Marcel Bendshadler Premier Show- The Constitutional Crusader Show 7/5/04 [Marcel] Good afternoon and welcome to the

constitutional crusaders show; Im your host, Marcel Roy Bendshadler, constitutional counselor. Today Im coming to you from a super-secret location and a hide-a-way in the beautiful Columbia gorge area of Oregon. But thats not necessarily where Ill be coming to you each week. This is our premier show and well see if we have some listeners out there and if I put out a word to try and get some, but well see. I always like to open up these shows with wisdom of the ages and I had my own AM radio version of the constitutional crusaders show several years ago and I opened up with wisdom of the ages that I called the quote from the dead white guy. And being that today is July fifth, the day after when we celebrate a supposed independence where you can only shoot off regulated fireworks in designated fire zones I thought it was rather appropriate have a rather lengthy quote from a dead white guy. Im sure many of you will recognize the end of this quote but Im not sure how many of you will actually remember the beginning of it. But before we get too much further this is a live call-in show and for those of you that would like to sound off and join in the number is 1-800-433-1429. And Ill get started here with this quote from a dead white guy; if you can figure out who this is before I get to the end call on in and see if you can rattle the cage and figure it out. This guy started out by talking and he said: Mr. President it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against the painful truth. It is this, the part of wise men engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty. Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes see not and having ears hear not the things that are so nearly concerned their temporal salvation. For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no other way of judging the future but by the past. Let us not, I beseech you sir, deceive ourselves longer. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned, we have remonstrated, we have supplicated, we have prostrated ourselves before the throne and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and parliament. Our petitions have been slighted. Our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult. Our supplications have been disregarded and we have been spurned with contempt from the foot of the throne. In vain after these things may we indulge in the fond hope of peace and reconciliation? There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free, if we mean to preserve the inviolate, those inestimable privileges for which we have so long contenting. If mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have so long engaged and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained we must fight. I repeat it, sir, we must fight. An appeal to arms and to the god of hosts is all that is left to us. They tell us, sir that we are weak, unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be next week or next year? Will it be when we are totally

disarmed and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusions, delusive, a phantom of hope until our enemies shall have us bound hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature has placed in our power. Three millions of people armed in the holy cause of liberty and in such a country that which we possess are invincible by any force which our enemy can sent against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election, if we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery. Our chains are forged; their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston. The war is inevitable and let it come. I repeat it, sir, let it come. It is vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, peace, peace, but there is no peace. The war is actually begun. The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms. Our brethren are already in the field, why stand we here idle. What is it that the gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? For bid it, Almighty God, I know not what course others may take but as for me give me liberty or give me death. And thats the quote from the dead white guy for you and the words are still true today. We are not a free country anymore. We have been subjected into slavery that has soothed and swayed at us by sweet and honeyed words of security and safety, but the problem is, is that security and safety are an anathema to freedom and liberty because if the government is big enough to come in and do everything it can to provide you safety and security, its big enough to take away everything you have. So, theres our thoughts from the dead white guy for today. So, what is the Constitutional Crusaders all about? Well, I have been deemed by the Oregon State Supreme Court to be a constitutional counselor. That happened several years ago when I was unfortunate to be in front of them arguing a habeas corpus with them and I pointed out to the justices of the Oregon State Supreme Court that the man standing off to my right from the state attorney generals office had no business in the common law court which I was invoking. One of the justices asked me the question, why would say this is a common law court? And I said, because thats the jurisdiction that Im coming to you hereunder is under the common law and Oregon is a common law state. And for the next twenty minutes I was quizzed and queried by the several of the justices on exactly what is the common law and at the end of this I turned to the gentleman off to my right and I said, oh, ye viper, get out of this courtroom, you have no standing or jurisdiction here. To which one of the justices of the Supreme Court leaned over and said to another one, he sounds like a constitutional counselor to me. And I went, hmm, thats very interesting, I think Ill accept that. And since then, thats what Ive gone by, constitutional counselor. So

what is a counsel? Well, the Supreme Court has said that in the early days of our republic a prosecutorand there it is, I found the caseUnited States v. Sanford, this is an 1806 case, very early case, as you can tell. It said in the early days of our republic, prosecutor, was simply anyone who voluntarily went before the grand jury with a complaint. Well, if a prosecutor is just anyone who goes forward with a complaint, what is counsel? Counsel is your friend, counsel is the one to help you and remind you of the things that you need to say and do and thats what I do. I come in and I help you remember so that when you get the deer-in-the-headlights look I can jab my elbow into your ribs, get your attention and say, remember we wanted to do this so you can find your voice again. I dont come in and I dont represent people because for those of you that have studying and paying attention you realize that represent is actually two words put together. Present is obvious and re is the Latin verb, thing. So what does an attorney do? He presents you as a thing. Does that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside? If it doesnt, well then call in and tell me about it. Why? If you think that this is inaccurate in any way, shape or form, call in and give it your best shot and well see how well you can do, stand your ground. Again, that number is 1-800-433-1429. It is the governments position; that is the de facto government that we have now, that if you dont know what your rights are, you dont have any. And this is quite true because if you dont know, how can you assert it? But the court has come down with a series of decisions which help us delineate what our rights are if we just pay attention to them. For example, in Marbury v. Madison 5 US137, the Madison in this case later became President Madison, one of the signers of the declaration of independence and such and the court came back and said in this case, the constitution of these united States is the Supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law. So theres you simple acid test. Look at what is being presented to you as law and see if its in harmony with the constitution. If it isnt, well, then its not law. A little later in Norton v. Shelby County the court came back and said this, an unconstitutional act is not law, it confers no rights, it imposes no duties, affords no protection, it creates no office. And that was an awful long list of nos. It doesnt do this and it doesnt do that and it doesnt do the other thing. So what the heck is it? Well, the rest of the sentence explains that to us. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it never had been passed. So look at this law that someones trying to charge you with, see if its within the confines of the constitution and if its not, it has as much force and effect upon you as the blank piece of paper. It only has as much force and effect as you give it. Heres the first challenge of the day. Grab yourself a Blacks Law Dictionary just about any edition will doand look up the word, assume. Yes, you will see that, assume, means to pretend in law. Thats its definition; its a long two-word definition, to pretend. But now look up the word, pretend, and you will see that it means to offer as real that which is not; it is the thing to simulate. In other words its fraud. And thats what they do; they assume that they have authority over you. And heres the second challenge, look up the word, authority. It has a long one-word definition. I love pointing this definition out to attorneys and judges and such because as soon as you do they realize that youve got them. They dont understand how the heck you understand this because its very clear. So whats the definition for the

word, authority? Because they will get up there and they will beat their chest and they will say, we have authority, we have authority, you must submit to our authority because we have authority. And Im going, like really, lets look up the definition of that word. The definition is, permission. When did I give you permission, please show me when I relinquished and gave you permission. I didnt, so since I didnt give you permission just exactly where did you get authority? One time, I was told that I had to submit to a psychological evaluation. This will help illustrate the concept of authority to you, ok? I was told that I ok, well Ill explain the rest of this after the break. But youre listening to the Constitutional Crusaders Show on the American Voice Radio Network. {http://radio.theamercanvoice.com} Well be right back. {break} {A little lively rock and roll music} [Marcel] Ooh, that gets you up and dancing there. Welcome back to the Constitutional Crusaders Show on the American Voice Radio Network where the number is 1-800-433-1429 and I was going to illustrate the concept and Ill try and do it quickly in this segment here of why authority, why they need permission to prosecute you. I was told that because I was being so adamant and so vehement in demanding my rights that I must be crazy so I had to undergo a psychological evaluation. So I show up for this psychological evaluation and the first question I asked the examiner is, can anything I say or do in the psychological evaluation be used against me in any way, shape or form? And she said, well, yes, its going to be given to the court and theyre going to use it in determining what to do in your case. And I said, Oh, well then, I wish to exercise my right found under the fifth article of the Bill of Rights, not to be forced to be a witness against myself and therefore I wish to remain silent. And she just looked at me dumbfounded like, why how dare you, you cant do that, and she said, the judge will sanction you if you dont submit to the psychological evaluation. I said, whoa, wait a second here, either I have the right to remain silent which you told me I have or I dontwhich is it? She says, well, you have the right, and I said, good, because if I dont have the right then he can sanction me. And she said, well, he may sanction you if you dont submit, and I said, well, whoa, either I have the right or I dont, which is it. And she just went silent; she wouldnt say another word to me. And I said, ok, lets look up the word here, authority, gee, it means permission. When did I give permission for this psychological evaluation? She couldnt come up with anything, she went silent because I essentially told her she had the right to remain silent and anything she told me can and would be used against her in civil courts and torts and actions against her for breach of fiduciary duty. So she just sat there stone-faced and silent and I did all the talking and when I was done, I handed her a notice of competency and I left it with her. I asked her, do you work for any one of these agencies listed here on this notice of competency, and she goes, oh, yes, I work for the State of Washington. And I said, oh, oh thats interesting, then I hereby deem you incompetent, I revoke your power of attorney and youre fired. And I turned around and walked out and Mr. Zimmerman, the man pretending to be a judge wearing a black dress never said one word after that. Nobody wanted to talk about this anymore. Why? Because I showed them that they had no authority. Now, whats the word that they would like

to use? They cant. Can any of you guess it out there? The word is, jurisdiction. They dont have jurisdiction because theyre not within the common law anymore. Theyre only within a special statutory law. Back to those two cases, Norton v. Shelby County and Marbury v. Madison, are these statutes imposing upon you the live, natural man whether you happen to be of the male or female gender is irrelevantdoes it apply to you, the live, natural man? Well, I say it doesnt and you can prove it by the very caption heading that they use. When you look at the caption heading you will see that the caption heading that they present to you is an in rem caption heading. In Rem is the technical term used to designate proceedings or actions instituted against the thing in contradistinction to personal actions which are said to be in personem. Proceedings in rem include, not only judgments of property as forfeited or as a prize in the admiraltyhint, hint, what kind of law are you under, statutory, thats another name for admiralty lawor the English Exchequer but also the decisions of other courts upon the personal status or relations of the parties such as marriage, divorce, bastardy, settlement or the like. Hmm, these are all commercial actions. So what do we hear, were in a commercial court under admiralty law operating in commerce. And as a good friend of mine said, commerce is war masquerading as peace. Just pretending to go along; lets all pretend here that were at peace, but were not, were at war. And in the courtroom it is a battlefield, the judge is your enemy and the person they give you as your attorney is a spy for the enemy. Hes not your friend and well talk more about that on the other side of the break. Again youre listening to the Constitutional Crusaders Show on the American Voice Radio Network {break} [Marcel] And welcome back to the Constitutional Crusaders Show on the American Voice Radio Network. This is your host, Marcel Roy Bendshadler, constitutional counselor, and the number that you can call in if you want to agree or especially if you want to disagree is 1-800-433-1429. Before the break I was beginning to talk extensively about in rem versus in personem jurisdiction and whenever youre give a case, whether it be a traffic citation or theyre suing you or trying to charge you criminally actually thats kind of funny because what they are doing is a crime, but Ill get into that a little later so its kind of ironic in that fashion. But, look at the header; you will see that they give an all-capital letters name as state of this versus this all-capital letter in rem fictional name. Do you spell your name in all-capital letters? And I know theres a lot of people out there, its not me argument and they say it doesnt work. Well, you know what, it doesnt work for people who dont understand and thats absolutely true. If you dont understand its not going to work and thats the thing. Its a lot of understanding. In fact, thats another word that you should understand. The judge will have you stand up and he will say, do you understand? Thats a loaded question because what hes really asking you is are you going to stand under my jurisdiction? And you go, oh, yes, yes, yes, I understand. Sorry, I dont understand a thing. Youre speaking to me in a backwards foreign tongue. In fact, this is one of the things is you look in Blacks Law Dictionary like in the fourth edition, there are several words that are given in the Blacks Law

Dictionary in the fourth edition where they will say, in judicial matters this word is no different than the common vernacular or the definition does not deviate from the common vernacular. Well, when you read that and you stop and think about it, that is an open admission that whats being defined in the law dictionary is a twisting or a distortion of reality and thats where they hang you because they bring you in, in rem instead of in personem. Now, in personem, thats a remedy, in personem, is one where the proceedings are against the personyouin contradistinction to which those are against specific things or in rem. Now, both of these are from Bouviers Law Dictionarya real old dictionaryboth those definitions of in rem and in personem. So, then what do you do? Well, they say, well, what do you want to do, you want to be pro se? And I say, no, sorry, Im not pro anything, Im antieverything, Im not pro se. If you must, I am here in in propia personain ones own proper person. See, its a ruling in pleadings that pleas to the jurisdiction of the court must be pled in propia persona because if theyre pled in by an attorney they, the attorney, admits the jurisdiction as an attorney is an officer of the court and he is presumed to plead after having obtained leavethat is, you gave him permission obtained leave which admits jurisdiction. So we have this battlefieldits called the courtroom. That judge is your enemy and the attorney that they assigned to you is a spy for the enemy. Does that make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside? I know it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy because what I do is I have questions. The second they thrust a public pretender on me I ask them questions like, do you carry malpractice insurance? If so, I require a copy of your policy or the name of the carriers and the policy number as proof. If you dont, why not? How the heck can I hold you liable for your malpractice? How much experience have you had defending a case involvingand name off whats involved in your case, but dont forget whats involved in your case is treason of oath by judges and prosecutors. Failure to arraign you, what else, failure to state a claim upon relief can be granted, failure to state nature and cause, failure to provide due process by law, failure to provide a trial by jury as opposed to a jury trial. Theres so many things, I can go down a whole list of things that they fail to do. How many of you understand out there exactly what a proper arraignment is? There hasnt been a proper arraignment done here in Oregon, that Im aware of for, at least 40 yearsfour, zero, forty years a little less time than Ive been alive, but still, hasnt been a proper arraignment done because they dont know how to do it anymore. So, I opened up the show and I started to talk about, this is the day after independence day, and I have been privileged in my lifetime to know two gentlemen who, both these men escaped Soviet Bloc countries when I was still a baby in diapers in the early 60s and they were teen-agerslate teenagersand they specifically escaped to come to this country to partake of the freedoms and liberties that we have in this country. And both of them have said to me, now, in their retirement years that they had more freedoms and liberties as a young boy growing up in their Soviet Bloc countries under the iron fist of the Soviet dictatorship. They had more freedoms and liberties as children in these countries than exist in America today and furthermore they watched those freedoms erode away in the time theyve been here in this country. Specifically, in the past 20 years, a dramatic increase, explosion on the erosion of our rights and liberties. So, what can you do about it? Well, the thing is, the first thing you need to get educated.

And during the break you heard the ad there for desert owl, my good friend, whos interviewed me several times. He interviews controversial figures and I try to be controversial because its only through controversy that truth is discovered. So I try to be controversial deliberately. Im deliberately in their face and showing them meaning the black-robed thievesexactly how theyre wrong. And it has sometimes got rough and tumble, but most of the time its worked out well because, see, the thing is you have to know.things are. And I think I heard a beep that we might have a call. Do we have a call? [Dale] Yes. [Marcel] We have a caller; who is this and where are you calling from? [Dale] Hey, Marcel, my name is Dale from Pennsylvania. [Marcel] Hey, Dale from Pennsylvania, what do you have to say this beautiful afternoon, at least here in Oregon its a beautiful afternoon. [Dale] Here in Pennsylvania its pretty hot. [Marcel] Oh, wonderful, so whats on your mind? [Dale] Well, my question is: Im in a fight with some local township people and the last time I was in court they tried to charge me with contempt of court. Now, Im asking your thoughtsIm thinking of appealing it, but heres my question: What they did was, they came after me and told me I was only allowed to own four cars on our property and when we were in court last monththe property is not in my name, its in my wifes namebut when the judge issued the order the order came against me. [Marcel] And youre only allowed what on the property again? [Dale] Four cars. [Marcel] Oh, four cars on the property, ok. [Dale] Everybody else is allowed as many as they want. [Marcel] Four automobiles on the property, but theyre coming against you; who are the cars registered to? [Dale] Some are in my name, some are in my wifes name. [Marcel] How many in your name? [Dale] Four or Five.

[Marcel] Ok, so you have more than their maximum number. [Dale] But theres no law or ordinance in the township that says you can own any number. Now, this is something they just did just for me, only. [Marcel] Well, again, have you been listening to the whole show? [Dale] Yes. [Marcel] Then you heard me say, look up these laws and statutes and see if they abide and are in harmony with the constitution. If theyre not, they are null and void. So how do they get you? They get you by you volunteering into the situation. [Dale] I understand that. [Marcel] Heres a quote for you to help you understand exactly what Im talking about. Are you familiar with who chief justice Rhenquist is? [Dale] Yes, Ive heard of him before. [Marcel] Yes, hes the chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. Are you familiar who Justice Thomas is? [Dale] Yes. [Marcel] Yes, an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Are you familiar with Justice Bork? [Dale] Yes, hes not there anymore. [Marcel] Yes, he was nominated and hes very qualifiedshould be sitting there instead of Ruth Gator Ginsberg but hes not, but all three of these gentlemen have said this very thing on different occasions and this is what they said: 100% of the people that are in state and federal penitentiaries are there voluntarily. So, how do they get you to volunteer? Well, they get you to come in and you end up starting arguing with them. [Dale] I understand that. [Marcel] And the thing is, is how to learn not to argue anymore. Thats tough, because in order to not argue anymore you have to understand really what it is theyre doing. Theyre bringing you in, in an in rem proceeding but theyre holding you liable for the in rem proceeding. So you have to divest yourself of that and hold them responsible for their criminal actions against you such as barratry. When you look up barratry in Blacks Law Dictionary, youll see that it is vexatious litigation. Its a

crime, but they should be charged with it, but theyre not until we do it; we have to charge them with it. Ok? [Dale] Ok, but let me ask a question. [Marcel] Go ahead. [Dale] If I decide I want to appeal this to take it to a higher court, I have to do it this week and since this judge has issued this order theyre trying to fine me for $3,800 for something I didnt do wrong and I havent paid that and I dont intend to pay it because I didnt do anything wrong. [37 min., 49.914 sec.] [Marcel] Ok, so when did this order come down? [Dale] June 7th or May 20th, one of those days, somewhere in there. [Marcel] So, fairly recently. [Dale] Right. [Marcel] Ok, heres what you can start out doing and this will helpnow, remember, this is just a little bit here, theres more to it than this but this is what I can give you real quickly on the air and in the time we have left in this segment. [Dale] Ok, please. [Marcel] And that is to write them a letter and say, youre charging me $3,800 or whatever the amount is, I need to know who is responsible for paying this. Is it the debtor or the creditor? I need to know who is responsible for paying this debt and, first of all actually, sorry, I jumped in number two, I forgot number one. The first question, will the fine constitute a debt? And then, if it does constitute a debt, whos responsible for paying it, the debtor or the creditor? Once you get an answer to those two questions then they should tell you, well, its the debtor thats responsible and, yes, the fine does constitute a debt. Now, you can ask the question, well, gee, its a debt, the debtors responsible, now Im wondering will you accept a promissory note in lieu of tender of payment of the debt? Now, if you put it to them exactly the way I just worded it to you, will you accept a promissory note in lieu of tender of payment of the debt. All those little adjectives and such need to be in there, in that order. Ok? They should come back to you and say, Oh, no, no, no, no, we wont accept a promissory note. Thank you very much. And, of course, these answers are only valid if someones doing it over a wet-ink signature under penalty of perjury, otherwise they havent answered you. Ok? And as soon as they say, no they wont, now you can write back to them and say, sorry, all I have is promissory notes. Well take a FRAUD, a federal reserve accounting unit device. [Dale] I understand, I know where youre going with it.

[Marcel] Yes, blow it up over a hundred and fifty percent, black and white only, just the front side of it and say, sorry, all I have is these promissory notes and you say, you wont accept a promissory note in lieu of payment of the debt and I have an affidavit for waiver of paying the fine or fee because I dont have any gold and silver and youve not given me permission to pay in anything but gold and silver, so since you havent given me permission, I dont have it and furthermore, whos the debtor, its not me, its you, youre the debtor. So wheres your check? [Dale] Ok, but my deep down concern is, since theyre saying we can only park four cars on the property and since they forced me to park them in the street and since they put no parking signs up in front of my house so I couldnt park them on the street [Marcel] Lovely. [Dale] Now, they want me to rid of them; the cars are legally tagged and insured. [Marcel] Yes, well, thats what theyre trying to do; theyre trying to limit your property rights. [Dale] Yes, but they didnt do this with anybody else. [Marcel] Youre probably in a town, arent you? [Dale] Yes, in a township, yes. [Marcel] Yes, youre in a town where theres neighbors, etc, so you probably cant even erect a garage structure to hide your property in. [Dale] Well, I could, but why should I have to hide my property? [Marcel] Well, theres some battles. [Dale] Theres no law in this township that says you can own one car or 21 cars, no law. [Marcel] I understand. There are some things that you just literally have to decide, what am I going to pick as my battle. [Dale] Well, this has been a battle since 1977; Ive been fighting that long. [Marcel] Wonderful, keep on top of what kind of jurisdiction are they in. As far as an appeal to get back directly to your direct question of appeal, you can make a huge part of your appeal a demand for proving jurisdiction. See, jurisdiction can be challenged at any time. Ok?

10

[Dale] Ok. [Marcel] So thanks a lot, Dale. [Dale] Alright, thank you. [Marcel] Check in with my website later. Ill give that information toward the end of the show and that will tell you how you can e-mail me. Ok? {www.freedomcommittee.com/5537 KC7AQK@worldnet.att.net } [Dale] Ok, thanks a lot, good bye. [Marcel] This is the Constitutional Crusaders Show on the American Voice Radio Network. {break} Warning!! This show may be hazardous to your

paradigms if you are a whiny, crying, liberal, pinko, commie bedwetter and an inept, overpaid bureaucrat or are still mad over Reagans tax cut. Should you fit into any one of the above categories, immediately have your friends tie you down for some truth therapy. Continue this therapy until you can dismiss your delusions and can deal with reality. If you cannot handle 100% pure unadulterated truth this radio show will not be held responsible for your predictable discomfort. {followed by a shrill shriek and a chorus of Get over it}
[Marcel] And theres your disclaimer, folks. This is the Constitutional Crusaders Show on the American Voice Radio Network and its absolutely true, if you cant handle truth well then maybe this isnt the place for you to be listening in. Im your host, Marcel Roy Bendshadler, constitutional counselor and I promised Dale at the end of the last segment that I would give some contact information. For those of you who would like to contact me either by e-mail or snail mail or even call me on the phone on occasion, Ive been known to answer the phone when it rings. You can find all that current contact information at my URL which is www.freedomcommittee.com/5537 . And if you e-mail me and ask me for educational materials, I have a very long list and extensive list of educational materials for people like Dale and others that are interested in learning more about how to recognize the system as it is today and educate yourself on how to deal with it better. I can e-mail you that long list of materials and you can see if theres anything there that peaks your interest. Click on the contact us linkscomes up with all my contact information. So, whats on your mind, out there? Its your country, what are you going to do about it? What you have to do is realize that its been taken over by a foreign agency known as the bar association. And this bar association, you find them

11

in every place in government. You find them in the judicial branch; you find them in the executive branch; you find them in the legislative branch which is a clear violation of the separation of powers doctrine because they all claim to be judicial officers. But is that attorney that is assigned to you really looking at your best interest. For those of you that have the gumption, get down to your local law library and ask them where they keep the corpus juris secundum or just CJS for short. And when they tell you where the corpus juris secundum, go over there, grab volume seven, yank it off the shelf, open up to page 801 and dont stop reading until youre done with page 802. Once you read these two short pages, it will inoculate you, inoculate you to the point to where you will never again use the word, my, next to the word, attorney, ever again in your life because youll realize that hes {program cut off at this pointprobably about one to five minutes of program material missing.}

12