Self Governance

Common-Law vs. Statute Law by Robert-Dean:House
.
A lot of people are being misled about Common Law.
.
At age 22, I attended a two year Law Enforcement course in the Hibbing Minnesota area Vo-Tech along with some required classes at the Hibbing Collage.  This course taught about the common law from the begging of time up to, then 1980.
.
An (Affidavit) Statement of Victim/Witness is used under Common Law and is also used in Self Governance. The Statement would have the victim’s name, born on date, address, work address and in today’s society, home, work and cell phone number all written at the top and before the statement. The Statement was written in clear and concise print and in a chronological order stating Who did What to Whom, When, Where, Why, and How.
.
If one person took property from another without the owner’s permission, which is known as stealing, and the owner witnessed the theft, the first thing to do about it is to confront the culprit. (As is Self Governance). Should there still be disagreement, the owner, now a victim of theft, writes an (Affidavit) Statement of Victim.
.
Back in the 1820s, (Danial Boone days), the victim/owner would then call upon a neutral third party who was respected within the local community to help settle the matter. Such as Boone. He would then confront the culprit and let him read the statement and ask him to give a statement of his own accounts of the matter. If the culprit refused, then the victim’s statement would stand as truth and Boone would have the property taken back and given to the rightful owner. Note: The Affidavit became the Common Law Court.
.
Had the culprit given his account of the matter and Boone could not decide who was telling the truth, Boone would call upon a member of the community as in a petit jury, pronounced as, “pet it”, of 12 men.
.
Still under Self Governance. The 12 would decide the outcome to include property to the lawful owner and possibly a fine or a jail sentence or both to the culprit. This type of court was held on one plane or floor, usually the ground out of doors.
.
The Common Law has been with us forever, along with the ability of Self Governance but society has gotten used to having someone else do their thinking, enforcement, management, teaching, etc. for them. Instead of doing it themselves.
.
Now we have been deceived and consent to Statute Laws created by Legislators and copywritten fo their benefit.
.
Under a well-educated society and in the not so distant past God’s Law, the Commandments, also known as Common Law, supersedes Statute Laws and this is why the Corporate courts we have let take over are here today.
.
As stated above, the victim of a crime, under Common Law and under Self Governance uses the (Affidavit) of Statement. Note: I have noticed that some people avoid using the Affidavit in their posts. These people are functioning under Statutes and Codes, etc. Don’t be fooled by them.
.
Today and according to Magna Carta 61, and under Self Governance, in any conflict not resolved by the parties involved, the (Affidavit) Statement of, goes to one of the four Grand Jury Administrators for an investigation and often is resolved. It does not go to a Grand Jury unless the Administrator can not resolve it.
.
Then the Administrator’s investigative report along with the (Affidavit) statements of, and all other evidence is forwarded to a Grand Jury Foreman to present it to the Grand Jury of 25, to include the four Administrators, the Foreman and 20 other unknown people of the community. Note Each Administrator would select five people thus keeping the other 15 unknown to three Administrators and 21 people unknown to the public. The four Administrators would be known and accessible to the public.
.
The Grand Jury will then decide on a Presentment or an Indictment of the culprit who will then stand to be heard and judged by a 12 man Petit Jury of his peers.
.
This is Self Governance, anything otherwise is not. This is also why those in the DeFacto Government will not answer to an (Affidavit) Statement of.
.
Therefore, after the first Affidavit was not answered by a DeFacto Government Servant and a second (Affidavit) Statement of Non-response has been properly served, the victim now takes it to one of the Counties Grand Jury Administrator who will confirm the Affidavits with the culprit and to inform him/her that he is going to forward it to the Grand Jury for a Presentment or Indictment. And if found guilty he/she can be in forfeit of all their property, current and future, and fined and/or imprisoned or both. Note: This does not go before a Petit Jury for it was not contested.
.
The Grand Jury will have 12 people who will be authorized to enforce the Jurys decision.
.
What do you think the Government DeFacto Servant will do after being confronted by the Administrator? (Do rats in a sinking ship give you an idea)?
.
Your thoughts at trefarmerh@centurylink.net.
.
_________________________________________________________
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.