STANDING YOUR SQUARE AS BELLIGERENT CLAIMANT

Dean Of The Family Kory January 14, 2014

Apply these methods to either U.S., Canadian, Australian, English, New Zealand etc court systems or anywhere else the Romans may have roamed.

When confronted by police in any situation and they ask question respond to police, “I do not understand the nature and cause of your inquiry.” Keep repeating this to all their statements or questions.

If they threaten arrest state, “I do not understand the nature and cause of the charges; I object you lack jurisdiction.”

If in police station or car do not answer questions. Say, “I wish to speak to my counsel.” Do not delay in saying this. Do not say anything no matter how much they threaten or speak to you.

Never sign anything. You do not have to give them fingerprints or anything else. Never give name.

You are not the name on document. The document is commercial paper. They will try anything to get you into contract.

"The privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the man who is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto. It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can be retained only by sustained combat. It can not be retained by attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in the flesh.”

“The one who is persuaded by honeyed words or moral suasion to testify or produce documents rather than make a last ditch stand, simply loses the protection. Once he testifies to part, he has waived his right and must on cross examination or otherwise, testify as to the whole transaction. He must refuse to answer or produce, and test the matter in contempt proceedings, or by habeas corpus.”
– United States v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538, 540 (District Court, M.D. PA. 1947)

Once one hires an Attornor, and tell (testifies to) the Attornor (the enemy’s spy and Officer of the Court) what has happened, the Attornor is required by law to share (Discovery) ALL evidence, which he obtains from his Client, with the Prosecutor. “You have the right to remain silent, everything that you say (to any of these devils), CAN and WILL be used against YOU.” Miranda v Arizona, 384 US 436(1966). You would be wise to remain silent! “Open mouth, insert foot!” It is all a game, you are a pawn; and you have been prearranged to be the loser. Here is another good one, learn to answer a question with question. The master asks the question and the slave or servant answers.

Start of proceeding in court, after they call the name of defendant.

You say:

"My presence is special in regards to that matter.

"I am not the defendant, I am the Claimant.

"I do not understand the Nature and Cause of the Charges.

"I take exception, you lack jurisdiction."

The following is for after above statement in court to be used throughout rest of proceeding. This takes a little practice to remember without it written, which should be your goal. More than likely you won't have this written down on you.

I am not the defendant, I am the Claimant. (Whenever anyone calls defendant name or calls you defendant)

I do not understand the Nature and Cause of the Charges. (Remember to say this of all things. Never come into understanding with them unless using acceptance method, which this is not)

I do not wish counsel at this time. (Everytime judge asks if you want lawyer or attempt to assign one, then state #6 also)

My Mother calls me Son/Daughter. (If they ask your name, optional)

I make objection, you lack jurisdiction. (when DA makes motion or request against you)

I take exception, you lack jurisdiction. (when judge accepts motion or makes order against you)

Yes sir, you sure can hold me in contempt, asked and answered, no issue, Demand to move on. (If they threaten to hold you in contempt say this)

If they repeat any question, such as, "what is your name", state "Asked and answered, Demand to move on."

There are additional statements that can be made, but one must learn them. This here are the basics of standing your Square.

https://www.facebook.com/dean.kory/posts/10203918103770429:0

‘IGNORANT CHARLATAN’ MALCOLM MCCLURE FOUND GUILTY FOR ACTING AS UNQUALIFIED LAWYER FOR FRIEND BOB JANE

Emily Portelli Herald Sun June 19, 2014 
 

Malcolm McClure, 41, has been found guilty of engaging in legal practice without being qualified to do. Picture: Ellen Smith
 

TYRE king Bob Jane begged his friend - described by a Federal Court judge as an "incompetent, ignorant charlatan" - to assist him in a court battle despite the fact he was not a lawyer, a court has heard. 

Businessman Bob Jane was represented by his friend Malcolm McClure in his legal battle against his son Rodney Jane.
 

Malcolm McClure, 41, was today found guilty of engaging in legal practice without being qualified to do so and fined $10,000.

The self-represented McClure said Mr Jane knew he was not a lawyer, but appealed to his "good Samaritan duty", despite McClure's reluctance to become involved in the case in late 2011.

"He said, 'Malcolm, you've got to help me’," McClure told Melbourne Magistrates' Court.

McClure said he became a director of Mr Jane's company because he believed it entitled him to do certain acts on behalf of Mr Jane.

Magistrate Ann Collins said the substantial involvement of McClure, who legally advised and drafted legal documents and correspondence for Mr Jane, in a Federal Court action against Mr Jane's son, had huge consequences for the well-known businessmen.

She said McClure's advice that Mr Jane did not need to turn up to a court hearing lost him the right to trade in his own name and caused tens of thousands of dollars in extra costs.

The magistrate found that he engaged in legal practice, but said she could not find beyond reasonable doubt that two $3000 donations to the church he is associated with made by Mr Jane around the time of the court case were payments received by McClure for his services.

McClure said he was not aware of the existence of the offence he was charged with and was doing his best to comply with the laws he was aware of.

"It is not our intention to flagrantly disregard laws," he said. He said he was done acting so selflessly in helping others.

"Every time I help the community, I'm the one that is to blame," McClure said.

Rodney Jane leaving the Supreme Court at an earlier hearing. Picture: Jake Nowakowski

He indicated he would likely appeal the decision of the magistrate, who allowed into evidence an affidavit made by McClure that he claims was made under duress and did not allow him to admit further evidence today after submissions had finished.

Prosecutor Shaun Ginsbourg said McClure, who was part of a "freedom movement" that assisted people in the community in representing themselves, had an alleged testimonial on his website that said he had been "proclaimed a genius by many".

Ms Collins said she accepted McClure's assurances that he would not repeat this conduct and had removed all material on the internet offering assistance to the community that was within his control.

She said the law was not "harsh", as McClure described it, but necessary to protect the community from unqualified and uninsured bogus lawyers who did not owe a duty to their clients or the court.

McClaure said he was "a pauper" and earned only $12,000 a year from his church, but was glad that his prosecution would be an educational lesson to others.

The magistrate convicted him and gave him six months to pay his $10,000 fine, noting that deterring others from similar conduct was of utmost importance.

A decision on costs was deferred to a later date.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/ignorant-charlatan-malcolm-mcclure-found-guilty-for-acting-as-unqualified-lawyer-for-friend-bob-jane/story-fni0fee2-1226959929056?nk=5abbe3864d325ab685ff3d39f3186972

CHIEF COMMISSIONER KEN LAY’S PLAN IS THE FUTURE OF POLICING

Keith Moor Herald Sun June 04, 2014 

Chief Commisioner Ken Lay knows he will have a battle on his hands to get some of the Blue Paper proposals implemented, writes Keith Moor. Picture: Norm Oorloff

 

POLITICIANS want to sound tough by promising upgraded or new police stations and hundreds more uniform officers for the front line. 

Chief Commissioner Ken Lay actually wants to be tough by putting infrastructure and manpower where they are really needed — which isn’t necessarily in marginal seats.

What Mr Lay doesn’t want to be promised by the Government or the Opposition is 700 or 1000 blue shirts, four new police stations and 20 renovated ones.

What he does want is a change in the way the force is funded so he gets the same cash amount it would take to fund those promises, which he can then spend on modern methods to cut the crime rate and protect the community.

That isn’t just cops on the beat and divvy vans. It is also specialist detectives, forensic accountants, lawyers, computer-savvy analysts and CSI types who can get DNA from a drop of sweat.

There is no doubt political parties in the past have spent millions of dollars on police stations in marginal seats to win votes.

If any party tries to do that in the upcoming state election, there is a good chance Mr Lay will go public and point the finger.

Unlike some previous chief commissioners, he isn’t beholden to any party for having made him top cop.

He didn’t want to be Chief Commissioner in the first place, but was persuaded to take the job to act as a stabilising force after years of conflict in the upper echelons of Victoria Police.

Politicians on both sides have greeted Mr Lay’s bold blueprint for the future with simplistic self-interested shouts of “no police stations will close on our watch” and “we promise more uniform officers, not less”.

Surely they don’t really think Mr Lay is silly enough to ignore frontline policing. There is nothing in his Blue Paper that suggests uniform police and divvy vans will not continue to be available to respond to calls for help.

In fact, there is much in it that would free more sworn officers to get out on the beat — and for longer each shift.

Mr Lay knows he will have a battle on his hands to get some of the Blue Paper proposals implemented. Those who oppose them should not underestimate his quiet but firm resolve to leave the force in much better condition than he found it when he became Chief Commissioner in November 2011.

Mr Lay considers his Blue Paper to be the key to opening up dialogue between him, the Government and Opposition, the Police Association and the community.

He sees it as an opportunity to debate the real problems his force faces, rather than simply offering solutions without discussion.

It is highly likely he will have to offer sweeteners to the Police Association in the next round of enterprise bargaining negotiations if he is to get the rostering and other changes he wants to change the way police work and where they work from.

THERE will also be tough discussions between Mr Lay and political leaders if the force funding model he wants — which is to spend money where he thinks it will be most effective — is to come to fruition.

Mr Lay’s Blue Paper is a vision for how he sees Victoria Police in 2025. He will not be Chief Commissioner then, but he fully intends spending the final two years of his five-year contract negotiating hard-to-instigate change — and possibly for longer if he gets another term. Mr Lay believes the radical reforms suggested in his Blue Paper are needed if the force is to turn around from the situation it is in now — which he describes as “struggling to cope with the unprecedented demands upon it”.

Much of the commentary around the Blue Paper has centred on fears that beat police will be cut and stations will be closed.

Mr Lay makes no apologies for the fact he wants his troops centralised in what he calls “supersites” that would replace the current model of multiple, smaller and less operationally effective stations. He argues that will enable his commanders to move officers to where they are most needed when they are most needed. But he rejects that he is moving away from the need to have the high level of visible police the community expects, describing the men and women who patrol Victorian streets and roads as “the backbone of Victoria Police”.

Mr Lay told the Herald Sun on Wednesday it would be disastrous if the status quo remained, with the Blue Paper recommendations being shelved or watered down by a nervous Government and a change-reluctant Police Association.

He warned starkly that would make it impossible to address the complex organised crime and other problems the force was now facing an uphill battle to solve.

“If we continue to just simply invest in blue shirts and police stations, and not take a broader approach around technology and specialists, we will simply not get on top of this level of offending,” Mr Lay said.

keith.moor@news.com.au

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/chief-commissioner-ken-lays-plan-is-the-future-of-policing/story-fni0ffsx-1226943481720 

 

INTRODUCTION TO THE SENIOR MASTER'S OFFICE

GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL CARD FOR PROTESTERS

MICHELLE PAINE Mercury June 23, 2014

The Workplaces (Protection from Protesters) Bill has been triggered by forest protests.

 

PROTESTERS will face mandatory jail time and members of the public could be fined for inciting protests under tough new legislation to be debated in Parliament this week. 

Resources Minister Paul Harriss said the Workplaces (Protection from Protesters) Bill would be the centrepiece as State Parliament resumes tomorrow.

The Bill was triggered by forest protests but Mr Harriss said it could apply to other production sites.
Debate is expected on Thursday, and the laws could take effect by the end of the year if the Legislative Council passes the Bill.

“We support and acknowledge the constitutional right of people to peacefully protest. There’ll be no prohibition — and neither can there be, given the national legislation — but we don’t support this random invasion of workplaces where people are prohibited from going about their legal rights to work,’’ Mr Harriss said.

Penalties include $2000 fines for invading or hindering a business, rising to $5000 if the person has the charge heard in court and is found guilty. Convictions would be automatically recorded.

Second and later offences would carry a minimum three months and up to two years in jail — which would represent Tasmania’s first mandatory imprisonment legislation.

Individuals and organisations would also face heavy fines for inciting others to hinder a business.
Law Society of Tasmania president Anthony Mihal said the society viewed mandatory sentences “with alarm’’.

“It’s a fundamental principle that our democracy is founded on, that the separation of Parliament and the courts be maintained,’’ Mr Mihal said.

Courts should be free to impose penalties taking into account each situation, he said.

“These laws are founded on concerns of courts being too ­lenient. Those concerns are wrong. People do and have been imprisoned.’’

He pointed to a forest protester sentenced in Burnie to jail recently.

Mr Harriss said the legislation was appropriately tough.

“This will send the clear message that Tasmanians have a right to earn a living, whether that be in forestry, mining or any other industry, without having extremist protesters come on to their workplaces,’’ he said. “We say enough is enough – and at the election the Tasmanian people overwhelmingly agreed with us.’’

Protesters could put workers and their own lives in peril, Mr Harriss said.

He also hoped the Upper House would start to roll back the forest peace deal this week.

http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/go-directly-to-jail-card-for-protesters/story-fnj4f7k1-1226963182804

TWO POLICE OFFICERS CHARGED WITH ATTEMPTING TO PERVERT THE COURSE OF JUSTICE

June 18, 2014 Adam Cooper Court reporter for The Age 

Police officer Kieran John Atkin manning a breath-test station. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen

Two police officers falsely claimed a man rammed their patrol car and assaulted and detained him, court documents allege.

The two officers, Kieran John Atkin and Brennan Roberts, appeared before Melbourne Magistrates Court on Wednesday to face charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice and assault.

Charge sheets tendered to court allege the two officers claimed the man rammed their police car with his car in Hillside, in Melbourne's north-western suburbs, on August 22 last year.

The pair also assaulted and then "injuriously imprisoned" him, the charge sheets allege.

The following day, the officers "knowingly, wilfully and corruptly" signed a police statement knowing its contents were untrue, "wholly or in part", the charge sheets allege.

Mr Roberts, 25, faces three charges, of attempting to pervert the course of justice, assaulting and imprisoning the man and signing a police statement that he knew to be untrue.

Mr Atkin, 32, faces the same charges, along with three extra counts of assault and charges of careless driving and dangerous driving.

The court heard investigators had CCTV footage related to the allegations against the officers.

Magistrate Donna Bakos granted bail to both men to return to court on August 18.

Victoria Police said Mr Atkin and Mr Roberts had been suspended following an investigation by professional standards officers after a police pursuit last year.

A police spokeswoman said Mr Atkin was a senior constable and Mr Roberts was a constable.

It is not known what station the officers are based at, though a charge sheet alleges they signed a police statement they knew to be untrue in Sunshine.

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/two-police-officers-charged-with-attempting-to-pervert-the-course-of-justice-20140618-zsdjz.html#ixzz35Sw5qsvr

VICTORIAN PROTECTIVE SERVICES OFFICERS COSTING TAXPAYERS MILLIONS IN DROPOUTS

Aleks Devic Herald Sun June 20, 2014 

PSOs who drop out are costing Victorian taxpayers money.

 

VICTORIA’S gun-toting train station cop dropouts have cost taxpayers more than $2.65 million, with some quitting while still in training. 

Internal Victoria Police figures, obtained using Freedom of Information laws, show between 2011 and March 2014, 50 Protective Service Officers pulled the pin at the training academy and a further 20 resigned after getting a posting to man our railway stations.

Each PSO recruit costs $31,500 for their 12-week training course, which includes pay, uniform, operational vests and the gun.

The PSOs have a base wage of $53,641 and then get shift penalties depending on the hours they work.

Victorians will continue to pay for some PSOs who were eligible for the Emergency Service super once they were sworn in.

As part of the Coalition’s 2010 tough-on-crime election platform, it promised to have 940 PSOs at stations by November this year.

The training for transit PSOs started in 2011.

The FOI documents show transit PSOs are leaving the force for reasons including seeking other employment, leaving to work in the private sector and for “personal reasons”.

Victoria Police Acting Commander Mark Porter said 5 per cent of PSOs resigned while at the academy but once they were deployed, the attrition rate was on par with police officers.

“It’s difficult to compare this figure to police recruits undergoing training, as police train for 33 weeks, while the PSO course is 12 weeks,” Insp Porter said.

“While the PSO program is still being rolled out, we are pleased that the attrition rate is low, but it is too early to observe any trends.”

The slow take-up rate for PSOs forced Victoria Police to sideline would-be police recruits at the academy in preference of PSOs.

Force command is confident it will reach the quota with only months to go and 748 PSOs passing through the academy.

More than 11,650 people applied to become PSOs but only 5 per cent passed the exams and many failed the fitness component.

Since transit PSOs were introduced, they are trained at the academy to man train stations and PSU duties.

But those who became PSOs before 2011 need to do a bridging course in order to be placed at railway stations.

aleks.devic@news.com.au

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/victorian-protective-services-officers-costing-taxpayers-millions-in-dropouts/story-fni0fit3-1226961664896