The Paradox of Person

Wednesday, October 17, 2012

The Paradox of Person – Why “person” is both the central problem and last remnant of remedy for justice in the Western-Legal System

No other concept in Western-Roman Law is arguably more important than “person”– as all statutes, ordinances, case citations, writs, summons, benefits and punishments are founded on the presumed existence of “persons”.

No other concept in Western-Roman Law is more hated and despised than “person” by those who sympathize with the views of people variously described as the “freedom movement” or the “truth movement” or the “patriot movement”. The catch cry for many groups throughout the world in repudiation of the central tenet of “person” is to proclaim “I am not the person” also known as the “strawman argument”.

Despite the protests of countless defendants who continue to be brought into the courts of various nations and provinces around the world that say “I am not the person”, the members of the Private Bar Guilds that now control most courts as private “for profit” businesses seem to have no problem defeating the “strawman argument” by responding with absolute confidence that “you are the person”.

In many respects it may be because the concept of “person” is so fundamental, so ubiquitous throughout the system of Western-Roman Law that those who seek legitimate remedy regard the notion of “person” as abhorant. Some simply dismiss it as a fictional abomination. Other commentators within the freedom movement have successfully erected the mental equivalent to giant “beware of the dog” signs around it.

Yet what is person? What does it actually mean? How is it constructed? Where did it come from? And why?

This is the purpose of this brief article- to attempt to explain by answering the brief questions listed above why the paradox of “person” is both the central problem and last remnant of remedy for justice in the Western-Legal System. We begin with the historic context of the origin of the concept, where it came from and why.

All the world is a stage – the “mask” and the actor

[1]The word “person” comes from the ancient pagan Latin word persona meaning “part or character (of play), appearance or countenance, theatrical mask or death mask”. The Latin word persona in turn is derived from the Ancient Greek term prosopon (πρόσωπον) possessing exactly the same meaning as persona; and

[2] It was the Ancient Greeks, not Shakespeare that struck upon the notion “all the world is a stage” in the perfection of drama (δρᾶμα) meaning “to act, to take action or to achieve” and nomos (νόμος) meaning “customary law, statutory law, oration of law, or song”. Before television, the radio or the internet, the Ancient Greek philosophers considered the idea of “recreating the events” of an alleged controversy as a means of witnessing the arguments and identifying flaws between the various parties. Thus, the actions of theatre and the dispensation of the law were seen as being intimately linked; and

[3] The earliest Greek philosophers considered there to be primarily two (2) prosopon (πρόσωπον) being the mask of life, or comedy and the mask of death, or tragedy. Similar to the popularity of television crime and court shows today, the attendance to watch a trial performed by actors at the local amphiteatron (ἀμφιθέατρον) was popular entertainment for the people. Unfortunately, even in ancient Greece the “entertainment value” of witnessing actors play out the parts of a trial to determine the fate of an accused often overshadowed the substance of the case; and

[4] It was Aristotle in the 4th Century BCE that instituted major reforms within the practice of nomos (νόμος) with a professional class of judges known as ephetai that formed a new professional class of judges to replace the arkhons (or arkhai as singular) of the “the Eleven” and the dikastea being a semi-permanent body of part-time jurors to replace to popular “hordes” that previously would vote on whether someone was to be executed or live if they liked the drama; and

[5]The Pagan Roman Empire continued the same notion as Ancient Greece of theatre and law sharing a natural symbiosis and form. Under the ancient Pagan Roman Empire, the Chief civil and military magistrates invested with imperium were called Consuls and periodically held called ‘consulatio’ – hence where we get the modern English words and concepts of consult and consultation; and

[6] Below the Consuls were the Praetors and the Tribunes. However, when the Tribunes met in number of three or greater, they had the power to veto laws, decrees and acts of all other magistrates except dictators (consuls granted extraordinary powers under emergency); and

[7] Similar to other ancient law, Roman law considered oral testimony as primary evidence. Contrary to deliberate manipulation and corruption of history, there was no “professional class” of jurists within Rome. Instead, a citizen would on occasion, if unable to speak clearly, hire an actor to speak in their place as a “persona”. In such circumstances, the actor was sworn to recite the truth as told to them by the accuser or defendant on their testicles (being removed if they lied) – hence the origin of testimony; and

[8] By the 8th Century CE and the emergence of the Sacre Loi (Sacred Law) of the Carolingian Empire and the first formation of the Catholic Church and Canon Law (in direct opposition to the Holly Roman Empire of Antioch, also known as the Byzantine Empire), the concept of actors or “persona” performing in place of the actual accused or accuser was abolished and considered an abomination against Anglo-Saxon Law; and

[9] Under the Instatutum, (“Institutions”) of Sacré Loi (Sacred Law) first introduced by Charles Martel in 738 CE, all disputes between smaller estates known under Carolingian law as “peto sessionis” (petty sessions) were to be heard in “Placitum”, while all serious property disputes and crimes carrying the death penalty called “quatio sessionis” were to be heard in “Manorum” being at the Manor Hall of the Baron to whom the accused served.; and

[10] In accordance with the Sacré Loi (Sacred Law) defined by the Carolingians in the 8th Century, a Placitum was presided over by one (1) to three (3) justices of the peto (petit sessionis) known as Iustitia Petit sworn under solemn oath to uphold and protect the law. The most senior of the Iustitia Peto (Petit) was known as a Praesideo, or if only one Iustitia Peto (Petit) was hearing the matter, he was known as the Praesideo. The term “praesideo” comes from Latin meaning “a guardian, defender, director or ruler of (sacred) law” and is the origin of the word “president”; and

[11] Significantly, in opposition to the original concept of “persona” by the Romans and prosopon (πρόσωπον) by the Ancient Greeks, the Ango-Saxons considered the oath or vow of a living flesh man or woman as of paramount importance being their “bond” – bringing a return to a principle that was fundamental to Celtic Law including the fact that a man could not be convicted on testimony gained through torture – in other words, our word must be given freely and without duress if it is to be regarded as true and reliable; and

[12] Contrary to deliberate corruption, the word “person” first appeared in Western-Roman Law as late as the 16th Century through two bodies of work with mysterious origin – the first being the folio of Shakespearian Plays and secondly the production of a suspect work known as Corpus Iuris Civilis in 1583 by Jesuit trained and educated Denis Godefroy.  However, unlike its limited use in the times of Ancient Greece and Rome, the creation of “person” was now based on the premise that “all the world is a stage” and that “everyone possesses a person”.  Most notably, the treatise of Godefroy attempted to claim these concepts existing as far back as the 6th Century CE by Emperor Justinian of the Holly Roman Empire (Byzantine Empire); and

[13] One of the most notable philosophers contributing to the spread of “person” was Thomas Hobbes (b. 1588 – d.1679), also beneficiary of Jesuit education and assistance in Paris, who in 1651 published his famous work Leviathan. Hobbes states numerous key arguments concerning the nature and function of person, the most notable for the purpose of this article being: “A person, is he, whose words or actions are considered, either as his own, or as representing the words or actions of another man, or of any other thing to whom they are attributed, whether Truly or by Fiction.”; and “[…] a Person, is the same that an Actor is, both on the Stage and in common Conversation; and to Personate, is to Act, or Represent himself, or another; and he that acteth another, is said to bear his Person, or act in his name; “; and ” Of Persons Artificial, some have their words and actions Owned by those whom they represent. And then the Person is the Actor ;  and he that owneth his words and actions is the Author: In which case the Actor acteth by Authority. “; and

[14] The full emergence of “person” in the modern sense did not take full hold in English Law until the Bill of Rights of the openly treasonous Parliament and Judiciary of 1689. Again, to hide its provenance, numerous former statutes were altered or simply re-written to claim the provenance of “person” a from as early as the 13th Century under Edward Ist.  The fraud is easily exposed when one compares verified original writings of the 13th Century, 14th Century and even 16th Century; and

[15] A notable English philosopher of the 17th Century that immensely aided in the synthesis of the fraudulent “canon law” of the Roman Cult, also known as the Vatican to English Law was Sir William Blackstone (b.1723 – d. 1780) who in 1765/1766 published the first volume of his Commentaries on the Laws of England, stating: “Rights are however liable to another subdivision, being either, first, those which concern and are annexed to the persons of men, and are then called jura personarum or the rights of persons; or they are, secondly, such as a man may acquire over external objects, or things unconnected with his person, which are styled jura rerum or the rights of things.”; and ” Persons are also divided by the law into either natural persons, or artificial. Natural persons are such as God of nature formed us: artificial are such as created and devised by human laws for the purpose of society and government. “; and

[16] The emergence of “person” in Europe beyond England was in the late 18th Century and the start of the 19th Century with the Civil Code of Napoleon being a central statute heralding the emergence of legal persons and statutory persons underpinning future laws; and

[17] Today, the concept of person is fully integrated into every statute, every ordinance, every instrument and every right of society.  The definition of person has also devolved according to Blacks 9th Edition (pg 1257) as “1. A human being – also termed natural person. 2. The living body of a human being. 3. An entity”. Is this an accurate definition based on the foundation of law that is supposed to underpin Western-Roman Law, or is this definition of “person” a deliberate corruption?

The purpose and function of “person”
[18] So far in this article we have defined the origin of “person” and its historic and intimate connection to viewing the world as a stage or a film or some kind of holographic “Matrix”. However, to best define what is “person”? let us refer to Article 17 – Person of Canonum De Ius Positivum (Canons of Positive Law) one of the twenty-two (22) books of Canon Law known Astrum Iuris Divini Canonum:
Canon 1498 
 
A Person is a 16th Century CE created word (but falsely claimed from the 6th Century CE) defining a fictional Form of Property enclosing certain characteristics and appearances as the Identity of one or more Level 6 Higher Order Life Forms to which further Rights of Use are then annexed.
 
Canon 1499 
 
The word Person comes from the Latin word persona in Latin meaning “mask, character or part of a play” and originates as a key element of the fraudulent treatise known as Corpus Iuris Civilis at the end of the 16th Century whereby all “persons” by their nature were falsely claimed to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Roman Cult, also known as the Vatican. The invention of Person from the 16th Century enabled the “enclosure” of the bodies of living flesh beings and the “alienation” of traditional and natural rights associated to them with “person” being viewed as a type of “property” which could be purchased, sold, seized or surrendered.
 
Canon 1500 
 
The existence of a valid and proper Person requires the following minimum nine (9) elements to be present being Author, Script, Actor, Relation, Binding, Part, Actions, Record and Title:
 
(i) Author, also known as the Principal (including but not limited to the Creator, Trustor, or General Executor) and the holder of original Authority  is the term used to define the One empowered to direct the actions of the Actor (Agent or Trustee) in accord with the expressed Script; and
 
(ii) Script, also known as the Deed, or Covenant or Statute is the term used to define the instrument of empowerment by which the Author (Principal) directs the actions of the Actor (Agent) for the benefit of the Part (Identity and Beneficiary); and
 
(iii) Actor, also known as the Persona, or Interpreter, or Agent or Trustee is the term used to define the one who consents to perform the Part (Identity) in accord with the Script (Deed, Statute or Law); and
 
(iv) Relation, also being the Trust between the Author (Principal) to Actor (Agent) relation expressed as being either a General (Public) or Special (Private) appointment and where only three (3) types of Relation are possible being “self” or “another” or “not known”; and
 
(v) Binding, also known as the Agreement is the term used to define the formal binding of the Actor (Agent) to the performance of the Part (Identity) and consents as to the direction of the Author (Principal) in accord with the Script (Deed) such as a Vow, Oath, Acknowledgment, or Seal or Signature on paper; and
 
(vi) Part, also known as the Identity and the Beneficiary is the term used to define the fictional mask, or character to be supported by the Actor (Agent) at the direction of the Author (Principal); and
 
(vii) Actions, also known as Personation, is the actions of the Actor (Agent) performing and supporting the Part (Identity) as stated by the Script (Deed, Covenant or Statute); and
 
(viii) Record of Event, also known as Personification being the formal written memorial of the event of the Creation (Birth) of the Person through the previous elements of  Author, Script, Actor, Relation, Binding, Part, and Actions; and
 
(ix) Title to Beneficial Interest being the Property of the Person created by the Extract and Acknowledgment of the Record of Event.
 
Canon 1501 
 
A Level 6 Higher Order Life Form may be associated to more than one Person associated with more than one Trust. However, a Level 6 Higher Order Life Form may not logically, legally or lawfully be:
 
(i) the holder of title for Beneficial Interest (Beneficiary) at the same time as acting in the capacity of Trustee (Actor); or
 
(ii) the holder of title for Beneficial Interest (Beneficiary) at the same time as acting in the capacity of Executor (Author or Principal).
 
Canon 1502 
 
All Persons may be categorized according to the three (3) possible types of Relation being the Author (Principal) to Actor (Agent) being: 1st Person (Self), 2nd Person (Another) and 3rd Person (Not Known):
 
(i) 1st Person, also known as a Natural Person and in propria persona is when the competent mind of a carnate Level 6 Higher Order Life Form as Author (Principal) appoints, records and publishes themselves by Special (Private) appointment as Actor (Agent) by some solemn binding agreement. Therefore, a 1st Person or Natural Person possesses “natural title” to right of beneficial use associated with the 1st Person synonymous with such pronouns as “I, thou, me, my, mine, myself, we, us, our, ours and ourselves”; and
 
(ii) 2nd Person, also known as an Artificial Person is when a carnate Level 6 Higher Order Life Form as Author (Principal) appoints another carnate Level 6 Higher Order Life Form by Special (Private) appointment as Actor (Agent) by some solemn binding agreement. Thus, a 2nd Person or Artificial Person is synonymous with such pronouns as “you, yours, yourself and yourselves”; and
 
(iii) 3rd Person, also known as a Legal Person, or Statutory Person or Surrogate Person is when the Author (Principal) is hidden or not known and the Level 6 Higher Order Life Form fails to properly express any competent in propria persona (1st Person) or 2nd Person Author (Principal) to Actor(Agent) Relation prior to the commencement of any interpersonal intercourse. In the 3rd Person, the flesh and body of a Living Level 6 Higher Order Life Form is mis-taken, and presumed to be, by default, the “person” and the Statutes of Law, or Rules of the Court as Script (Deed) and the Judge or Magistrate as the Author (Principal). Thus, a 3rd Person or Legal Person is synonymous with such pronouns as “he, she, it, they, them, their, theirs and themselves”.
 
Canon 1503 
 
A Person may possess greater or lesser authority, powers and rights than another. All authority and power of a Person is inherited from the limits of powers and authority of the Author (Principal):
 
An Author (Principal) is said to inherit the rights, authority and powers of the father and mother, unless specifically deprived by will; or
 
An Author (Principal) may be granted certain rights, authority and powers by the laws of a higher estate or trust to which they belong or rightfully possess a beneficial interest.
 
Canon 1504 
 
All Persons may be categorized and ranked according to four (4) possible levels of authority, powers and rights from the greatest and highest powers and authority to the lowest and least powers and authority being (in order of rank): Divine, True, Superior and Inferior:
 
(i) A Divine Person is the purely Divine Spirit Person associated with a Divine Trust formed in accord with the sacred Covenant Pactum de Singularis Caelum by the Divine Creator into which the form of Divine Spirit, Energy and Rights are conveyed; and
 
(ii) A True Person is the Form attributed to a True Trust formed when an associated Divine Trust already exists and there is a lawful conveyance of Divine Rights of Use and Purpose, known as “Divinity” to a True Trust associated with then the birth and existence of a living Level 6 Higher Order Life Form. A True Person can never be claimed or argued as higher than the Divine Person from which it derives its authority; and
 
(iii) A Superior Person is the Form attributed to a Superior Trust when an associated True Trust already exists and there is a lawful conveyance of First Right of Use and Purpose, known as “Realty” to a Superior Trust associated with the birth of a service or agreement associated with the Membership of a living Level 6 Higher Order Life Form to a valid Ucadia society. A Superior Person can never be claimed or argued as higher than the True Person from which it derives its authority; and
 
(iv) an Inferior Person or “Roman Person” is the Form attributed to any Western-Roman Trust and is the lowest standing and weakest of all valid forms of Persons. An Inferior Person can never be validly, legitimately, logically, legally, lawfully or morally claimed or argued as superior to a Superior Person.
 
Canon 1505 
 
A Juridic Person is a type of Artificial Person created by a lawful act and association of two or more Level 6 Higher Order Life Form in accord with these canons:
 
(i) Only seven (7) Forms of Juridic Person are valid: Supreme, Universal, Global, Civil, Mercantile, Union and Inferior (Roman); and
 
(ii) An aggregate of Persons as a Juridic Person without at least two (2) active members of the Homo Sapien species ceases to have Form; and
 
(iii) No aggregate of persons intending to obtain Juridic personality, is able to acquire it unless competent authority has approved its statutes; and
 
(iii) Representing a juridic person and acting in its name are those whose competence is acknowledged by these Canons or by its own statutes; and
 
(iv) Upon the extinction of a Juridic Person, the allocation of its goods, rights and obligations is governed by law and its statutes. If these give no indication, they go to the Juridic Person immediately superior, always without prejudice to the intention of the founders and donors and acquired rights.
 
Canon 1506 
 
Excluding Divine Personality, all Persons are temporary and based on temporary trusts:
 
(i) True Persons are extinguished upon the physical death of the flesh form associated with the True Trust, with Divine Right of Use returned to the associated Divine Trust; and
 
(ii) Superior Persons are extinguished upon the extinction of the associated True Trust or the abjuration of membership to the associated Ucadia Society, or the suspension or revocation of a particular membership or service, or a fundamental change to the deed or agreement of formation of the person; and
 
(iii) Juridic Persons are extinguished in accordance with their own statutes and superior competent authority. No Juridic Person, excluding Society Juridic Persons formed and named in accordance with Pactum De Singularis Caelum and associated covenants and charters, may exist for more than one hundred (100) years; and
 
(iv) Inferior Persons such as Legal Persons, also known as Statutory Persons and Surrogate Persons are extinguished upon the fulfilment of their purpose and intention, or upon exposure of fraud, or material breach of agreement, or presentment of a person of higher standing and authority.
 
Canon 1507 
 
A failure to recognize a valid and properly constituted and formed Person or the claim of superior jurisdiction of an Inferior Person over a Superior Person or True Person cannot ecclesiastically, logically, legally, lawfully or sensibly be sustained and is therefore without force and effect with any subsequent judgment null and void ab initio (from the beginning).
Consistency of Canons to Western-Roman Law Knowledge of Person
[19] Far from contradicting the historic definitions, meanings and applications of the use of Person, the Canons of Positive Law as listed above are perfectly consistent with both the contemporary definition of person and its definition as first introduced in the 16th Century; and
[20] If we take the most recent updated version of the meaning of “person” from Blacks 9th Edition (pg 1257) , then we can see from Canon 1502 of Positive Law of Astrum Iuris Divini Canonum that definition 1. is equivalent to the 1st person also known as “natural person”, while definition 2. is entirely consistent with the 2nd person, also known as an “artificial person” and definition 3. is the 3rd person or “legal person”; and
[21] Therefore, no reasonable person (no pun intended) demonstrating sound mind and competence could argue that the Canons as expressed within this article derived from Astrum Iuris Divini Canonum (Canons of Divine Law) are contradictory, or inconsistent with the foundations of Western-Roman Law.  Rather, the canons “illuminate” and expose the inner workings of person for all to see such form and function; and
[22] As a result, it is hoped that those who take the time to carefully read and review with article, especially the total code of law of Ucadia and the Society of One Heaven will come to better appreciate not only the form, function and nature of law, but the form, function and nature of modern court procedure and where its deliberate corruption, obstruction and misuse may be revealed.
Personal Jurisdiction and the need for the Legal Person
[23] All administrative law, all public statute law and all court rules and procedures depend and rest upon the presence of a legal person (also known as a statutory person or surrogate person) or the effect “control of the person. If the Person present for the matter of controversy is not a legal person, but a “superior form” of person that does not agree to surrender its authority to the court, then the court has a problem – as it has to serve the best interests of resolving the controversy concerning the person associated with the matter; and
[24] Names such as employee, citizen, taxpayer, driver, employer, recipient are some of the many hundreds of terms used within public statutes to describe “legal persons”. As modern Western-Roman courts operate within the first form of law (without recess or deliberate change of form) as administrative law courts, the application of personal jurisdiction of the court pertains to an alleged controversy associated with a public statute concerning a type of legal person and the presence of the legal person in question; and
[25] If however, the person who is present is not a legal person, but a Level 6 Higher Order Life form who has chosen to represent themselves in propria persona as a Natural Person then the court must effectively convince the natural person to surrender their position to the absolute authority of the court. This is most frequently done by a combination of force, trickery and intimidation through such corruptions as:
(i) forcing the Natural Person to stand “pro se” and therefore automatically agree to the personal jurisdiction; or
(ii) asking if the Natural Person is willing to “understand the charges against (the person)” therefore stand under the absolute authority of the court; or
(iii) demand the Natural Person take an oath “under the court” thereby creating a legal person and automatically surrendering their Natural Person; or
(iv) if all else fails, simply intimidate, trick, falsify and unsettle the Natural Person by ignoring due process until through inaction by the Natural Person against breach of due process they “surrender” to the power of the judge or magistrate; and
[26] If the person is a 2nd person, also known as an “artificial person” as in a classic agent-principal relation, then courts frequently obtain personal jurisdiction by:
(i) Demanding only members of the Private Bar Guild may be agents or attorneys and therefore by their oaths, automatically submitted to the absolute authority of the court; or
(ii) Demanding the agents have suitable insurance (bond) and swear an oath to “uphold due process” and by default to stand under the absolute authority of the court; or
(iii) Demanding the paperwork of agents are originals with wet ink signatures when submitted to the court clerk, therefore transferring original “title” of the agent-principal relation to the control of court; or
(iv) Removing the right, or mention or forms available for proper recording of an agent or power of attorney to represent the principal in court; or
[27] The questions on how to address such obvious perversions and obstructions of justice when they occur within the modern courts deserves a separate article in itself.  However, for the moment, the illumination and proper interpretation of the form, function and nature of Person that the Canons of Divine Law of Astrum Iuris Divini Canonum at least afford some remedy through knowledge as to what constitutes a proper person and a person of higher standing and authority than merely a “legal person”.
Logical fallacies and absurdities used by Private Bar Guild Members concerning Person and the Law
[28] Plato stated: “the world is divided into two realms, the visible (which we grasp with our senses) and the intelligible (which we only grasp with our mind). The visible world is the universe we see around us. The intelligible world is comprised of the Forms—abstract, changeless absolutes”.  Thus, the Ucadia Model as well as the complete and total law of the Society of One Heaven is consistent with the foundations of Western thought; and
[29] This being said, the mental illness of “legal realism” has infected the minds of many of the best and brightest members of the Private Bar Guilds that they demonstrate neither logic nor reason within their arguments – often with fatal consequences to the validity, legitimacy and efficacy of such presumptions; and
[30] For example, a cornerstone of all authority throughout the world is the logical and absolute immutable arguments that (a) all lesser offices obtain their authority from higher offices possessing greater authority and (b) a lesser office therefore cannot have greater authority than the one that created it; and
[31] In practical and as simple terms as possible, it means a “legal person” cannot have more authority than an “artificial person” of the same name and that neither a “legal person” or “artificial person” can have more authority than a “natural person” of the same name; and
[32] As is repeatedly recognized by the Roman Cult, upon which all Western and English Law is now based and aligned, this concept of “succession of authority” is absolutely recognized and considered fundamental to asserting the authority claimed by the Vatican – that is any ordinary who were to contradict such a fundamental point of logic and reason by way of direct contradiction would automatically render themselves excommunicated from any rightful judicial office and unfit to interpret any verdict; and
[33] Consider then the recent commentary by Associate Chief Justice J. D. Rooke of the Corporation of Canada (CIK: 0000230098), registered as a business with the US SEC into the District of Columbia and operating from 1746 Massachusetts Ave NW Washington DC 20036.  Here, this independent contractor and employee of the corporation known as Canada states: “This person (Frank O’Collins), whom I understand is an Australian, has published what he calls “Divine Canon Law”, the law that governs persons in the “One Heaven Society of United Free States of Spirits”. At least one Alberta OPCA litigant has claimed to be subject to only this “Divine Canon Law”. Does this defeat the inherent jurisdiction of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench? Of course not. While I strongly question that a person could bind themselves and society to abide by some distinct legal scheme that trumps the common law and statute, success would still leave that person subject to the scrutiny and supervision of this court”; and
[34] Ignoring for the moment the absence of logical argument, reason and the complete contradiction of the most basic tenets of what is generally known as “human rights” and “democratic freedoms”, what the reference by Justice Rooke demonstrates is a complete lack of logic and reason to the very meaning and function of person.  Instead, there is almost a “parrot like” reversion to the almighty authority of a legal person over all other persons – even from the perspective of being a private contractor employed by a corporation masquerading as a legitimate justice of a true and proper sovereign country; and
[35] Clearly, as Plato intimates, the divine form trumps any temporal form and the whole history of Western Logic and Reason agrees, excluding those crippled by the mental illness of “legal realism” as demonstrated above.  Thus, the True Person as demonstrated by your Live Borne Record from membership of the Society of One Heaven trumps any and all legal persons and other inferior persons.  Yet, as we have shown, this will not stop the deliberate corruptions, obfuscations and lunacy of a legal system on the verge of complete and total collapse.
Genuine knowledge of Person as remedy
[36] As has been stated repeatedly on discussions and previous postings, the only genuine remedy rests with knowledge and its competent use.  As you hopefully have seen through this article, there is significant potential remedy in finally recognizing the form, function and nature of person; and
[37] Statute is supposed to be public law, adjudicated in public courts. If the last stand and defense of the out of control Private Bar Guilds is to deny access to these facilities, then you have the absolute right to demand a hearing in a public venue.  If none are found in a timely manner, you have the right to ensure a public hearing is convened by fellow members of the society; and
[38] To deny public access to the law is proclaim the law private and therefore not applicable to you. You can have a matter decided in private- but that is a choice and an agreement. You cannot be forced; and
[39] It is therefore a genuine hope that from this article those that are seeking the honoring of the written law, the defense and application of justice and the end to rampant judicial and legal corruption find solid footing on their continuing endeavours; and

[40] As for the vast majority of honest lawyers, judges, magistrates and court officials who have suffered as a the silent majority while the corrupt minority destroy the law, it is hoped that you also find hope and possibly the strength to hold these colleagues to account for their actions.

http://ucadia.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/the-paradox-of-person-why-person-is.html

Leave a comment

Filed under Law/Geopolitics/ Politics, Rights, Social/Society

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s