by Anna von Reitz
Prosecute the Prosecutor
Day after day I get these pitiful letters and emails. It’s some helpless widow, a great-grandma like me, and the vermin have got hold of her by some ruse, and now they are shaking her down like terriers shaking a rat. And now, at the 11th hour, the victims come seeking help.
It’s impossible — literally — for me to get involved in all the court actions. I can give you generalized information and pointers and hope that you are listening, bearing in mind that every case and situation is different. I can give you my insights into the common mistakes that are made.
Your first job is to declare and record your proper political status. It should be done now, before one of these courts even starts to address you. It will stand as evidence of who you are and in what capacity you are acting. This is like ammo stored up for hunting season.
Your second job is to join your State Assembly and take up the work of an active State Citizen. Why is this important? Because there is strength in numbers and deliverance from this tyranny in your own hands. Once you fill your jury pools and elect your Sheriffs and Justices of the Peace, the foreign courts are obligated to step down and not address you, unless you actually and factually stray into their very limited foreign jurisdictions.
That said, the most common mistake made when interacting with these felons is that we don’t state our counterclaims and counteroffers from the get-go, and we don’t prosecute their Prosecutors.
The Prosecutor thinks it is his job to prosecute you, but in fact, by addressing you, he has made it your job to prosecute him.
He is the one bringing any complaint against you, so he is the one you have to cross-examine and bring your firepower to bear on —- and most of the time, he’s just a dumb schmuck doing what he has been trained to do by rote.
In order to effectively and efficiently nail a Prosecutor, you have to hone your ability to ask pointed questions, bearing in mind that you can never get into trouble in a courtroom by politely asking questions.
“Mr. Prosecutor…. is the DEFENDANT a person?”
uh, uh, ummmm….
“Mr. Prosecutor…. can you explain to the Court exactly what kind of person the DEFENDANT is?”
Uh, uh, ummmm….
“Mr. Prosecutor….you have used an unusual style convention to name the DEFENDANT in all capital letters —- is the DEFENDANT’s NAME written in Latin or something made to appear like Latin?”
Uh, well, uh, I …. no, that’s just the way we do it, uh….
“Mr. Prosecutor…. were you aware that writing the DEFENDANT’s name in all capital letters has a meaning indicating that the DEFENDANT is either a dead man’s estate, a corporation, or a trademark?”
Umm-uh, I never heard anything like that…
“Mr. Prosecutor…. may we let the record show the Chicago Manuel of Style attributes meaning to the use of all capital letters to name the DEFENDANT on page…. (give your citation and edition, etc.)?
Well, uh, I, we-uh, I mean I was unaware….
“Mr. Prosecutor…. is the DEFENDANT a trademark?”
Uh, no, not that I know of….
Mr. Prosecutor…. is the DEFENDANT dead?”
Uh, uh, oh-uh, well, uh….
Mr. Prosecutor…. is the DEFENDANT a corporation?
[If he admits that it is…] “Mr. Prosecutor…. what kind of corporation is the DEFENDANT?”
Ah, ah, ah…..
“Mr. Prosecutor, what evidence do you have that the DEFENDANT exists?”
I-uh, we-uh, well-uh…..
“Mr. Prosecutor, can you please bring your evidence demonstrating probable cause that the DEFENDANT exists and submit this evidence on the Public Record of the Court….?
Aye, aye, uh, cough, cough, blanch…
“Mr. Prosecutor…. is the DEFENDANT allowed to do business in this state?”
Bhelf, uh, oh, uh….
“Mr. Prosecutor…. is the DEFENDANT being represented by a Board of Directors?”
“Mr. Prosecutor…. if you had a problem with the DEFENDANT, why didn’t you address your charges to the Board of Directors or the CEO of the corporation?”
“Mr. Prosecutor…. what I am trying to get to is, why is this DEFENDANT being sent mail to my mailing address?”
Buh, wuh, I-uh, well, isn’t it obvious….?
“Mr. Prosecutor…. where is the probable cause that I have anything to do with the DEFENDANT—other than having a somewhat similar name?”
Ah, well, uh…
“Mr. Prosecutor… are you aware that the DEFENDANT’s name has appeared as a Traded Security and brokerage account?”
um, um, um, um-ah….
“Mr. Prosecutor…. you have named this DEFENDANT and sent mail (or process servers or officers) addressed to it at my address, is that not true?
Well, uh, yes, I suppose that occurred… uh…
“Mr. Prosecutor…. you are obviously aware that I am not an incorporated entity and not a Traded and Bonded Security, either, correct?”
Of course, not… I can see that… uh….
“Mr. Prosecutor…. can you please provide the Court and submit to the Public Record any evidence that you have amounting to probable cause for you to think that the DEFENDANT is connected to me or is voluntarily represented by me in any capacity?
“Mr. Prosecutor…. can you demonstrate and explain to the court exactly why you addressed this DEFENDANT in this manner?”
Well, yes. It’s required by our style guidelines….
You see my point. Once you fully grasp what the Person/PERSON they are addressing really is, you can run laps around them and reduce them to blithering idiots in front of a judge on this one point alone, because (1) most of them don’t know what they are doing or why, they have just been trained to “do it this way” and (2) they have been caught in something that is obviously shady, and (3) for those who do know the scam, they can’t admit it, can they? So they wind up looking completely incompetent.
“I move the court to dismiss for failure to state a case, failure to identify the nature and identities of the Parties being addressed, and failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.”
Put yourself in the guise of an investigator, someone who has landed in this peculiar World of Oz environment of the courtroom, and Mr. Prosecutor is the one person in the room who is obligated to answer all your questions about the whole circumstance, because that’s what he is.
He is the one bringing charges, so it is his job to know who or what the DEFENDANT is, and everything else about the circumstance. It is his burden of proof to support everything he says and does.
So, batten up, and role-play with each other. Now you know the game and it is just a matter of asking them questions they can’t or won’t answer.
Learn to make everything into a question and learn to recognize and rebut their language cues — for example, you may address them as “Mr.” but never let them address you using such a title.
They may say that you are a “resident” of whatever town or county or state; always “take exception” to this. You don’t reside anywhere or maintain a “residence” in any fictional State of State. You have a house and you live in your State. Period.
The identity and nature of the DEFENDANT is just one small point that you can and should drill home. I’ve seen Prosecutors run from courtrooms after four or five such pointed questions. Very few of them will let it get down to any discussion of the actual meaning and use of DOG LATIN, because it is damaging to the court and to their own professional credentials.