Thursday, January 6, 2011


Published by admin at 7:06 pm under Knowing Who You Are


If we were to act as anything other than the beneficiary of the Cestui Que Vie (CQV) trust, we could assist in settling these matters but, as the Clerk is the Trustee of the CQV trust, she has appointed the judge as trustee and the prosecutor as executor of the constructive trust (case #…), so it is their job to settle the accounting. The prosecutor charged the trust account and created the debt, so it is he who is liable for repaying and balancing it.

They break their own rules, by their fraud of failing to perform their duties. Saying, “I will appeal this, as a matter of law, to a higher court, if court rules are broken” means the judge won’t get his commission, based upon his fraud.


Since no one can be trustee of both the CQV (BC) Trust and the Constructive Trust (Case#….), at same time, they do a “bait and switch”. They use the CQV trust to create a temporary, constructive trust––the case. The matter/case is a trust apart from, but attached to, the CQV trust. The bonds are added to the constructive trust, at clerk’s office.


1 - UCC, equity, commerce: it’s all about property rights

2 - Maritime, Canon: only now can the judge cite for contempt, impose fines, jail time, etc.

3 - Talmud: the judge returns as priest. Most do not go this far, as, by now, he already knows that we know, and so he knows it’s over for him.


When the judge calls for a recess, it means he is going for a bigger stick. He intends to change courts. We ought to say, “I do not consent to the form of court being changed. For and on record, I object to judge changing the form of court from Equity to Canon/Admiralty. If you insist, I’ll reassert my rights upon your return.”


The clerk is the Senior Ecclesiastical Officer and can assign Title over to the bank. We are tenant, the mortgage is the lien/lease/loan. We do not and cannot ‘own’ anything. The bank does NOT want us to pay the mortgage which is the interest, aka rent, because they want us to be delinquent, i.e.: incompetent in performance––which is the main point of the contract––in order that we lose our claim. When we pay some form of rent, even if only $50 a month, we change our status from ‘delinquent’ to ‘competent’ and this allows us to remain in honour which is the entire matter. They do not want us to behave honourably. The bank/court cannot force us to leave property, yet, we must address our “standing”. Then we can use their procedure against them. We must challenge the CQV Trust.

If one gets to court re: foreclosure: “As a tenant in this matter, with only ‘right of use’ of property, I ask for a stay as I haven’t exhausted my administrative options.” We can do this in order to buy time to do an Ecclesiastical Deed Poll (EDP) on original issue, through the clerk (protonotary/trustee of the CQV trust) or the chaplain of the court. They must forgive, in open court, or they have lost their Ecclesiastical authority.

A woman told the attorney for the bank, “Just so you know, we will be coming in at a superior, property-holder, competent position and we know and understand the three forms of court.” The attorney rang her later and said the case is dropped.


When asked how we plea, we can say, “I wish to ask, as a matter of law, are you presiding as Trustee of this matter––the Constructive Trust––case #1234? “ If a negative response, “Without seeking an appeal to another court, as a matter of law, I merely ask, are you presiding as administrator of CQV trust, from which the Constructive Trust is created?”

It is not good to mention “contract” because they DO have a contract… with our parents, which is how the CQV trust was created.


There are 3 CQV trusts: name, flesh, soul. Due to this, we have no property rights, so they can ‘lawfully’ hold us, but if a friend of one who is incarcerated establishes himself as competent, he can demand that his property be returned. So, he changes his standing and demands his property be returned, as he has a higher claim. OR, the friend can send an EDP so, at the hearing, the EDP is in the court. “As friend of court, I seek leave of the court so my friend can complete EDP, witnessed by court.” If declined, “I seek leave of court for an appeal on a matter of law that you are not permitting this man a fair defence and to establish his standing.”

I know of a woman who was being transported from jail to prison. When she arrived, she was asked her name. As a body, she was worthless to them; they needed the name and they needed her to BE the name. She surprised them by saying, “If you don’t know who I am, how can you imprison me?” and they let her go because she refused to give them the name of the account which they intended to charge and against which to float the bond.

EDP (Ecclesiastical Deed Poll)?

All matters are about property and trusts. The EDP establishes us as property-holder and so, then we have rights and can claim our property, whether it is our friends in jail or our homes. All they have left is force, fear, threats, intimidation. They are criminals, pirates, and parasites.

For ANY presentment we receive, we ought to send an EDP.?


Attacking commerce commercially, –– from the level of commerce–– is a powerless venture. Since 1983 Canon Law, it is our “paper” which condemns us. The only paper which will work for us is the EDP process on blue paper, signed with our blood. We must attack commerce, ecclesiastically–– from the only level which the parasites respect, fear, and derive their alleged power. They can––and do––change the codes (e.g.: UCC) and rules of commerce which they operate, however, they are powerless to change Ecclesiastical Canon Law because they are under it and must obey it; they do not and cannot ‘operate’ it.


I might go over to MVD (DMV)/Registry and put down the Certificate of Title and ask, “Who owns the vehicle represented by this?” She will look at it and read, “JOHN DOE”. Then, I’d ask, “Who owns the JOHN DOE Trust?” She won’t know so I would tell her, “It is owned by STATE (PROVINCE) OF ___. How do I know this? This (birth certificate) document proves it. Since the owner of anything is always the trustee and the trustee is always the liable party, then, “owner always pays”. (If A=B and B=C, then, A=C). Accordingly, since the vehicle is owned by STATE OF ___, then STATE OF ___ is the one which must pay for the insurance, registration, taxes, etc. If you claim I am inaccurate or that I am the one liable to pay, then, you’ll have to prove it.” We could just put the titles of our cars into the name of the state/province, as it already owns them, anyway. In a sense we will be donating the car, but, why not? How can the cops steal a car from the state when it belongs to the state?


This is the time when the judge must quote all law he is using to sentence and it is also when we can comment on their offer of sentence. You are free to decline. Anything done or signed under duress has no legal standing. To “comply” under duress is not the same as to “consent”. “I state, for and on the record, that I was under threat of physical assault, so I signed. Now, I am lodging my appeal to a higher court, as a matter of law, because all I said or did was under duress and therefore unlawful. I was psychologically and physically abused.” If we, as beneficiary, accept the sentence, aka benefit, then they make us executor which means that it is we who enforce our own sentencing.


I still will not go to court. No one has the authority to tell me what to do. Send an EDP, in advance, or have someone go in your place, so that you will not, inadvertently, admit to being the trustee. What’s the worst that can happen to the representative, when he can prove he is someone other than the trust/trustee.

We must show our competence by asking questions, politely. We can stand at bar and say, “I have an important paper to give to clerk. May I ask, with respect, as a matter of law, before I cross bar, what role each of you is playing here today, with respect to the trust which is being charged.” Ask a second and THIRD time. “As a matter of law, is the Prosecutor acting as Executor of the Trust and are you acting as Trustee of the Trust of this matter?” They’ll likely be rude, but don’t sink to their level. “Respectfully, it is a matter of law for me to know the roles we’re all playing and then I’ll be willing cross the bar and engage. If you don’t answer, I’ll be lodging an appeal and I appeal now that this matter be suspended so I can request an interlocutory argument and have this question answered. If you are the Trustee, then here is my EDP.” The judge does not want the case appealed because, if it is over-turned, then he will pay, from his own trust account which is his commissions.

We are of absolutely NO value to them until we give them details of an account which they can charge. They cannot gain from us unless we give them the name of a trust to charge. The name, not we, is the only value we can offer. “Are you JOHN DOE?” “I couldn’t possibly be a trust account.” We do not require a name for anything other than commercial purposes––school, services, doctor, memberships, bank account, benefits, etc. This is why they are so adamant that we carry “ID”. What if we had nothing to identify the trust? Their system would crash if they couldn’t get any of us to BE the trust, in order to authorize them to use it. They would starve to death. We, as just plain-old men and women, without names, are no good to them. We are not slaves via our bodies; we are slaves, only via the account.

In California, the people complained that the “undocumented Mexican immigrants”, aka “illegal aliens”, were causing violence, crimes, vandalism, etc. and the cops and the courts were doing nothing about it. It seemed as if “illegal aliens” were the problem. But, the District Attorney said, “Anything short of murder we won’t prosecute.” If only the people knew what he meant, they would shift their rage from the “illegal aliens” to the DA and his ilk.

“Undocumented” means there is no trust account to charge, which is why the government wants them all to have driver licences. The DA won’t prosecute because he can’t; there is nothing and no one to charge. Men and women cannot be charged; only trust accounts can be charged and, since there is no account, due to no documents to create them, there is no way to make money off these “immigrants”. Murder is a different story. This means the “illegals” took out of the commerce game someone with an account and so, in that case, the DA will prosecute. Wait until the people of California figure out that the real “problem” of the “undocumented Mexican immigrants” is, as always, “ALL ABOUT MONEY”.

What about the cost to repair and compensate? Well, it comes from the Public Trust, as does everything else which requires public funding. They want us connected to ‘Named’ trust accounts which make up the Public Trust, solely to confiscate our cash. This is tantamount to “uninsured” drivers or people without passports. We don’t really require car insurance or passports because all payments for injuries come from the public trust which WE have already funded. Causing us to believe that we are “personally liable” is how they steal our cash.

I think the real question is, how can we render worthless the CQV trust account, so there will be nothing for them to charge, even if they do track down the account? If we all did this, it would end this insane system. They would prefer to keep it alive but the only way to do this, once we threaten to kill the accounts, is to begin to behave honourably and follow their rules.

“To find your life you must lose it”. I’ll bet this means: “Our life is commerce; commerce is our life.” The only way to lose our life is to get out of commerce. The only way to get out of commerce is to CLOSE THE CQV TRUST ACCOUNT.

The only way to close the CQV account is to claim our body to be in the Divine Trust. This will bring their fraud to a screeching halt.

Frank O’Collins is on Talk Shoe:?

My email:

No comments:

Post a Comment