise, Dig. tit. 12, c. 4, s. 4; vide Vin. Ab. Trust, U, W, X, and Y 1 Vern. 14; Dane’s Ab. Index, h. t.: 1 Story, Eq. Jur. 321, note 1; Bouv. Inst. Index, h. t. CESTUI QUE VIE. He for whose life land is holden by another person; the latter is called tenant per auter vie, or tenant for another’s life. Vide Dane’s Ab. Index, h.t.”
The above passage from the 1666 Act and Bouvier’s definitions clearly establish that if a person [meaning the flesh and blood in this case, since a legal fiction has no life to lose] who has beneficial interest in property held on these shores abandons that property for a period of at least seven years, as happened frequently in times of war, that Cestui Que Vie [the owner of the property concerned] will be considered legally dead for the purpose of proceedings for the recovery of such property by other interested parties, which stands on its own as compelling evidence that the claims being made are entirely misconceived.
In my own experience, having acted in various proceedings in Her Majesty’s Courts, from the Magistrates’ to the Crown, County, High, Appeal and Supreme Courts, it is certainly true that judges can and will only deal with persons, but the types of persons they normally deal with, while not exactly synonymous with the flesh and blood, are always attached, for better or worse, to a man, woman or child, at least under their present system.__
In other words, the courts do not refuse to acknowledge us as living flesh and blood; they merely refuse to accept that the living flesh and blood and its legal person are not one and the same thing, which is generally in order to establish liabilities or charges of some description, whether criminal or civil, that have been attached to the capitalised name, by and through the force and effect given to government legislation and the politicians, bureaucrats, lawyers, barristers, judges, private and permanent secretaries and the civil servants who enforce the fines and forfeitures which make up the vast majority of the income generated for the Crown in Her Majesty’s Courts, administered under their oaths of allegiance to Elizabeth II, who presides over the entire so-called Justice System. As some have already astutely observed, the Just-Us System would be a much more accurate description, notwithstanding the constitutional obligations of the English Monarch, whether illegitimate or otherwise.
From the Act of Settlement 1700:
“And whereas the Laws of England are the Birthright of the People thereof and all the Kings and Queens who shall ascend the Throne of this Realm ought to administer the Government of the same according to the said Laws and all their Officers and Ministers ought to serve them respectively according to the same”
By this Act [and other constitutional statutes which arose out of Magna Carta 1215 and the Declaration of Rights 1688], the English body of law imposed upon the people Britain by the genocide, piracy and usurpation of foreign invaders, was granted into trust by the reigning monarch for the benefit of every man and woman born on these shores. The judiciary share trusteeship of the Laws of England [now the Laws of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland] and are responsible for making sure that the beneficiaries [the people] receive adequate disbursements of the remedies and protections prescribed by those laws, whether provided by statute or the common law.
Fictitious legal entities cannot benefit from this public trust without the consent, authorisation or acquiescence of real flesh and blood, which is all too often obtained through coercive and/or deceptive methods, resulting in a miscarriage of justice system, which protects the interests of the moneyed aristocracy, rather than the people.
It is therefore self-evident that a judge acts as trustee in every matter brought within their court’s jurisdiction; the Claimant and the Defendant are the beneficiaries of that perpetually resulting trust. For and on behalf of the monarch (the Grantor of the protections and remedies to the people), the court/judge acts as the trustee of the law for the benefit of the parties before him. However, that does not mean that every court is secretly operating under trust law, as some researchers continue to claim. Far from it in fact; since the Judicature Acts of the 1870’s, the courts of common law and equity have been combined, so that the jurisdictions run concurrently in Her Majesty’s Courts.
How many of us have ever asked ourselves why these allegedly impartial tribunals are not called the People’s Courts?
The remedy for the types of injustice that are so often handed down by Her Majesty’s Courts, the officers of which often have woefully insufficient knowledge of the law or its due process, may well be to lay a complaint of misconduct in public office against the judge or magistrate responsible for any obvious miscarriage of justice, which are now so common-place within the current system that the deliverance of a just verdict has become an expensive rarity rather than a natural right, which begs another obvious question:
Can the system be fixed or is it broken beyond repair?
The purpose of this work is not to persuade you to agree with me or to disregard the work of any other researcher. I merely ask that you stop to consider how much of your own understanding is based upon assumption, presumption and trust that other people have correctly interpreted all of the available information.
It might help to remember that we all learn far more from our mistakes than we ever do from our successes, so living in denial of them is a self-defeating act of futility. But whatever you choose to do with your unlimited potential, please don’t take my word for it, because the journey of self-realisation is yours and yours alone and there are no short-cuts to knowing the truth in your heart.
