From:
Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn
Non-Domestic Mail
C/O 6340 Lake Worth Blvd., #437
Fort Worth, Texas
ZIP CODE EXEMPT
By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3659 To: By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3666 To:
Gary E Trietsch, Director Nick Turner, Harris County Attorney
7701 Wilshire Place Drive 1019 Congress Avenue #15
Houston, Texas [RFD 77040] Houston, Texas [RFD 77002]
Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES
By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3673 To: By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3680 To:
Laura Cahill, Harris County Attorney Calvin Harvey, Director
1019 Congress Avenue #15 7701 Wilshire Place Drive
Houston, Texas [RFD 77002] Houston, Texas [RFD 77040]
Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES
By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3697 To: By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3703 To:
Kay Aune, Assistant Director Clay Cossey, Assistant Director
7701 Wilshire Place Drive 7701 Wilshire Place Drive
Houston, Texas [RFD 77040] Houston, Texas [RFD 77040]
Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES
By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3710 To: By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3727 To:
Lawanda Howse, Assistant Director Lisa Casteneda, Deputy Director
7701 Wilshire Place Drive 7701 Wilshire Place Drive
Houston, Texas [RFD 77040] Houston, Texas [RFD 77040]
Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES
By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3734 To: By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3741 To:
Peter Key, Deputy Director John Tyler, Deputy Director
7701 Wilshire Place Drive 7701 Wilshire Place Drive
Houston, Texas [RFD 77040] Houston, Texas [RFD 77040]
Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES
By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3758 To: By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3765 To:
Patti Evans, Assistant Director Quinton Alberto, Assistant Director
7701 Wilshire Place Drive 7701 Wilshire Place Drive
Houston, Texas [RFD 77040] Houston, Texas [RFD 77040]
Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES
By Certified Mail 7004 2890 0001 5665 3772 To:
John R Blount, Harris County Engineer
1101 Preston, 7th Floor
Houston, Texas [RFD 77002]
Non-Domestic, ZIP Exempt, Without the UNITED STATES
NON-NEGOTIABLE NON-NEGOTIABLE
NOTICE AND DEMAND
I, Me, My, Myself, a man, a living soul, a sovereign, and a holder of the office of “the people”, with an address correction: C/O Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn, Non-Domestic Mail, C/O 6340 Lake Worth Blvd., #437, Fort Worth, Texas, WITHOUT the UNITED STATES, do hereby Notice you by Declaration, of the following:
- Each of you are NOTICED that I am in receipt of your hearsay evidence, a true copy of some of which is attached hereto, and the question I have is; Do you have any witnesses to this alleged crime?
- Each of you are NOTICED that, equality under the Law is paramount and mandatory by Law.
- Each of you are NOTICED that, I did not give you, the authority for making a legal determination for Me.
- Each of you are NOTICED that, if you think or assume that you are representing Me, you are FIRED!
- Each of you are NOTICED that, neither you, nor any other person, is competent in dealing with any of My affairs.
- Each of you are NOTICED that, I am competent for dealing in all of My affairs.
- Each of you are NOTICED of My copyright on the name(s) Glenn W. Fearn©, GLENN WINNINGHAM FEARN©, FEARN, GLENN WINNINGHAM©, or any derivative(s) thereof and others as found in NON-NEGOTIABLE COPYRIGHT NOTICE recorded with the PINAL COUNTY RECORDER at FEE NUMBER 2005-121243, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
- Each of you are NOTICED that, you are ORDERED that any communication with me is to be signed “under the penalty of perjury”.
- Each of you are NOTICED that, any violation My copyright(s), or making a legal determination for Me, representing Me, or communicating with Me in any manner not “under penalty of perjury” would constitute an agreement to the fee of;
- a) ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), minimum; or,
- b) one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) if violated for the purpose of profit/gain; or,
- c) ten million dollars ($10,000,000.00) if violated for the purpose of profit or gain more than three (3) times within a year, for each and every violation, payable only in U.S. Constitution Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1, gold or silver specie pursuant to your 31 USC § 5112, and the Coinage Act of 1792.
- Each of you are NOTICED that, if you wish to communicate with Me, the sovereign living soul, you are required to address the letter EXACTLY as shown above, otherwise, additional damages and injuries will accrue.
- Each of you are NOTICED that, I am not a second class UNITED STATES citizen, 14th Amendment Citizen, corporation or other fictitious entity as found in CORPORATE DENIAL AFFIDAVIT, which is recorded with the Pinal County Recorder at FEE NUMBER 2013-032373, all of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
- Each of you are NOTICED that I can be a state citizen of Texas without being a US citizen
“Such construction ignores the rights of a state in virtue of its sovereignty to confer citizenship within its own limits, where the rights incident to such a status are not of the citizenship mentioned in the federal Constitution. It does not follow that, because one has all the rights and privileges of a citizen of a state, he must be a citizen of the United States. Such a distinction has long been recognized in this County.” See Scott v. Sandford, 19 How. (U.S.) 393, 15 L.Ed. 691; Mitchell v. Wells, 37 Miss. 235
“The rights of (original judicial) Citizens of the States, as such, are not under consideration in the fourteenth amendment. They stand as they did before the fourteenth amendment, and are fully guaranteed under other provisions.” United States v. Anthony, 24 Fed. Cas. 829, 930 (1873).
“The term resident and citizen of the United States is distinguished from a Citizen of one of the several states, in that the former is a special class of citizen created by Congress.” U.S. v. Anthony 24 Fed. 829 (1873)
“there is in our Political System, a government of each of the several states and a government of the United States Each is distinct from the other and has citizens of its own.” . US vs. Cruikshank, 92 US 542,
“There is a clear distinction between national citizenship and state citizenship.” 256 P. 545, affirmed 278 US 123, Tashiro vs. Jordan
“One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States. Thomasson v State, 15 Ind. 449; Cory v Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R. 738); McCarthy v. Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443.” Mc Donel v State, 90 Ind. Rep. 320 at pg 323;
Both before and after the 14th Amendment to the Federal Constitution it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the U.S. in order to be a citizen of his State; Crosse v. Board of Supervisors, Baltimore, Md., 1966, 221 A. 2d 431 citing US Supreme Court Slaughter House Cases and U.S. v. Cruikshank 92 US 542, 549, 23 L. Ed 588 1875
“No white person born within the limits of the United States and subject to their jurisdiction, or born without those limits and subsequently naturalized under their laws, owes his status of citizenship to the recent amendments to the Federal Constitution.” Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal 43
“All citizens of the United States shall have the same right, in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by white citizens thereof to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property.” 42 USC § 1982
- Each of you are NOTICED that State Citizens are the ONLY ones living under free government
“State citizens are the only ones living under free government, whose rights are incapable of impairment by legislation or judicial decision.” Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 97, 1908
“State Citizenship is a vested substantial property right, and the State has no power to divest or impair these rights.” Favot v. Kingsbury, (1929) 98 Cal. App. 284, 276 P. 1083,
“The State cannot diminish rights of the people.” Hertado v. California, 110 U.S. 516
“The state citizen is immune from any and all government attacks and procedure, absent contract.” see, Dred Scott vs. Sanford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 or as the Supreme Court has stated clearly, “…every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent.”
CRUDEN vs. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 2 S.E. 70
“The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government.” City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944
- Each of you are NOTICED that at common law I have the right to free travel on the highways
“The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horsedrawn carriage, wagon, or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another’s rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct.” Thompson v.Smith, 154 SE 579, 11 American Jurisprudence, Constitutional Law, section 329, page 1135
“The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business.” Thompson vs. Smith, supra.; Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784
“the right of the citizen to drive on a public street with freedom from police interference is a fundamental constitutional right” -White, 97 Cal.App.3d.141, 158 Cal.Rptr. 562, 566-67 (1979)
“citizens have a right to drive upon the public streets of the District of Columbia or any other city absent a constitutionally sound reason for limiting their access.” Caneisha Mills v. D.C. 2009
“The use of the automobile as a necessary adjunct to the earning of a livelihood in modern life requires us in the interest of realism to conclude that the RIGHT to use an automobile on the public highways partakes of the nature of a liberty within the meaning of the Constitutional guarantees. . .” Berberian v. Lussier (1958) 139 A2d 869, 872, See also: Schecter v. Killingsworth, 380 P.2d 136, 140; 93 Ariz. 273 (1963).
“The right to operate a motor vehicle [an automobile] upon the public streets and highways is not a mere privilege. It is a right of liberty, the enjoyment of which is protected by the guarantees of the federal and state constitutions.” Adams v. City of Pocatello, 416 P.2d 46, 48; 91 Idaho 99 (1966).
“A traveler has an equal right to employ an automobile as a means of transportation and to occupy the public highways with other vehicles in common use.” Campbell v. Walker, 78 Atl. 601, 603, 2 Boyce (Del.) 41.
“The owner of an automobile has the same right as the owner of other vehicles to use the highway,* * * A traveler on foot has the same right to the use of the public highways as an automobile or any other vehicle.” Simeone v. Lindsay, 65 Atl. 778, 779; Hannigan v. Wright, 63 Atl. 234, 236.
“The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT which must be protected by the courts.” People v. Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971)
“The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel long the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some other vehicle.” House v. Cramer, 112 N.W. 3; 134 Iowa 374; Farnsworth v. Tampa Electric Co. 57 So. 233, 237, 62 Fla. 166.
“The automobile may be used with safety to others users of the highway, and in its proper use upon the highways there is an equal right with the users of other vehicles properly upon the highways. The law recognizes such right of use upon general principles.” Brinkman v Pacholike, 84 N.E. 762, 764, 41 Ind. App. 662, 666.
“The law does not denounce motor carriages, as such, on public ways. They have an equal right with other vehicles in common use to occupy the streets and roads. It is improper to say that the driver of the horse has rights in the roads superior to the driver of the automobile. Both have the right to use the easement.” Indiana Springs Co. v. Brown, 165 Ind. 465, 468.
“A highway is a public way open and free to any one who has occasion to pass along it on foot or with any kind of vehicle.” Schlesinger v. City of Atlanta, 129 S.E. 861, 867, 161 Ga. 148, 159; Holland v. Shackelford, 137 S.E. 2d 298, 304, 220 Ga. 104; Stavola v. Palmer, 73 A.2d 831, 838, 136 Conn. 670
“There can be no question of the right of automobile owners to occupy and use the public streets of cities, or highways in the rural districts.” Liebrecht v. Crandall, 126 N.W. 69, 110 Minn. 454, 456
“The word ‘automobile’ connotes a pleasure vehicle designed for the transportation of persons on highways.” American Mutual Liability Ins. Co., vs. Chaput, 60 A.2d 118, 120; 95 NH 200
Motor Vehicle: 18 USC Part 1 Chapter 2 section 31 definitions [emphasis added]:
“(6) Motor vehicle. – The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways”
10) The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit.
“A motor vehicle or automobile for hire is a motor vehicle, other than an automobile stage, used for the transportation of persons for which remuneration is received.” International Motor Transit Co. vs. Seattle, 251 P. 120 The term ‘motor vehicle’ is different and broader than the word ‘automobile.'”
- Each of you are NOTICED that, since you have falsely accused Me with your “toll violation notice” under your federal Texas Transportation code, does that means that you intend to get one of your code enforcers to MURDER me just like a Harris County Sheriff did to somebody recently? Or do you intend to engage in the theft of property? Or do you intend to assault me with an unlawful arrest? Or do you intend to falsely imprison me? Or do you intend to kidnap me?
- Each of you are NOTICED that, no corporation has any standing to do anything in any court of law, therefore, in the event of a lawsuit, each of you will be sued in your personal capacity
“My opinion is and long has been that the mayor and aldermen of a city corporation, or the president and directors of a bank, or the president and directors of a railroad company and of other similar corporations, are the true parties that sue and are sued as trustees and representatives of the constantly changing stockholders…. A corporation, therefore, being not a natural person, but a mere creature of the mind, invisible and intangible, cannot be a citizen of a state, or of the United States, and cannot fall within the terms or the power of the above mentioned article, and can therefore neither plead nor be impleaded in the courts of the United States.” Rundle v Delaware & Raritan Canal Company 55 U.S. 80 (1852) [emphasis added],
- Each of you are NOTICED that your Texas Transportation Code is actually a federal statute for US citizens
“…..Federalizes State civil law, including common law.–The rule serves to federalize not only the statutory but the common law of a State. Kniffen v. Hercules Powder Co., 164 Kan. 196, 188 P.2d 980 (1948); Kaufman v. Hopper, 220 N.Y. 184. 115 N.E. 470 (1917), see also 151 App. Div. 28, 135 N.Y.Supp. 363 (1912), aff’d., 163 App. Div. 863, 146 N. Y. Supp. 1096 (1914); Norfolk & P.B.L.R. v. Parker,… STATE AND FEDERAL VENUE DISCUSSED: The civil laws effective in an area of exclusive Federal jurisdiction are Federal law, notwithstanding their derivation from State laws, and a cause arising under such laws may be brought in or removed to a Federal district court under sections 24 or 28 of the former Judicial Code (now sections 1331 and 1441 of title 28, United States Code), giving jurisdiction to such courts of civil actions arising under the “* * *laws * * * of the United States” where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $3,000, exclusive of interest and costs.” Jurisdiction over Federal Areas Within the States – Report of the Interdepartmental Committee for the Study of Jurisdiction over Federal Areas Within the States, Part II, A Text of the Law of Legislative Jurisdiction Submitted to the Attorney General and Transmitted to the President June 1957, page 156-158, & 165, and further,
- Each of you are NOTICED that I DEMAND to see your evidence that I am a US citizen, because there is no such thing as a US citizen
“…it might be correctly said that there is no such thing as a citizen of the United States. ….. A citizen of any one of the States of the Union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing.” Ex Parte Frank Knowles, 5 Cal. Rep. 300,
“. . . (E)very taxpayer is a cestui qui trust having sufficient interest in the preventing abuse of the trust to be recognized in the field of this court’s prerogative jurisdiction . .” In Re Bolens (1912), 135 N.W. 164.
“A “citizen of the United States” is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT (Public Charitable Trust), the constructive, cestui que trust of US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc.” Congressional Record, June 13 1967, pp. 15641-15646
“Chap. 854. – An Act to establish a code of law for the District of Columbia.” which was Approved on March 3, 1901, by the Fifty-Sixth Congress, Session II, at 31 Stat. 1189, and in Sec. 117, at 31 Stat. 1208, where it says;
“That in addition to the jurisdiction conferred in the preceding section, plenary jurisdiction is hereby given to the said court holding the said special term to hear and determine all questions relative to the execution of any and all wills…”
and at Chapter Fifty-Six in Sec. 1617, at 31 Stat. 1432, where it says;
“The Legal Estate to be in Cestui Que Use”
- Each of you are NOTICED that the use of any statutes, codes, rules, regulations, or court citations, within any document created by Me, at any time, is only to notice that which is applicable to you, and is not intended, not shall it be construed, to mean that I have conferred, submitted to, or entered into any jurisdiction alluded to thereby.
- Each of you are NOTICED that you have no right to assault me with your Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966
“(h) DEFINITION’s. …. “(3) MOTOR VEHICLE.-The term ‘motor vehicle’ means a self-propelled vehicle which is registered for highway use under the laws of any State or foreign country..” Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966 at Public Law 89-719 at 80 Stat. 1130-1131
- Each of you are NOTICED that in order for you to have jurisdiction, you have to prove that I consented to give up my God given common law right to the free use of the highways
“It is impossible to prove jurisdiction exists absent a substantial nexus with the state, such as voluntary subscription to license. All jurisdictional facts supporting claim that supposed jurisdiction exists must appear on the record of the court.” Pipe Line v Marathon. 102 S. Ct. 3858 quoting Crowell v Benson 883 US 22
- Each of you are NOTICED that your presumptions do not avoid liability for constitutional rights violations
“The power to create presumptions is not a means of escape from constitutional restrictions.” Bailey v Alabama, 219 U.S. 219, 238, et seq., 31 S.Ct. 145; Manley v Georgia, 279 U.S. 1, 5-6, 49 S.Ct. 215
- Each of you are NOTICED that your determination with your “TOLL VIOLATION NOTICE” is a Bill of Attainder
“bill of attainder. 2. A special legislative act prescribing punishment, without a trial, for a specific person or group. • Bills of attainder are prohibited by the U.S. Constitution (art. I, § 9, cl. 3; art. I, § 10, cl. 1). — Also termed act of attainder. See ATTAINDER; BILL OF PAINS AND PENALTIES . [Cases: Constitutional Law 82.5. C.J.S. Constitutional Law §§ 429–431.]” Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th Edition, page 496
“BILL OF PAINS AND PENALTIES bill of pains and penalties. A legislative act that, though similar to a bill of attainder, prescribes punishment less severe than capital punishment. • Bills of pains and penalties are included within the U.S. Constitution’s ban on bills of attainder. U.S. Const. art I, § 9. [Cases: Constitutional Law 82.5. C.J.S. Constitutional Law §§ 429–431.]” Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th Edition, page 499
“Bill of Attainder” means Legislative acts, no matter what their form, that apply either to named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial. United States v. Brown, 381 U.S. 437, 448-49, 85 S. Ct. 1707, 1715, 14 L.Ed. 484, 492; United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303, 315, 66 S.Ct. 1073, 1079, 90 L.Ed. 1252.
- Each of you are NOTICED that when dealing with a statute, all judges become bought and paid for Clerks, and cannot do anything judicial
“A judge ceases to set as a judicial officer because the governing principals of administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their evidence, testimony, record, arguments and rationale for that of the agency. Additionally, courts are prohibited from their substituting their judgments for that of the agency.” AISI v US, 568 F2d 284.
“When acting to enforce a statute and its subsequent amendments to the present date, the judge of the municipal court is acting as an administrative officer and not in a judicial capacity; courts administrating or enforcing statutes do not act judicially, but merely ministerially.” Thompson v. Smith 154 SE 583. [emphasis added]
“…judges who become involved in enforcement of mere statutes (civil or criminal in nature and otherwise), act as mere “clerks” of the involved agency…” K.C. Davis, ADMIN. LAW, Ch. 1 (CTP. West’s 1965 Ed.)
“It is the accepted rule, not only in state courts, but, of the federal courts as well, that when a judge is enforcing administrative law they are described as mere ‘extensions of the administrative agency for superior reviewing purposes’ as a ministerial clerk for an agency…” 30 Cal 596; 167 Cal 762.
and your “Toll Violation Notice” status is a fraud and a nullity
“Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities” Burns v. Sup., Ct., SF, 140 Cal. 1
- Each of you are NOTICED that your determination with your “TOLL VIOLATION NOTICE” is a Void Judgment
“Where there is no jurisdiction there is no judge; the proceeding is as nothing. Such has been the law from the days of the Marshalsea, 10 Coke 68; also Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall 335,351.” Manning v. Ketcham, 58 F.2d 948.
“A void judgment is one which, from its inception, was a complete nullity and without legal effect” Lubben v. Selective Service System Local Bd. No. 27, 453 F.2d 645, 14 A.L.R. Fed. 298 (C.A. 1 Mass. 1972). Hobbs v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 485 F.Supp. 456 (M.D. Fla. 1980).
“Void judgment is one which has no legal force or effect whatever, it is an absolute nullity, its invalidity may be asserted by any person whose rights are affected at any time and at any place and it need not be attacked directly but may be attacked collaterally whenever and wherever it is interposed.” City of Lufkin v. McVicker, 510 S.W. 2d 141 (Tex. Civ. App. – Beaumont 1973).
“…all acts of judges, magistrates, U.S. Marshals, sheriffs, local police, all void and not just voidable.” Nestor v. Hershey, 425 F2d 504
and each of you are personally responsible in the event that your Satanist code enforcers assault me, or kidnap me, or falsely imprison me, or engage in the theft of property.
- Each of you are NOTICED that when you make a “Toll Violation Notice”, you are operating in your private capacity as a Revenue Officer under the federal Tax Lien Act of 1966, and you have no immunity, and you are personally liable
“Judge loses his absolute immunity from damage actions only when he acts in clear absence of all jurisdiction or performance of an act which is not judicial in nature.” Schucker v. Rockwood, 846 F.2d 1202
“When enforcing mere statutes, judges of all courts do not act judicially” and thus are not protected by “qualified” or “limited immunity,” SEE: Owen v. City, 445 U.S. 662; Bothke v. Terry, 713 F2d 1404
“Officers of the court have no immunity, when violating a constitutional right, for they are deemed to know the law.” Owens v Independence 100 S.C.T. 1398 (Ezra 7:23-26)
“An officer who acts in violation of the Constitution ceases to represent the government”. Brookfield Const. Co. v. Stewart, 284 F. Supp. 94.
- Each of you are NOTICED that I DEMAND that you provide proof that;
- I am a US citizen, AND,
- carrying passengers or property for hire, AND,
- that I have knowingly, willingly, and intentionally consented to give up my God given common law right to free travel on the highways, AND,
- your witnesses to this alleged crime, or
if I see or hear another word about this, I will sue each of you, in your personal capacity, for racketeering, among other things, in federal court.
- Each of you are NOTICED that if you have any doubt that I have the capability to file a lawsuit, I suggest that you go to the US Supreme Court website and search for my name.
- Each of you are NOTICED that you each are personally liable for any potential assaults, kidnappings, false imprisonments, thefts and MURDERS that may occur at the hands of your code enforcers, because of your presumptions, and your assaulting me with your District of Columbia codes.
- Each of you are NOTICED that everything you do is a fraud and a lie, because
- You assault me with your fraudulent fictitious US citizen slave status
- You assault me with your fraudulent fictitious ZIP CODEs
- You present yourselves as a neutral and unbiased judge, when in reality you are bought and paid for
- You assault me with your satanic Roman law
- You assault me with your fraudulent fictitious hearsay evidence
“Once a fraud, always a fraud.” 13 Vin. Abr. 539.
“Things invalid from the beginning cannot be made valid by subsequent act.” Trayner, Max. 482. Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary 9th Edition, page 1862
“A thing void in the beginning does not become valid by lapse of time.” 1 S. & R. 58. Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary 9th Edition, page 1866
Time cannot render valid an act void in its origin. Dig. 50, 17, 29; Broom, Max. 178, Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary 9th Edition, page 1862,
“Ex dolo malo non oritur action. Out of fraud no action arises. Cowper, 343; Broom’s Max. 349.” Bouvier’s Maxims of Law, 1856,
and any act by any government official to conceal the fraud becomes an act of fraud;
“fraus est celare fraudem. It is a fraud to conceal a fraud. 1 Vern. 270.” Bouvier’s Maxims of Law 1856
and fraud is inexcusable and unpardonable;
“Fraus et dolus nemini patrocianari debent. Fraud and deceit should excuse no man. 3 Co. 78.” Bouvier’s Maxims of Law 1856
and any fraud amounts to injustice;
“Fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant. Fraud and justice never dwell together.” Maxims of Law, Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Edition, page 1832
“Quod alias bonum et justum est, si per vim vei fraudem petatur, malum et injustum efficitur. What is otherwise good and just, if sought by force or fraud, becomes bad and unjust. 3 Co. 78.” Bouvier’s Maxims of Law, 1856.
- Each of you are NOTICED that you are Satanists
“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” John 8:44
“….. I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, [or Christians, etc.] and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.” Revelations 2:9
and your judgment day is coming
“But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers [pharmaceutical drug pushers], and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” Revelations 21:8
- Each of you are NOTICED that your lying, thieving, murdering, Vatican, Jesuit, BAR member liars (attorneys) do NOT have authority to represent me, or make legal determinations for me, and if you think that they do, it will result in a racketeering lawsuit, with them named as well.
- Gary E. Treitsch, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Nick Turner, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Laura Cahill, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Calvin Harvey, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Kay Aune, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Clay Cossey, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Lawanda Howse, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Lisa Casteneda, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Peter Key, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- John Tyler, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Patti Evans, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Quinton Alberto, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- John R. Blount, before God, Angels, and these witnesses, I shake the dust of the earth from off my feet against you (Matt 10:14, Mark 6:11, Luke 9:5) and we will be talking about this on judgment day, satanist!
- Each of you are NOTICED that this Declaration is signed and sealed in red ink this _____________________ day of June in the year two thousand and sixteen, on the land of Texas pursuant to your Rule 201 of your Rules of Evidence, and locus sigilli
“locus sigilli – The place of the seal. Today this phrase is almost always abbreviated “L.S.” ” Black’s Law Dictionary 9th Edition, page 1026.
This Declaration is made before God, Angels and these witnesses and submitted “UNDER PENALTIES with PERJURY” [28 USC § 1746(1)].
Notice for the principal is notice for the agent and
notice for the agent is notice for the principal.
This instrument was prepared by Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn.
GLENN WINNINGHAM FEARN, and all derivatives thereof
My Copyright
______________________________________L. S.
Glenn Winningham; house of Fearn, sui juris
sovereign living soul, holder of the office of “the People”
man on the land known as Texas, without the UNITED STATES
With full responsibility for my actions
under the Laws of YHWH as found in the Holy Bible
Witnesses
Name Location Signature
_____________________ ____________________ ____________________
_____________________ ____________________ ____________________
_____________________ ____________________ ____________________
_____________________ ____________________ ____________________
_____________________ ____________________ ____________________
sovereigntyinternational blog 