Non-Statutory Abatement
[Important Note: For those of you who are new to the abatement process, we recommend you do not skip anything in this article, but read everything very carefully. You are solely responsible for knowing and understanding all of what is said herein. We are not responsible for your loss or gain from your use of the Non-Statutory Abatement process. No hierarchy is claimed and you should never look for one. You have the Law written in Scripture, and you have your relationship to the Holy Spirit, Who will guide you to the Truth. Consult Them first before you contact us.
This work contains the newest abatement, default, and updates. This process must be served by two or three brothers in your assembly. Click here to skip our introduction and be taken directly to the newest abatement material.
For those of you who do not have an assembly of two or three brothers to serve the abatement, you must use our older abatement with our older ways of serving the abatement. Click here to go directly to the older abatement material.]
Preface
In a nutshell, a non-statutory abatement is strictly the Law of God. It is served upon those who are coming against you; those who the complaint is coming from. It’s served on them personally by the Christ’s assembly at wherever you happen to be; the Christ’s assembly meaning “For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:20). It doesn’t have to be a Church or anything like that. And the abatement is presented as a covering for whoever the government is coming against unlawfully. However, if you’ve committed evil, as defined by God’s Law and not by man’s law (which would be contrary to God’s Law), then the abatement would not apply in your particular case, because we’re to submit to those authorities when we have committed evil.
Whatever they believe that you’re violating, which does not violate the Law of God, can be abated by serving it upon them. They have ten days to answer, and when they don’t answer then the brothers go back and serve a default upon those defendants (they become defendants when you serve the abatement).
The first abatement was done by Almighty God, when he drove out Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden, and put Cherubims and a flaming sword, to keep them away from the Tree of Life (Genesis 3:24). And that’s basically what an abatement does; it throws their action out. Our Father was the first abator, because Adam and Eve were not following His Word, they decided to partake of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Which means they decided to re-define what good and evil is, they became their own god and said, “Wow! We can be God. We now know what good and evil is. We’re going to define it in our own image and likeness because we are now god (Genesis 3:5).”
And that is really what happens when government goes beyond its duty. An abatement suspends their nuisance until they answer to the Law. The duty of a true, lawful, ordained government is to punishment evildoers, and praise them that do well (John 18:22-23, Romans 13:3-4, 1 Peter 2:14). That’s what you submit yourselves to. That’s why the governments and magistrates are in place by the Lord, to punish your evil.
When the government goes beyond that, when they start licensing everyone, you must ask, “Why are they doing that?” Anything contrary to the Law of God is really no law at all. And their law is the Law Merchant. And when the Lord has written it on your heart to repent and no longer partake of that system, and that system wants to continue to try to draw you back to them, to draw the “old man” back, then that’s where the abatement comes in. But the abatement will not be successful for anyone if they’ve not repented. Repentance is the first step, then the abatement comes.
You have to be walking in the Truth, because it is a document of Truth, it declares the Truth. And it can only declare the Truth if you’re walking in it. That’s a walk of Faith.
For those who ask about the physical origin of the non-statutory abatement, there is no origin in man’s law, that’s why it’s called a “non-statutory abatement.” The abatement is a document of faith. It’s origin is in Genesis, when God abated Adam and Eve. There’s many more examples in scripture of abatement. Seek and ye shall find. As long as it’s in the Truth, it’s “origin” is irrelevant.
Introduction
The Non-Statutory Abatement process is a continually developing Work, by the Grace of our Father, by and for all of the Christ’s bondmen. We have but one goal. To compel the provisional governments de facto conducting civil affairs at the federal, state, county, and city levels, their agents (tax collectors and banks), and assigns – to keep the Law. If they do this, they will leave the God’s children alone and let them continue to live in the Peace of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ.
Contrary to the media and the press, we are not anti-government, and we are not ‘paper terrorists’ or any other kind of terrorists trying to overthrow the civil power; very simply, we seek, not to do our own will, but to do our Father’s will as did our Lord and Saviour Jesus the Christ. We know that current provisional governments exist to keep the “low and lawless forms of humanity”(1) from doing violence to all, including themselves. Thus, as Lawless as the current provisional governments are, without them there would be total anarchy.
Many people say, “the government is doing this bad thing to me,” or “the government is trying to force me to do this act.” But this is not true. The government doesn’t do anything to you, it’s the individual officers that are doing these things to you. That’s why we deal with those officers who come against us.
The need for an abatement usually comes about because we were partaking of the things of the world. In order for the abatement to work, we must have repented from those acts and no longer partake of those things. When the world comes against you and tries to pull you back into their system, that is when the abatement will stop that action. But if you are still partaking of their system, the abatement will not work. The abatement brings the Truth to bear upon them, and if you are not living in the Truth, the abatement will not work. This is actually a blessing! Because this aspect of the abatement prevents people from abusing it. You will be tested to see if you are who you say you are. If you’re not who you say you are, the abatement will not work. It can’t be abused this way.
The real problem has nothing to do with law, but religion, as George Washington said in his Farewell Address: “One’s god dictates the kind of law one implements and also controls the application and development of that law over time. Given enough time, all non-Christian systems of law self-destruct in a fit of tyranny.”
Thus, we seek to restore the vitality and enforcement of God’s Law for all men in all ages. This means, of course, a full restoration of the customs and usages of Christians applying God’s Law, all for His Glory, to live their everyday lives. There are some who despise the Christian agenda. That is their problem, not ours.
An abatement is a recognized procedure in jurisprudence. It comes out of the English Common Law (before it was merged with commercial law), which was based upon scripture and derived from scripture; it’s basically God’s Law applied.
The Works herein are, for us, one more step in the process of restoring true Law, as we attempt to take a few more steps on a very long road back from the Dark Age of Humanism which has claimed more victims than Europe’s Black Death. The Handbooks, from modest beginnings, have sparked a new interest in local Christian government and have also provided tools to restore Lawful government at the local level, which helps bring knowledge, understanding and hope into the Christian arena.
The Non-Statutory Abatement Handbook is the first in a series of non-carnal Lawful weapons that can be used to retard the advance of Imperial powers, until members of the Christ’s assembly everywhere return to His old paths from the whence they began to err.
Our position is: “Law is better than blood – one Law for all.”
Who Non-Statutory Abatements are for
Abatements are for those bondservants of Christ who are committed to pressing the Crown Rights of King Jesus and who are willing to take on the responsibilities related thereto. They are for those who are willing to throw off the ‘chains that bind them,’ known as ‘commercial activity,’ ‘benefits, privileges and opportunities from a secular world,’ and all of the attachments created thereby. Repentance in these areas is essential for a successful abatement. They must have the Christian Discernment necessary to hold off the encroachment of ‘the powers of the earth.’ The ability to do this comes only through Knowledge, Understanding, Wisdom, and Perseverance under God, and most importantly, Prayer.
Who Non-Statutory Abatements are not for
Abatements are not for those who are looking for a ‘quick fix,’ ‘silver bullet’ or ‘a magic remedy.’ Abatements are not for those who believe that a few words on a piece of paper are going to make all of their troubles go away, and then go on about their ‘business’ engaging in the activities within the private lex mercatoria of the un-Godly. Abatements are not for those who put their faith in a bank or insurance company for limited liability protection, instead of faith in God’s protection. Abatements are not for those who want a vehicle to threaten a judge with a lien, etc., or are looking for some way to get revenge because they believe they’ve been injured, for “vengeance is Mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” Abatements are not for those who believe, through the teachings of their 501(c)3 Church, that you must obey all authority, even if it be an un-Godly one that rewards evil and punishes good. Abatements are not for those who are afraid that they will be called a ‘religious nut’ when standing on the highest Law, which is God’s Law through Christ. Abatements are not for those who will cower
at the appearance of ‘an official’ telling them that they must submit to their ‘power.’ Abatements are not for those who fear the imperial powers more than they fear God.
What Non-Statutory Abatements Do
Non-Statutory Abatements respond to the vast majority of imperial powers paperwork — head on. When prepared and served properly, they’ve been very successful at stopping imperial arbitrariness, foreclosures, trespasses, suits, etc. (when the status of the abator is what the abatement says it is) — before they get started.
Abatements have the force and effect of an indictment and/or an at-Law case or suit when used against current international/martial rule courts. When the defendant doesn’t answer, and with Default properly written and served, the case becomes Res Judicata, i.e., final judgment has been made.
Abatements properly served with Default nihil dicit, constitute a public record of the defendant’s abandonment of their suit. (NiHIL DICIT: He says nothing. It is the failing of the defendant to put in a plea or answer to the plaintiff’s declaration by the day assigned; and in this case judgment is given against the defendant of course, as he says nothing why it should not. Vide 15 Vin. Ab. 556; Dane’s Ab. Index, h. t. – Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856).
Abatements turn those who file imperial process against you, from plaintiffs, to defendants, who under the rules of engagement during war, must strip themselves of all stratagems, and engage in their true character.
Abatements are low in cost to write and serve, and by ending an opponents case quickly, they lower dramatically the cost of maintaining and defending against imperial powers suits. Abatements follow the Maxim of Law that, “the law looks to the end of all litigation.” Contrast this with the current “law” which is: the only law
is that which comes out of the judge’s mouth. Judges have the Midas touch, i.e., what ever he touches or says becomes law because he touched or said it.
Abatements discussed, herein, have been served all over America, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, and have been used successfully against: Federal District Courts, Internal Revenue Service, Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, State Tax Entities, County Agencies, Bureaus, Courts, Banks and Loan Companies, and, countless others. Note: If your status is not what the abatement purports it to be, your abatement may be ignored. That is why it is very important to eliminate the ties, such as a driver’s license, use of a Social Security Number through employment with a corporation (which receives its right to exist from the State), etc.
Sample abatements listed after the text are based on many years of experience and thousands of actions, served in every state of the union, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia, in all types of courts, jurisdictions, and venues.
More importantly, research on the abatement process has not only continued, but intensified, with a marked increase in the number of genuinely committed bondservants of Christ working on perfecting them through God’s Word. Every word, clause, phrase, and sentence in the sample abatements has been gone over with a fine-toothed comb, and if there was any doubt about using a specific word, etc., it was researched and replaced.
The capitalization of nouns, appellations, and names, has been checked and re-checked.
Maxims of Law used in sample abatements are carefully selected for maximum utility.(3)
The point of explaining this is, to caution Readers, that any changes made in abatements herein, adding or removing words and sentences to existing text, etc., is dangerous, and may likely result in a document that is worthless. There are also those non-Christians and ‘Judeo-Christians’ (Yahveh-ites and Yahshua-ites) who have removed Christ and Scripture from the abatement, and have failed every time. No Law, no foundation. ‘Private opinion, belief, or interpretation,’ and ‘denominational dogma’ are not, and never have been, recognized in Law.
Replacing the text of the appellation of Demandant, name of the Defendant, Demandant’s location for a Defendant to respond to (if he can), and Defendant’s address, dates, title of paper being abated, etc., should be the only changes necessary, in most cases.
We know, that in spite of warnings, thousands have made and will make all sorts of frivolous, unnecessary, and harmful changes in the samples, the vast majority of which will compromise the abatement’s effectiveness. We strongly caution the Reader against doing so.
Faith in God Works
The old adage that “faint heart ne’er won fair maid,” can be re-worded as “lack of faith can cut your own throat in Law.” Once, a man back east served a Non-Statutory Abatement to stop a foreclosure, one of the first such abatements ever done. It successfully stopped the banks foreclosure for six months. Then, the bank began sending nasty letters, making threats, etc. Instead of sticking to the abatement, he got involved in Leroy Schweitzer’s Bank Warrant game, shammed his abatement and lost everything, and the man’s position was now worse than before. It’s sad that he never stopped to ask whether or not the Warrants were the godly thing to do.
Faith in God’s Law kept the wolf from the door in this man’s case. Bank Warrants did not just re-open the door to foreclosure, it smashed the door, utterly.
What is so shocking is that men and women of otherwise good will have involved themselves in a very dangerous game that is utterly contrary to God’s Law, and they still call themselves Christians. “What communion hath light with darkness?” In other words, walking with Mercury, i.e., “commerce,” and walking with God at the same time are an impossibility, for “No man can serve two masters.” We do not recommend anyone playing with Satan’s instruments such as Bank Warrants, Bills of Particulars or Liens, no matter how great the temptation. Doubting God’s Fidelity to his Word is equivalent to calling God a liar.
Non-Statutory Abatements:
What They Are, and What They Were Never Meant To Be!
[An amended Article written in July of 1996 for Issue the Seventh of The Christian Jural Society News]
In a recent case up north in Oregon, a ‘person’ used an abatement and went to jail.
In another case, a ‘person’ in Louisiana used the abatement after appearing in court and complained bitterly when it failed.
And, one of those ‘abatement gurus’ who plagiarized and ‘improved’ our first abatement package, saw to it that ‘his people’ shammed their abatement when they tried to use his ‘new and improved process.’
Do I have your attention yet???
From the moment I released the Non-Statutory Abatement process in January of 1995, there has been a concerted effort by some in the ‘patriot movement’ to discredit the process for one reason or another, none of which has damaged the process, but instead, has damaged these so-called ‘experts in common law’ and their unsuspecting victims.
These so-called ‘patriots’ not only have their own special ‘insight’ into how the process should be done, but have acquired ‘pirated’ material of the first abatement package and are selling it at sometimes exorbitant prices and leaving my phone number in it, so that I get all of the questions. In one case, an ex-bar attorney charged a man $7,800, called him a ‘sentient human being’ (meaning, a conscious animal) in the abatement and the man ended up losing his house over it.
These tactics are nothing new in the law reform movement, which is one reason for the movements’ tarnished name. These people are, in some cases, more corrupt than the ‘government’ they say needs to be reformed. The Scriptural injunction at Matthew 7:3 concerning the mote in another’s eye is apropos here.
Examples of the abuse of the process are: removing all references to Christ from the abatement; telling people to use such un-Godly cites as the U.C.C., Title 42, Title 4, etc., which is private commercial statute law, in a Non-Statutory instrument; telling people to file the process into a court instead of serving it on a defendant personally; telling people to send the abatement Certified mail instead of Registered, thereby injecting it into a commercial venue; telling people to call themselves Respondent instead of Demandant; telling people that it’s not necessary to serve the default if you don’t hear from the Defendant; and finally, promoting the idea that one can use the abatement to threaten judges and I.R.S. agents.
I have the following to say about the above catalogue of abuses:
One. The abatement works when it uses the highest possible Law, which is God’s Law. Removing Christ from the abatement reduces it to a form of law that can be easily dispensed with. [Replacing God and Jesus the Christ, with Yahweh and Yahshua, will sham the abatement because of the custom and usage of Christian nations using the former designations, even though they have the same spiritual meaning].
Two. Using statutory cites in a Non-Statutory Abatement process guarantees that the abatement will be ignored.
Three. If you file, instead of serve the process, you lose your court and are asking the un-Godly to decide against you.
Four. If you serve the abatement by Certified instead of Registered Mail, it will not have a chain of recorded custody in the process and you will be ignored, unless the court or agency is just as ignorant as one who uses Certified Mail. Certified Mail is also a commercial war measure instrument begun during Lincoln’s War.
Five. Calling yourself a Respondent is an equity term and you are looked at in their law as a fictional persona. The parties will be cast with the wrong standing if this is done and guess who will lose in the conflict.
Six. Serving the Default and making Public Notice of same is absolutely essential.
Seven. Not being located at an ‘address’ is absolutely essential to have a successful abatement.
Eight. Using any form of process to threaten anyone, constitutes attempted extortion in all forms of law.
This last tactic has resulted in at least one arrest for threatening a judicial officer to date. This is precisely why the woman in Oregon who made the threat of filing a commercial lien on a judge for $10,000,000 if he did not obey her abatement, was ignored and went to jail.
The man in Louisiana, while he was complaining, revealed that all the while he was trying to use abatements, he had two other cases going in the same court and had an attorney as well. One cannot render unto Caesar and unto God at the same time. Remember, there’s always a rusty nail in the top of the fence for those who think they can ride both sides of it.
And, in the series of cases that were lost, mentioned above, it seems that the abatement package that was used had been ‘improved’ by an Ohio Title 42 ‘guru’ and his ‘business’ partner. Apparently their Title 42 business was not doing as well as they would like and thus, one week after learning about abatements at one of our seminars, they were ‘experts’ and began doing seminars with the ‘new and improved’ statutory abatement. There is other such nonsense going on in other areas of the country as well. These problems will work themselves out in the end.
When a Non-Statutory Abatement is commercially improved, it becomes a statutory abatement, which, of course, has no force and effect anywhere, not even in Fantasyland at Disneyland or with Alice in Wonderland.
Those who have Title 42 ‘businesses’ [or pro se ‘businesses’] and spend their lives encouraging people to ‘hang ’em in court,’ have a commercial twist in mind that once was very profitable. Losses in court [and the advent of the Non-Statutory Abatement process], however, have a tendency to depress one’s stock in such commercial ventures.
Therefore, it is not surprising that the commercially oriented types will never be successful with an instrument such as a Non-Statutory Abatement, which is Christ-based, simple to understand when accompanied with diligent study and Discernment, and non-commercial.
Those who inject their own ‘ideas’ of law, based as they are on absolutely no Lawful Authority, actually believe that the court cannot tell the difference. It is so obvious in most cases that even those who are public ‘drool’ graduates with no prior experience in law can see when the abatement changes its character from a Godly one — to an un-Godly and Lawless one. Looking at the secular statutory system, it can be likened to a first-year law student attempting to write a Supreme Court decision. Ludicrous!
The point is this: When one varies from certain pre-set guidelines established through long-standing usage and custom, one not only appears ignorant of the Law, but at the same time, shams their abatement.
Therefore, just as the literati of man’s law know the difference in style between John Doe and John Jay, so do the courts recognize when a ‘sentient common law sovereign citizen human being person’ injects its convoluted diatribe into the Abatement, thereby evidencing a conflict of law within itself.
Some will read this article who may feel that I’m expressing a certain type of arrogance in what I’ve written above. Let them believe what they will, or in other words, let the blind lead the blind or let the dead bury the dead. The truth is, The Christ’s assembly were developing and using the Abatements a year before we released it to the country. We did the original research and writ writing — from the authoritative sources. Others have done the plagiarizing, and mutilation.
This abuse and the deliberate moves to discredit the abatement process by some has come to the point where it is time for us to speak out against all of those who engage in such tactics and then call, write, or fax us, with the problems that result.
Now that I’ve vented my spleen, so to speak, I’ll go through the basic guidelines, once again.
What Abatements Are
One. In Lawful courts, a Non-Statutory Abatement is a dilatory plea that acts to delay a plaintiff’s action until certain errors in plaintiffs process are corrected. In this sense, it acts to improve plaintiff’s process.
In military/commercial law courts, when the abatement is properly written and served, it comes to the court from a higher Law that the defendants cannot answer because they are bound by the Rules of Pleading in Codes, ordinances, rules, and regulations — and not Law.
Thus, because all parties to the action must stand at the same level, i.e., have the same standing in the same law, and since the martial law courts have an inferior standing relative to Lawful instruments of any kind — abatements act as an effective bar against un-Lawful process.
Therefore, they always go to default — if one serves the Default soon after the Rule Day, i.e., the day on which the abatement goes to Default.
Two. The abatements were developed quietly for more than a year before they were released and we have continually refined the statements of Law therein, to the point where, the early abatement package is comparatively antiquated as far as the substance and quality of its content is concerned.
Three. The single most important factor in the success of the abatements has been the standing of the abater, i.e., the one who serves the abatement.
One must be living in Truth in order to have the standing in Law to bring a Non-Statutory Abatement to bear on a case.
Keeping a street or P.O. box number while trying to issue an abatement is fatal — always.
Four. The only law superior to the existing martial law powers, that is still readily accessible to bondservants of Christ, is God’s Law, found in Christ and the holy scriptures.
Only by genuinely acting in the mode and character of a bondservant of Christ can one consistently bring Non-Statutory Abatements to bear against martial law courts, who have only a form of law.
One who is not a bondservant of Christ, or who professes to be one but believes they live under grace and not under Law, and does not act in the mode and character of a bondservant of Christ, i.e., follows the Law of God, will have the same standing as the courts, who see them as mere human beings, persons, individuals, etc., without Law and who are subject to every whim of the reasonable judge’s fancy.
Five. Serving, not filing an abatement is essential, because that which is filed in the court is presumed to be an answer upon which the court may rule, thereby surrendering jurisdiction.
Since the court cannot hear Lawful process, it must rule against a filed abatement because it imports a Law foreign to the court, which the court by Rule, must deny and set aside.
Serving an abatement starts another action, a counter suit, if you will, which a court or martial law defendant has no standing to answer when the abatement is properly written and served by a bondservant of Christ. It remains in a godly venue across the board. Any deviation from these criteria simply shams the abatement.
Six. Any direct contact with a court by any other means such as: making an appearance; filing other process before an abatement; hiring an attorney; serving a court clerk (who will file the abatement into the court); posting bail or, signing an O.R. (release on your Own Recognizance); being arrested and making an admission or confession of information that will confirm the court’s jurisdiction; making an appearance in an administrative hearing or answering a summons; where there is a damaged victim; or, if one as a matter of public record is the owner or employee of a corporation; renders the abatement of no effect.
The abatement is thus, the very first response a bondservant of Christ makes against processes of martial law courts, their agents or assigns, administrative agencies, banks, etc.
Do not respond to a letter with another letter. Respond in Law with a Non-Statutory Abatement.
Seven. Abatement is the proper response to a court or agency by any godly Woman under Coverture; i.e., when under the covering of her husband, father, brother in Christ, or the Christ’s assembly, in accordance with Scripture.
The first abatement served in this case abates the process improperly brought against a godly Woman under covering. Such an abatement is always issued by the bondman of Christ sitting as the woman’s covering, for purposes of Law.
What They Were Never Meant To Be
One. Abatements are not, never have been, and never will be a ‘silver bullet’, as some commercial promoters have claimed. They are for Christian preservation in cases where the abator is a bondservant of Christ living according to God’s Law, for His Glory, to edify His assembly in every part of their being, and have not rendered damage to an innocent victim and are not rendering unto Caesar, i.e., not wasting God’s inheritance by engaging in the ways of the Law Merchant by selling insurance, speculating in fictional commodities such as real estate, stocks and bonds, selling to the public-at-large, ’employment’ by a Corporation, which gets its right to exist from the State, and other such commercial depravity.
Two. Abatements are not, never have been, and never will be used successfully by those who choose to live contrary to Scripture, by accepting benefits from a government that has deliberately chosen to operate under the humanist religion. Such benefits include receiving ‘free delivery’ of mail to one’s home, office or P.O. Box; taking a license from the State to pursue the calling or exercising the duty for which he or she was given by Almighty God; receiving tax exemptions from entities never having the standing to tax anyone in the first place; accepting the conveniences and benefits of a government banking system or protection of an insurance company and other such activities that are contrary to Scripture.
Three. Abatements are not, never have been and never will be used successfully for one who has given jurisdiction to the court or agency by ‘appearing’ for them and accepting counsel and judgment from them. Accepting counsel and judgment from the un-Godly is un-Godly.
In closing, I will say this. The sooner all bondservants of Christ break these commercial contacts and disengage from the lex mercatoria, the sooner We will understand what True government really is. Living by God’s Law preserves a people; living by man’s laws destroys a people.
The General Guidelines
Non-Statutory Abatements take their name from the fact that the process exists and can be written — not because of any statute passed by some legislature — but by virtue of its customary usage arising out of God’s Law. The authority for its use, therefore, does not require any legislature’s stamp of approval.
As to the nature of an abatement, Shipman says:
There are certain preliminary objections to the maintenance of the suit, which do not attack the
core or merits of the plaintiff’s case. These formal defects are waived, unless they are raised by the defendant at the first opportunity. These were known in common law pleading as matters of abatement and suspension, and were raised by the so-called “dilatory pleas,” since they tend merely to delay or put off the particular suit, by questioning the method in which it is pursued, rather than by disputing the very cause of the suit or right to relief in proper form. Dilatory pleas are to the jurisdiction of the court, alleging that it has no cognizance of the subject-matter; to the disability of the plaintiff, by reason of which he is incapable to commence or continue the suit, …(4)
Thus, the only facts stated in an abatement are the facts of defects in plaintiff’s initial process (the very first piece of paperwork sent to you), along with plaintiff’s inability to bring a suit.
In Lawful dealings (not under The Laws of War), a Non-Statutory Abatement suspends a suit until a plaintiff can correct errors in his original process. If errors are corrected in a response to the abatement, plaintiff’s suit continues. This is why a Non-Statutory Abatement is called a dilatory plea, because it acts to delay proceedings of a plaintiff’s suit, but does not prevent the plaintiff from correcting his errors, and continuing his suit.
Note that the abatement only deals with the facts concerning the process itself, not the plaintiff’s argument or the core issue or merits of plaintiff’s case. Does the plaintiff have standing to bring the suit?; has he misnamed the defendant?; and other facts that have nothing to do with the core issues.
When the defendant (you) in the plaintiff’s suit (administrative agency, bank, etc.) responds with a Non-Statutory Abatement, you the defendant, become the Demandant, not another plaintiff, and the plaintiff who filed the original suit becomes the Defendant in a new action, which is the Non-Statutory Abatement.
If, for whatever reason, the Defendant in the Abatement cannot correct the errors in his process or suit, he cannot pursue his original case ‘in Law,’ and the Abatement is said “to lie” against the Defendant (originally the plaintiff who brought the first action).
‘Marks’ are statements in the Abatement that list the fatal errors in the original plaintiff’s suit or process, which the Abatement Defendant must correct if he wishes to continue his original suit.
Other fatal errors that may be stated in the ‘marks’ besides misnomer, are; misjoinder of causes of action, misjoinder, and misjoinder of parties.(5)
But, when proper Non-Statutory Abatements are issued against imperial powers, they have the effect of process at-Law and:
Suspend all proceedings in a suit, from the want of proper parties capable of proceeding therein.(6)
The ‘want of proper parties’ means that someone filed a suit who had no standing to file such a suit in the first place. Thus, it is impossible for someone to file a suit in one jurisdiction to try and reach a purported defendant in another jurisdiction.
One in a superior position cannot be sued by one in an inferior position in Law. Thus, parties under emergency powers, The Law of War, International and Municipal Law, have no standing in Law and thus cannot answer Non-Statutory Abatements from bondservants of Christ, who in fact, act in the mode and character of a bondservant of Christ. The courts recognize the existence and power of God’s Law, but can do nothing about it because God’s Law is the highest jurisdiction there is, and military law is the lowest.
The Rule is; those under The Law of War cannot answer processes at Law.
Plea Out of Bar
A plea in abatement is not a plea in bar, but out of bar. That is, a court cannot hear and judge matters that have not yet come under a court’s authority. For cases to come under court authority, all preliminary matters, such as errors in the original process, (marked in the abatement) must have been resolved, or the plaintiff has failed to properly bring his case to you or the court.
In fact, there is no case and nothing for the court to hear. The case exists in the first place, because someone (plaintiff) serves process on someone else. But, a plaintiff cannot put a case in bar, unless his process complies with court rules, the first of which is, plaintiff’s process must have no errors in it. Errors constitute defective process and are sufficient cause for a purported defendant to issue an abatement.
Since abatements are pleas out of bar, courts cannot hear argument on a case, unless some act of the respondent brings him in bar and makes him a defendant, i.e., by not answering plaintiff’s process, by demurring, or by otherwise conceding jurisdiction to the court to hear the matter.
In contrast to the above, consider a situation where one works, is mustered into, or employed by imperial powers, i.e., “effectively connected in a trade or business with the United States.”
First, the law says it is a privilege to work for civil governments.
Second, all privileges granted by civil government are taxable.
Thus, it is likely that a Non-Statutory Abatement will not lie against process issued by imperial governments to seize wages and salaries paid by them, unless the entity who files the process to seize, is utterly incompetent. Then, abatement may be successful, but don’t expect it to be.
Differences between a ‘persona'(7) created by Imperial governments and the bondservant of Christ Man or Woman, are important and determine when the abatement will, or will not, lie — if the Christian Man or Woman is not otherwise working for the government or a State approved corporation..
State granted, imperial privileges, via licenses (a token of the persona) differ from the prerogatives held by a king, i.e., the bondservant of Christ who has the prerogatives (jussus and immunitas) of the King of King. The Maxim of Law is:
Domus sua cuique est tutissimum Refugium — Every man’s house is his castle.(8)
If a government entity, however, comes after one on the Membership Roll of a Registered Church (a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit State sponsored corporation), or if you have a Trust of any kind that is being attacked,
both are statutory and thus, cannot resist seizures, and abatements may not lie. Other examples are: private employment contracts, independent contractors;(9) employees of Departments of Motor Vehicles; and, others ‘privileged’ to be a fiduciary (employee, agent, trustee, actor, representative) of an Imperial power, are subject and the abatement probably won’t lie.
Scripture has something to say on these points:
Render therefore, unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.(10)
This verse applies especially to the resurrected Roman Imperial law that now rules current provisional governments.
It also relates to the money question, in that bank loans, bank checks, bills of credit, etc., are fictitious debt instruments created by imperial governments with no value or substance, while dollars specie (pre-1964 silver coin), have value and substance, and are Scripturally Lawful. If Cæsar permits issuance of these debt instruments, he has jurisdiction (imperium) over their use. But, if bondservants of Christ deal only in dollars in silver, Cæsar is dead – long live Christ Our King.
The Imperial powers do not want to open the money issue and the question of the bankruptcy of the United States and all its agents (the States, banks, etc.) in any court. Remember: Imperial privileges created can also be abolished, destroyed, or taxed, by their Imperial creator.
On Appearance
There is much discussion in the law reform movement on the type of appearance one can make in court without granting jurisdiction. The consensus is, by special appearance only. But, do such appearances accomplish the desired result?
An appearance is any act or proceeding by which a defendant places himself before the court, in order to participate in an action:
Personal jurisdiction or power to render a judgment in personam may be acquired either by personal service of summons or by appearance. If a defendant or his attorney does any act with reference
to the defense of the action, he is held to submit himself to the authority of the court and all defects in service of process are thereby cured.(11)
The modern law does not seek to compel appearance, but if the defendant is properly served and neglects to appear and plead, the court will render judgment against him for default of appearance. Inasmuch as the default constitutes an admission of the cause of action set forth in the declaration, all that the plaintiff has to prove is his damages.(12)
Special appearances are only for the purpose of determining if a court has jurisdiction or not. But, if a court, or, its principal, has a money interest in a case, the court almost always decides in its own favor. Motions to courts grant jurisdiction to hear the motion, even through a special appearance.
If one appears and answers ‘here’ when his name is called, he grants jurisdiction to a court over a persona which you, the bondservant of Christ of substance has become ‘surety’ for. Saying ‘here’ means the bondservant is present and ready to defend, and becomes the surety for the persona. The bondservant has waived all of his Rights, including his God given Duty to abate the process.
The problem is, the bondservant pays the fine and does the time, not a persona, because the bondservant, as surety, applied for the benefit, privilege, or opportunity that created the persona.
The bondservant has the ‘benefit of discussion’ in the court concerning a persona, but no prerogative to use his Master’s Law, because he waived his Rights when he answered for a persona without first correcting plaintiff’s process by abatement. The bondservant appeared and perfected the errors in plaintiff’s process by confirming he is the persona, and that the plaintiff has standing to bring the suit. From that point on, only the law of the persona can be used. All of the above also applies to all administrative agencies (I.R.S., etc).
The ‘benefit of discussion,’ is:
A proceeding, at the instance of a surety, by which the creditor is obliged to exhaust the property of the principal debtor, towards the satisfaction of the debt, before having recourse to the surety; and this right of the surety is termed the ‘benefit of discussion.'(13)
Note: one has a ‘benefit’ of discussion, not a ‘right’ of discussion. In another work, there is an excellent article of the related idea of “pledge.”(14)
Never, never, confuse the difference between the flesh and blood Man and the fictional persona. The persona is the principal debtor and the flesh and blood Man or Woman is he or she who stands in as the surety for that persona resulting from an improper answer.
The flesh and blood bondservant of Christ is never the same as the persona. The Man is created by God. The persona is created by man as a means of getting to the bondservant. The bondservant is a Man of substance, while the persona is a ‘person’ of fiction indicated by one or more numbers, i.e., a driver’s license, a ‘birth date,’ Social Security number, Tax I.D. number, home address number, etc.
They are never the same and neither can use the law of the other, because both are bound by the law of their creators. bondservants have a relationship to God through Christ’s sacrifice and resurrection. When a ‘human’ becomes a bondservant, his godly name is written in the Lamb’s Book of Life which is a Christian name known only to God. The Covenant requires the bondservant to abide by God’s Law, not the man-made law of the imperial persona.
The law of persona clouds a bondservant’s relationship to God and interferes with his duty to obey God. Imperial powers create a persona to give an appearance of Lawful process to justify trespass on the bondservant’s liberties, through the imposition of a persona created by novation. Because the bondservant and a persona are under different law, there is a conflict of laws that are mutually exclusive ultimates, i.e., each mutually excludes the other. This is the ultimate conflict of laws.
To illustrate by analogy, God looks at the bondservant through Christ and sees one whose sins are ‘white as snow.’ An imperial powers agent or judge looks through the Codes at the persona and sees one who is as black as the pit, because the agent or judge is blinded to the existence of the bondservant, for even if he could see him, he could not hear the testimony within his secular administration world.
The ‘law’ of persona is never Law because it is directly contrary to God’s Law and. It is based on the Law of War, and is spawned by the god of war (Mars), while the Law of The One True God is based on Himself and is the Law of Peace and Safety. Thus, the maxim:
The Law of God and the Law of the Land are all one; and both preserve and favor the common good of the land.(15)
By way of contrast, the maxims of the law of War are clearly opposed to all true Law:
Silent leges inter armas — the laws are silent amidst arms.(16)
Thus, under the laws of War – statutory and constitutional laws are silent. They become directory only. In short, the laws become arbitrary and capricious under the discretion of the judge.
In 1628, a Petition of Right by Sir Edward Coke was issued against Charles I that stopped martial law in England and America. The relevant passage in the Petition is:
And also sundry grievous offenders by colour thereof, claiming an exemption, have escaped the punishments due to them by the laws and statutes of this your realm, by reason that divers of your officers and ministers of justice have unjustly refused, or forborne to proceed against such offenders according to the same laws and statutes, upon pretense that the said offenders were punishable by martial law, and by authority of such commissions as aforesaid, which commissions, and all other of like nature, are wholly and directly contrary to the said laws and statutes of this your realm.(17)
The bottom line is, one cannot claim a king’s prerogatives or sovereignty, without being an heir or son of the King of Kings, Christ Jesus:
The Spirit Itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ;…(18)
Perhaps now we see why imperial powers create the fictitious persona, with fictitious alter egos, i.e., persons, residents, individuals, human beings, natural persons, etc.,(19) because they have no power over bondservants whose Law they follow is God’s Law. The Roman imperial power extends only to what it creates, the persona, not to the bondservant of Christ.
God’s Law and man’s law are opposed at every point in Creation. God is no respecter of persons, (20) but man is, and his law reflects it, as seen above. Man knows he has no right of dominion over other men, but he nevertheless seeks to gain it, by creating the persona, known only by the nom de guerre.(21)
The bondservant cannot control what the Imperial powers do with his name. But, he can control the way he responds to a persona’s nom de guerre. The spelling makes all the difference between the real, substantive bondservant, and the fictitious vacuum that is a persona, which, so long as it exists, is the means whereby the bondservant’s life, liberty and property are raped, plundered, and pillaged, by Lawless and greedy little men.
We now know why names on Court Dockets (from which one’s name is read) and names on imperial process, licences, etc., are spelled in all capital letters, and why such names are called a nom de guerre (war name), which is specific evidence of the existence of a fictitious persona ‘for their purposes.’ Arguing jurisdiction is a fait accompli and utterly irrelevant if you’ve already answered for the persona.
One may think this is ‘fraud,’ but all names are spelled this way on all imperial process and on the Docket sheet posted outside the door of courts – where all the world can see it. If one fails to note that his name is not spelled according to the Rules of English, that the true Christian name is not on the process, they have no one to blame but themselves. A name spelled in any way other than in the proper Christian form is an error.
The persona has no power to answer defective imperial process. It has no hands to write a response and no voice, because, as the creation of an imperial power it is an absolute fiction, created ex nihilo, out of nothing. And, there is nothing that can qualify as a contract to tell you when and how the persona is created, it is always assumed.
The Maxim of Law is:
Fictions arise from the law, and not law from fictions.
But, if the ‘defendant’ fails to ‘appear’ or answer the process, the courts will issue default judgment against the persona anyway, because the surety – the flesh and blood Man – failed to come to court and answer for the fictional debtor. Thus, if a bondservant wants to stay out of jail, keep his liberty, and property, he must respond to the process and inform the court of the errors that are always there.
With abatements, one responds without ‘appearing’ and process is not perfected on the persona. The bondservant is severed from the persona by the abatement, which is the only response that answers imperial process and stops default judgment against him, provided he has not traversed his case by writing something stupid in the abatement (like UCC codes).
This may be difficult for some to swallow, but in more than two hundred years of Supreme Court decisions from the Runkle case (1799) to the present, it is stated that the Laws of the nation presuppose Christianity — upon which they depend. Non-Statutory Abatements are therefore, a specifically Christian remedy. When a non-Christian asks whether they may use Christian premises in an abatement, we must reply with the Maxim of Law:
No man warring for God should be troubled by secular business.
To continue, once an abatement is served, any type of ‘personal’ appearance (including answering to the persona) nullifies the abatement.
It’s nerve-racking when one serves an abatement against imperial powers and one’s court date passes without his making an appearance. But, trust in God, the abatement will not be answered properly and will go to Default. Then, one serves default against Defendant and the matter becomes Res Judicata, i.e., final judgment has been made. Imperial process goes to default for the same reasons that the imperial court will grant default judgment if one fails to appear and answer an imperial plaintiff’s process. (See, “Response Tactics,” below).
The truth is, no man, godly or otherwise, belongs in imperial powers courts. These courts may distinguish, but we must not. As the Scripture says:
One law shall be to him that is home born, and unto the stranger, that sojourneth among you.
Imperial government’s rule is: “The presence of the body cures the error in the name.”
The Rules of English
A major problem created by imperial schools, posing as ‘public schools,’ that directly impacts on one’s understanding of Law is, the failure to teach The Rules of English Grammar. For example, what words are capitalized and when. This difference alone has major significance in Law. But, imperial schools are only half the problem.
The American people abuse the English language as if it were a right. In Law, this is deadly, because it can put a defendant or plaintiff in jail without ever knowing why. We strongly recommend to Readers that they acquire and study a handbook on The Rules of English Grammar, and make it part of their life’s work to put these Rules into effect – daily. We recommend the older works on Grammar, for obvious reasons.
Nouns name persons, places, or things. General nouns denoting a class of persons, places, or things, are never capitalized. If we mean a specific person, place, or thing, only the first letter is capitalized. Thus, the noun ‘state'(22) and ‘State'(23) are different words denoting two entirely different things. The former (state) is general and used at Law, while the latter (State) is specific and denotes a created entity, i.e., a fictional res, i.e., a thing in commerce.
In today’s courts, persons, places, things, and entire court processes, are always written in all capital letters, a clear violation of The Rules of English. But, this is done to fully inform defendants and plaintiffs of the type of court that will hear the case. It says, clearly, that a court is sitting to hear matters in controversy – between personæ, or, a res and personæ in commerce, and thereby full disclosure is given to all.
Today’s courts cannot deal with real people, places, and things, i.e., substance, because being bound by International law, the lex mercatoria, and The law of War, such courts can only deal with fictional personæ. Thus, all parties agree to be named, and do appear by fictitious names, spelled in all capital letters or with a middle initial, i.e., a nom de guerre (war name).
An example of a war name is, JOHN DAVID SMITH or John D. Smith. Under the Rules of English, the Christian name is spelled John David, and the family name, Smith. Because all corporations, like the persona, are also fictions of law, their names are spelled in all capitals as well. Thus, if I.B.M. is a party to an action, its name is written; INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES, INC. on the court’s Docket, and in all court and administrative process.
Initials or abbreviations of a name, are “no name at all,”(24) and their use creates another fiction. Government administrative documents commonly make no provision in their forms for one to write out his or her middle name. This is a deliberate form of entrapment. This is the practice on all I.R.S. forms that only allow space for or only request the middle initial. Under the laws of War, they can only ask for the fiction. The Maxim of Law is:
An alien enemy cannot maintain an action during the war in his own name.(25)
When preparing the Non-Statutory Abatement, you style any Defendant from an emergency powers court in all capitals, or initials, such as THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, or the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, as it appears on the abandoned paper that you are abating.
Spell out all numerals or numbers in abatements, i.e., The Year of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus, the Christ, Nineteen hundred and Ninety-eight. Numbers are fictions in numerical form and have no substance.
The ‘fictional’ numbers that appear on the abandoned paper (i.e. 1/15/98) are not to be spelled out.
Next, is the use of parenthesis, brackets, curly braces, and boxes. All information contained therein is classed as; “extraneous, explanatory, and interpolated matter, with no force and effect in law.”(26) Therefore, never ‘interpolate’ any statements in the abatement.
Any name not correctly and fully spelled out is a misnomer, literally, mis-named, and is a solid plea in abatement. In most Non-Statutory Abatements there is some reference to the misnomer. When raising misnomer, however, state only the facts that lead a court to conclude a misnomer has been used. Let the court come to its own conclusion.
If your name is a single letter and not a full name, make sure you do not put a period after the single letter
name, because it says that one of your names is abbreviated and is thus a fictitious persona. To save yourself the pains of being mis-interpreted, one might want to adopt a fully spelled name to replace a single letter name.
The above is only a summary of the relationship of English usage and the Law.
The Rule is; Know the English language and use it like a weapon in Law.
What’s in a Word?
If one makes a careful study of the way in which imperial power’s word their paperwork, letters, and process, one will find a very deceitful use of certain words and phrases, all of which are designed to compel one to make a ‘voluntary appearance.’ And, since all appearances are voluntary, the words must carry the maximum impact, yet not cross over the line so as to violate the Rules of Imperial Process. Thus, one may see phrases such as “You must appear at … blah, blah, … at such a date and time, … blah, blah.”
Has this sentence violated the Imperial Rules of Process? Answer: No.
The reason: In man’s law, ‘must’ means ‘may.'(27) What’s really being said is, “We invite you to appear …,” because your appearance must be voluntary. Such phrases are designed to strike fear into the heart of a purported defendant and provoke a knee-jerk reaction that means the he loses!
Other words and phrases using the same kind of deceit are: “Notice of…,” “Notice to Appear,” “Notice of Lien/Levy,” “Notice to Remove,” “Notice of Warrant,” “Notice of Trespass,” “Order to Show Cause,” “Order and Demand,” and “IT IS SO ORDERED.” From what we have all learned from the above, we now know that the phrase “IT IS SO ORDERED,” because written in all caps, is unintelligible in English, and is thus abatable.
Letters from the provisional Government
It is common for all branches of current provisional government to send letters to people they are setting up for fleecing. The purpose of letters is not to inform you, but to inform them as to how much you know, or don’t know, about Law.
People normally respond to letters, with more letters. But letters, as such, have no force and effect in Law. Thus, when you respond to a letter, with another letter, this tells whoever sent you the letter that you know nothing about Law and that you can probably be pressured to roll over and pay without any further trouble on the government’s part. The letter is, therefore, merely a device used by administrative agencies to collect revenues without the bother of issuing process and going to court.
The problem is, this tactic joins you to an action without knowing it.
The I.R.S. uses this tactic, very effectively. Threatening letters making outrageous demands for taxes you probably don’t owe, are typical. Your knee-jerk reaction is, respond with a letter asking all kinds of questions that the I.R.S. could care less about. The point of the outrageous letter and demands is, to provoke a response from you, get you to appear, or make a call to the I.R.S., in which they will apply more heat to force one to roll over. The I.R.S. doesn’t care whether you’ve properly paid “your fair share”; they want more. The object is to compel you to submit to an increase in your voluntary assessments, rather than fight them. The letters are thus, a tactic using fear and intimidation to expose your ignorance of Law.
Remember; most I.R.S. agents are sub-contractors and work on commissions from seized property.
Often, the news media blasts you with stories of how the very wealthy are put in jail by the I.R.S. or have to pay huge fines and penalties for not filing, or filing in error.
But, it doesn’t matter who sends you a letter: do not respond with another letter!!! Respond with Lawful process, i.e., a Non-Statutory Abatement. Their letter may have no force and effect in Law, but the abatement will. Usually, they just go away and you will hear no more from them, unless you change your status, i.e., begin again with home mail delivery, working for a company or corporation, resume a bank account, etc.
The Rule is, respond to all letters from any government agency with Lawful process.
Response Tactics of Imperial Powers
Since, under International/Municipal law, “deceit” is legal,(28) one must expect that all federal, state, county, city, and local imperial government officers and agents will use it to get what they want, which is, to compel the bondservant of Christ to answer for the persona and “voluntarily comply.”
Tactics used by imperial powers to get ‘voluntary compliance,’ would be a joke if the end result was not so vicious. They will lie, cheat, destroy evidence, and create evidence where it never existed. Thus, there is a wide variety of tactics of response used by all government officers and agents to try to get someone who has served a Non-Statutory Abatement to respond in such a way as to nullify or circumvent the effect of the abatement. They cannot, in Law, set aside the abatement. They must deceive you, the abator, in order to force you to sham the abatement. Then they will re-issue a demand, bench warrant, or whatever, and proceed as if the abatement had never existed in the first place.
In the examples of Response Tactics that follow, we assume that some form of government sends you something. It could be a letter from the I.R.S., a Notice to Appear on a traffic ticket, a demand from the local Fire Department to cut your grass, a building code violation, or almost anything else. And, we assume you have properly responded to such forms of communication by serving an abatement and when the government agent did not respond, you served, after the lapse of ten days (not counting Sundays and Holy Days) a Default Judgment against them.
The ten days is taken from scripture (1 Samuel 25:38, Jeremiah 42:6-9, Daniel 1:12-16, Acts 25:6, Revelation 2:10).
Example One.(29)
A Sheriff Deputy shows up at your house with a warrant in his hand. Of course, the warrant will not be a genuine warrant with affidavit attached, court seal, or a judge’s signature in real ink.
It is important to note here that you should never open your door to anyone unless you are expecting a friend. Opening the door is an invitation, and you lose all asylum ‘of the castle’ when you do so:
“The maxim that ‘a man’s house is his castle’ does not protect a man’s house as his property or imply that, as such, he has a right to defend it by extreme means. The sense in which the house has a peculiar immunity is that it is sacred for the protection of the man’s person. A trespass upon his property is not a justification for killing the trespasser. It is a man’s house, barred and inclosing his person, that is his castle. The lot of ground on which it stands has no such sanctity. When a man opens his door and puts himself partly outside of it, he relinquishes the protection which, remaining within and behind closed doors, it would have afforded him.(30)
When you don’t respond to a knock on the door, the door cannot be broken down unless there is some sort of resistance sensed by those knocking. This is why you must stay completely silent:
Breaking doors or windows for entry or exit.
The officer may break open any inner or outer door or window of a house, or any part of a house, or anything therein, to execute a search warrant, if, after notice of his authority and purpose, he is refused admittance or when necessary to liberate himself or a person aiding him in the execution of the warrant.(31)
There is considerable authority to the effect that use of subterfuge to gain entrance to arrest or search is not improper. Of course, if “breaking” is involved, it is necessary for the officers to announce their authority and purpose in demanding entrance. Where a Federal agent, armed with a valid arrest warrant, gained entrance to the defendant’s apartment by stating he was an agent from the County Assessor’s Office, the Court held the entrance lawful, stating: “There is no constitutional mandate forbidding the use of a deception in executing a valid arrest warrant. The case of Gouled v. United States, 1921, 255 U.S. 298, 41 S.Ct. 261, 65 L.Ed. 647, relied on by appellant, holds that a search warrant is invalid even though entry is procured by stealth rather than force. The instant case is different in that the search was incident to an arrest under a valid arrest warrant. Criminal activity is such that stealth and strategy are necessary weapons in the arsenal of the police officer.”(32)
In case you or someone in the house opens the door without thinking (because we’ve been trained to be good little ‘citizens’), the Deputy will call you to the door and after a few remarks, will say something like the following. “Hi, I’m here to talk to John Smith.” John Smith comes to the door and the Deputy says: “In regard to the abatement you served, the judge will agree to drop the Warrant, if you drop the abatement, and you won’t hear from us, again.”
There is only one possible response to this – No!
One may frame their words more diplomatically, but the general idea is, refuse.
This is the mildest and least confrontational type of compelling “voluntary appearance.” Most officers walk rather softly after they have been served an abatement.
Example Two.
Same scenario, same situation, same Deputy. This time he says, “Uh, the judge wants to put out a warrant on you for not appearing on your court date, but he won’t, if you’ll come down to the court house to talk about the abatement you served him.”
In this approach, you are expected to meet the judge half-way and go along.
Don’t!
The bench warrant has already been issued on the Docket , and the Deputy may not even know it! Often, however, they know perfectly well the warrant’s waiting for you.
Again, the polite refusal will handle the situation.
Example Three.
In another case, the scenario is the same, except, John Smith is not home when the Deputy comes. John’s wife answers the door and when she found out what the Deputy wanted, she handed him a “Public Servant’s Questionnaire,” and he left.
Nothing more was heard on the matter.
Example Four.
In another case, after three abatements and three defaults on the same case involving an Order to Show Cause in Federal District Court, the Sheriff’s in a county different from the county where the court sat, sent three Sheriff’s cars to the Smith’s house.
In broad daylight and in front of the neighbors, the Deputies made a great show of force and when they found out that Mr. Smith was not home, asked the Smith’s son where his father was. The son said he didn’t know, the Deputies left, and no more was heard.
The point of this example is, the local Sheriff’s Office co-operated with the I.R.S. and used a half dozen Sheriff’s Deputies to put fear into the Abator and get him to come to court.
Example Five.
In one bizarre case, the local Sheriff put pressure on Mr. Smith’s neighbor to talk to Mr. Smith and get him to go down and talk to the judge.
This example points out very clearly, that imperial powers have no real power to compel performance when true Law has been brought squarely before them. The bottom line is, if they had real Law to back them up, they would not need to use fear, threats, intimidation, and trickery.
The fastest way to compromise your abatement is to answer to the nom de guerre, the fiction, unknowingly. When you are asked your name by an ‘official,’ the name they see on their paperwork is the nom de guerre, not you. If you are asked if you are ‘so and so,’ don’t answer no. By answering no, you become joined in the controversy. Simply say, ‘You don’t know who I am and I don’t know who you are, therefore I have nothing to say to you because you are a stranger and I don’t talk to strangers,’ and it can be continued by importing God’s Law into the situation by saying ‘Let’s search the Scriptures and find out who is who here’ or ‘let’s see if you have a linage to The Tree of Life’ or something to that effect. This is one reason why you should never go anywhere without your Bible. Always try to import God’s Law into these types of situations. If you do not do so, you will be looked upon by them as one of theirs.
Another of their tactics is an attempt to compromise an abatement by mail. In this the imperial powers, after the persona has been properly abated and defaulted, send a letter or process to the abator in general delivery, in the name of the abator’s persona. Remember, that the abatement has the effect of severing the connection between the bondservant and the persona (the nom de guerre).
But, what happens if a bondservant accepts mail from the imperial power (or answers to the nom de guerre)– in the name of the former persona?
Answer: the bondservant and the persona are rejoined and the first abated matter that was dead, is now alive and well again. The reason is, the bondservant has, by his own act, contradicted his abatement and default, and has proved, by accepting mail or saying ‘yes, that’s me’ for the persona, that he is not who he claimed to be in the abatement, and that he is volunteering to be a surety once again, for the persona.
When defective mail comes to the general post-office, write on it, “Not deliverable as addressed.” Do not write “Refused!!!” This is a dead give-away that the abator is still a ‘resident’ at the ‘address’ on the mail.
By the way, the meaning of ‘resident’ is, the ‘the thing identified.’
Response Tactics of the bondservant of Christ
How does a bondservant respond to the tactics of imperial powers in the above examples?
First, avoid idle conversation with those who try to talk you into removing your abatement. This is thin ice and you may be trapped by your own words into the “benefit of discussion.” Exercise your ‘right of avoidance’ at all times.
Second, the officer wants to speak to the persona, who cannot speak, except by the mouth of Ba’al. You must refuse all discussion with an officer, through verbal abatement or other wise.
Third, if any further process — on the same case and with the same case number — comes into the presence of the bondservant, whether by personal service of process, or by any other means, there is only one possible response for the bondservant to take, abate again.
Misnomer
Misnomer means, literally, “mis-named.” More importantly, any process, bearing any name other than a bondservant’s full and properly spelled Christian appellation is an error subject to abatement:
The name of men, at this day, are only sounds for distinction’s sake, though perhaps they originally imported something more, as some natural qualities, features, or relation; but now there is no other use of them but to mark out the families or individuals we speak of, and to difference them from all others; since, therefore, they are the only marks and indicia of things which human kind can understand each other by, we must see what certainty the law requires herein, and what the effects and consequences are of the omission of the name, or false specification of the party…(33)
And from a work compiled in 1670,
Misnomer, (compounded of the French Mes., which in composition always signifies amisse, and nomer, Latin, nominare,) the using [of] one name for another, a mis-terming, or mis-naming.(34)
A misnomer is any spelling of a name contrary to the Rules of English Grammar and the way in
which one customarily writes his name. Thus, a nom de guerre, a name spelled in all capital letters, such as JOHN DAVID SMITH, is incorrect according to the Rules of English and is thus a misnomer.
Where a name appears in upper and lower case according to the Rules of English, and one of the names has been abbreviated or, initialized, it is also a misnomer. Thus,
We are of opinion that the word ‘misnomer,’ which means a naming amiss, is wide enough to cover the faulty indication of a Christian name by means of the initial: Vide, Bacon’s Abridgment, under misnomer,”(35) and “initials were no name at all.”(36)
Thus,
Misnomer is a good plea in abatement, for since names are the only marks and indicia which human kind can understand each other by, if the name be omitted or mistaken, there is a complaint against nobody. And, …if the defendant has been arrested by a wrong name, the court will set aside the proceedings … and discharge him if in custody.(37)
But, though a defendant may, by pleading in abatement, take advantage of a misnomer when there is a mistake in the writ or declaration, as to the name of baptism or surname; yet in such a plea he must set forth his right name, so as to give the plaintiff a better writ.(38)
Now, even though a misnomer appears on the process, a plaintiff may produce witnesses who will state that the respondent never spells his name the way it is spelled in his abatement.
Therefore, if one spells out his first name, initializes his second name, and spells his last (surname) name, and process is issued in that name (a defendants customary spelling, even though incorrect by the Rules of English), an abatement that pleads misnomer, may not lie.
It is good practice to put a colon (:) between your Christian name, given at baptism, and your family name. The Christian appellation includes only your first and second names. Get in the habit of writing out the full name, or one may use only the Christian name as a rule.
But, if one was given at birth a name with only a single letter in it, do not put a period after the single letter name. If it is done, it will convert the name to a nom de guerre.
The Rule is: Always spell ones Christian appellation according to the Rules of English.
Note: IRS agents, deliberately use misnomers for themselves. They call it an “officially registered pseudonym,” i.e., false name, to make it more difficult for one to find the agent’s personal property and seize it in a suit at Law.
Question: If what the I.R.S. does is Lawful, why do they need an ‘officially registered pseudonym.?’ Of course it is obvious they have no real Law.
Kitchen Sinkers
It is a maxim that “less is more.” No where is this more applicable than in Law and Process.
Yet, we’ve all heard of, and probably know, many ‘pro per’ or ‘pro se’ types who have never heard of this maxim and would reject it in a heart beat, because they are “The Kitchen Sinkers.”
When Kitchen Sinkers write process or a brief, they throw in everything they can think of, including ‘the kitchen sink.’ And for this reason, such people seldom win any cases, not even against the dog catcher, precisely because of the unrelenting need to throw in the kitchen sink.
These guys can take simple process like a Non-Statutory Abatement, that takes at most nine or ten pages to say what needs to be said, and blow it up into fifteen, twenty, or thirty pages.
They can write paragraphs of one sentence that are five pages long!!! And, in the vast majority of cases, such paragraphs have no substance in Law — at all. Instead, they are nothing but an exercise in how to vent one’s spleen in ten thousand words, without saying anything of real value.
They will sit at a typewriter or computer for hours, banging away in a rage and congratulating themselves on how ‘powerful’ their writing is. They build up an enormous raging sweat during this marathon of spleen venting and by the time they finish (assuming the process can be completed before the court deadline sixty days down the road) they are a bundle of knotted emotion and profanity. But, if they really do finish the job, they always qualify the end result by saying, “There’s some things I’d like to add, but, we don’t have time now.”
And at the end of it, the Kitchen Sinker sits back with great pride, looks at his stack of papers and says, “There, ah, show’d ’em!”
In truth, courts pay no attention to such trash, especially since at least half the words are devoted to slandering or libeling the judges’ bloodline back to his ninth great grand-parents on both sides of the family tree.
The Rule is; Avoid such people like the plague, because they are one.
On the Uniform Commercial Code
There is the tendency in the law reform movement to use the Uniform Commercial Code on everything from signatures on checks, on mail, on applications, and on anything that even appears to be paperwork or process from any government agency, bureau, department, or other imperial res.
Now, if those in the movement are so interested in restoring God’s Law and everything else that goes with it, why do they feel the need to use statutes??? And, the Uniform Commercial Codes, whether State or Federal, are commercial statutes, none of which is Law, or bears any resemblance to it.
“Individuals rely for protection of their rights on law, and not upon regulations and proclamations of departments of government, or officers who have been designated to carry ‘laws’ into effect.” Baty v. Sale, 43 Ill. 351
God’ Law and statutes do not mix. They are like oil and water. Yet, every time one hears a presentation on the common law, they invariably bring up the so-called ‘sure fire silver bullets’ of the Uniform Commercial Code. So prevalent is this practice that in one recent newspaper article on the militia, the newspaper reporter said that the courts call these people “The UCC’ers.”
Would any right thinking UCC fan use the I.R.S. Code to try and create a Non-Statutory Abatement? I think not. Then, why do they use the UCC, that uses the same “words and phrases” definitions found in Title 26, The Internal Revenue Code??? Could it be that all the Titles and Codes, and, specifically, the Uniform Commercial Code are really just an imperial mine-field???
Now, since people are so enamored of common law and still use UCC statutes, go ahead, use the UCC all you want. But, do not use any UCC citations in Non-Statutory Abatements — if you expect the abatement to be successful !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Conflict of Laws
Having spoken on the U.C.C., which is a privately copyrighted statute by The American Law Institute, raises the question of the use of any statutes in a Non-Statutory Abatement. It is not necessary or recommended to use any statute, including codification’s of the common law, because their use may, under many circumstances, compromise the abatement. As a result, we do not recommend use of any codifications of the common law, in a Non-Statutory Abatement.
The reason is because, first and foremost, you do not see the term “common law” in scripture. Bondservants of Christ are only to use God’s Law. Secondly, the common law is a commerical law today, created by merchants, influenced by Roman Law, and used for commercial purposes. The following definitions are taken from “A Dictionary of Law, by William C. Anderson, 1893.”
Custom of merchants: A system of customs, originating among merchants, and allowed for the benefit of trade as part of the common law. Page 303.
Law-merchant; law of merchants: The rules applicable to commercial paper were transplanted into the common law from the law merchant. They had their origin in the customs and course of business of merchants and bankers, and are now recognized by the courts because they are demanded by the wants and conveniences of the mercantile world. Pages 670-671.
Roman Law: The common law of England has been largely influenced by the Roman law, in several respects:…Through the development of commercial law. Page 910.
Recognizing Defective Process
For you to maintain your standing in Law, you must be able to distinguish between Lawful process and defective process. This is especially important if one discovers that their perception of Lawful process may be warped and thus, dysfunctional. A false perception of process, and acting on that perception, can be fatal to maintaining one’s Lawful standing — not the process itself. The key indicia in Lawful process are: One, a seal from a court known and recognized in the state, and not of the State; Two, signed in black ink by a constitutionally elected Judge in the Judicial Department in the state; Three, it must describe with particularity the bondservant, without errors in the name. Do not look to the Federal Constitution for the requirements.
Address vs. Location
At Law, you are your own “secretary of state.” You have established Christ’s government in your House which communicates with outside imperial and Lawless governments. It is your duty to maintain the integrity of Christ’s government and to that end you must understand certain terms which are misleading when first encountered.
There are several key terms concerning transmission of any communication between a Good and
Lawful bondservant and imperial governments when the Post Office is involved. These terms apply whether we receive process from governments or send process to governments.
Post Office functions have been converted under the provisional government to a commercial venue managed and serviced by a separate entity now known as the U.S. Postal Service. Key terms below clarify these differences if we note that Post Office Department terms used by the commercial Postal Service are given new names and redefined. The old ones still exist, but the new codes do not mention them.
The important avenue is to use non-commercial venues to avoid accepting any benefit, privilege, or opportunity.
Official terms that define the duties and powers of the Postal Service, assume that the District of Columbia is the ‘home’ point of origin. The term ‘domestic’ means; ‘about the home,’ ‘home-grown,’ etc., but, in Postal Codes, the home point to determine the meaning of domestic is the District of Columbia, and domestic mail moves between D.C., possessions and territories of the United States, Guam, Puerto Rico, Northern Marianas Islands, Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the parts of states that are ceded, rented, leased, or under management of the ‘United States,’ as trustees in bankruptcy. Mail moving within and between points outside of the above areas is ‘non-domestic mail.’
Zip Codes are fictions that number specific ‘military districts’ but are not part of the land itself. They are used to scan mail to determine if it is domestic or non-domestic. However, since words and numbers within brackets, etc., re-define enclosed ZIP Codes as “extraneous, explanatory, and interpolated matter,”(39) the ZIP code itself, has no force and effect in law when brackets are used.
In Law, the jurisdiction of the ‘United States’ and its federal power extends no further than the Post Office. But, through the benefit of ‘free delivery’ to a P.O. Box or address, that jurisdiction is extended. With ‘free delivery’ being a war measure from 1863, it is considered a commercial benefit and is technically governed by commercia belli.(40)
Those who use addresses are converted as well, to a commercial persona.
The evidence of this is that the postage only pays for transportation of mail between Post Offices. Any delivery of post beyond the Post Office is a benefit, because its free. P.O. Boxes are a benefit because a postal clerk delivers mail, for free, to the customers ‘address.’ Fees paid for a P.O. Box are only box maintenance fees, and do not pay the postal clerks wages who delivers mail to the box.
Thus, the only Post Office function not extending a commercial benefit, privilege, or opportunity is the general post-ofice, which existed before the Federal Constitution. It is also a custom and usage of long duration, preceding the legal memory of man.
Serve It, Don’t File It !!!
We have stated over and over again, that the current legal system is one of foreign law (Martial, International/Municipal, law of War, etc.) and such courts we style as Imperial Courts. Non-statutory abatements cannot be heard in legislatively created imperial courts.
This has not prevented people from filing abatements in such courts, anyway. Because such courts cannot hear these actions, there is but one result — rejection!!!
The problem is, when the abatement is rejected, people call or write to complain. After much discussion we learn the abator filed his process in the court. When reminded that Version 1.0 of the work tells him not to do this, Alzheimer’s sets in and he doesn’t remember this (or it may have been removed from his pirated copy of the abatement package).
One more time: Serve it, Don’t File It !!!
There are many reasons, of course, why we do not file an abatement in a court. One, there is no court today that has authority to hear it. Two, the court only hears a case — after all parties are joined in an action. Three, abatements are served on one who becomes a plaintiff thereby, who is given an opportunity to respond with a better suit, if he can. But, fiduciaries of today’s imperial governments cannot respond to Non-Statutory Abatements – only those with Lawful standing can. Four, if process comes from a court, abatements are still served on the persons, i.e., the judge, prosecutor, cop, State Judicial Council, etc. (to serve the secretary of the judge is the same as serving the judge himself). Five, all Non-Statutory Abatements in this Handbook are served on people in their private capacity. Six, the abator exercises his power in God’s court when the abatement is served. He cannot file it anywhere, in any court, because no court can hear any matter still under another court’s jurisdiction.
Thus, Serve the abatement — don’t file it!!!
God’s superior court?
We stated above that the abator exercises his power in God’s court. What does this mean?
It means just what it says. When the abator serves process, the contents of the process determine what court the process is served from, which is an at-Law court. This right to exercise God’s court is also verified in Chapter 34 of the Magna Charta which says in simple terms: “No man can be deprived of his own court.”
What is the name of God’s court? The name of God’s court is the ‘superior court’ spelled in all lower case letters, i.e., without a capital ‘S’ on superior and without a capital ‘C’ on court.
But, the courts in my State are called ‘district’ courts; what do I do?
Your court is still styled a ‘superior court’ because it is superior to all others. God’s court has nothing to do with their courts. These are completely separate jurisdictions.
Serving Non-Statutory Abatement Processes
The Non-Statutory Abatement Processes is served by two or three fellow brothers in Christ. For those who are without an assembly in their area, the previous method of issuing the process on your own through Registered Mail, or by the Sheriff, can still be used, but we have found that the newest procedure is a much more effective method. For those who go through registered mail or the sheriff, our older Non-Statutory abatement must be used, not our newest updated version.
The most scripturally based way to serve the abatement is to have at least two brothers in Christ serve this abatement on the Defendants. Jesus sent his apostles out two by two, because God’s Law says in the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established. If you cannot get two brothers to serve the abatement, you can get one brother and you can go along with him as a witness. If you go with him, be sure not to serve the abatement yourself, and be sure not to say a word; you are there simply as a witness. Have your brother serve the abatement and do all the talking.
We recommend serving everyone involved, including the police officer, the judge, and the prosecuting attorney. The judge may be the most difficult to serve, but all judges have a secretary. If you serve the secretary, it is just as good as serving the judge himself.
For those of you who do not have an assembly of two or three brothers to serve the abatement, you must use our older abatement with our older ways of serving the abatement. Click here to by-pass our newest abatement and go directly to our older abatement section.
Non-statutory Abatement Updates
With the completion date of the Fifth Edition of the Book of the Hundreds being uncertain and somewhat distant at this time, we have been led to present the newest update of the abatement process for those in need of it at this time.
In the continuing effort to strengthen the abatement process in its current form, which has been one of our duties here in the past six years or so, we present the following Non-statutory Abatement and Default.
What is presented hereafter is the diligent labors, in the Christ, by many Brothers and Sisters of His Body too numerous to detail here. Without their vast and continuing fellowship, exhortation, and knowledge concerning His Word and the power thereof as it relates to the abatement process, the following update would not be presented here.
It must also be said that, through their trials and tribulations related to the process of setting the record in our Fathers court for His judgment and pleasure, they have evidenced for all to see, as we all should, one way in which the running of the race to “be diligent to present thyself approved to God, a workman not ashamed, straightly cutting the word of truth” can be achieved.
To most of those that are familiar with the previous forms of it, this newest update may appear to be a “radical” change from the earlier editions. We do not consider it radical, but one further step on the long road back to the old paths where all of the Christ’s called-out ones must return, all for His purposes and for His glory; and not their own.
Various Changes from the Older Abatements
One. The first notable change is the placement of the seals and signatures. They have been moved to the top in accordance with the ancient writs which were always signed and sealed before the Law and Facts were presented. In this way, His court’s process also remains separate and distinct from the modern commercial modes which are signed after the fact. His court is always “superior court at (city or area), i.e. “at Denver,” “at Appalachia,” “at Iowa.”
Two. The process is issued through the area assembly for the purpose of “covering” the accused Brother or Sister.
Three. It is made clear to all receiving the Abatement process that it is being issued in our Master’s court, thereby avoiding any accusations of issuing “false” process. Though no one to our knowledge has ever been prosecuted for doing so, as it relates to the abatement process, their have been many statutes passed at the State level as a deterrent.
Four. All reference to “the church” has been eliminated, and replaced with the true descriptions of the Branches on His Vine, i.e., His ekklesia, the Christ’s Lawful assembly at ………………, His Lawful assembly at ……………..,etc. These have the same meaning, and are used throughout the process so that their is no misunderstanding about who the process is issued by. This also eliminates any presumption of legal personality.
Five. The process is no longer served through the mails, but is now served by two Brother’s as messengers from the area assembly. They are to also return on the Rule Day to receive an answer from the Defendants. At that same time, if there is no answer, they can serve the Default. This mode has been found to be very effective, and also eliminates any presumption of evil as to the use of the commercial “U.S. Postal Service” for serving Lawful process.
Six. The prosecuting attorney, or District Attorney, has been added to the Defendant list in all cases. This has now been found to be of utmost importance, for he or she is as much a party to the action as all of the other Defendants. We have even had confirmation in one case from the judge, stating that, “if the District Attorney had been made a Defendant and served with the process, the warrant would never have been re-issued.”
Seven. All periods (.) have been eliminated and replaced with colons (:), semi-colons (;), and commas (,) to avoid any break in the continuous spirit of thought, as is found in the original Greek texts of Scripture.
Eight. “Nom de guerre” as it relates to the Accused has been replaced with “legal fiction,” which, technically, describes a name in all capital letters. A name in all caps is also a persona designata; therefore that term has also been retained to describe the legal fiction.
Nine. “It has been written from the beginning” now precedes Scripture verses in place of “it is written” in order to make it clear to all that God’s Word is from the beginning and for everlasting, and that anything the natural man invents has no standing, even according to his own maxim of law, “first in time is first in right.”
Ten. There is no longer a “dating” of the process. All current calendars used by the natural man are in error, therefore it serves no purpose to use them, and in truth, these pagan years are not “in the year of our Lord.” Additionally, using his dating system, to some extent, allows a presumption of recognition of him and his ways, and approval of his error.
Eleven. We no longer use general delivery, but we go through the general post-office.
For those that have been led to seek others of like mind in their local area, or within a larger area, please let us know here [(818) 347-7080] and we will try to put you in contact with others that are seeking the same thing.
Additionally, for those that are led to use this process, and have any questions on its use, please call or write for fellowship any time at (818) 347-7080.
Letter of Appointment
(This Letter of Appointment is to be carried by the Brothers who are appointed as messengers to serve process for your area Lawful assembly. This Appointment is for serving the Default. The wording can be changed when serving the Abatement.)
From the Christ’s Lawful assembly at Los Angeles to all whom this matter does concern, Greetings in the Hallowed Name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus, the Christ, and ourselves;
Locus sigilii ecclesia:
Solar 