Howard Griswold Conference CallThursday, September 13, 2012 Partial Howard Griswold Conference calls: Conf call (talkshoe)

724-444-7444 95099# 1# (non-talkshoe members must use the 1# after the pin number) Thursdays at 8 p.m., Eastern Time. Talkshoe mutes the phone lines ******************************************** http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/audioPop.jsp?episodeId=661654&cmd=apop ********************************** http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=95099&episodeId=665319&cmd= hrepi ************************** Howard's link for Thursday: http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=95099&episodeId=665319&cmd= hrepi Hosted by: Gemini Research Group Phone Number: (724) 444-7444 Call ID: 95099

Howard is the Guest Featured Speaker on Saturday at 6 p.m., Eastern Time at: http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=99043&cmd=tc Hosted by: :Mighty-Mo; Phone Number: (724) 444-7444 Call ID: 99043 **************************

Howard is listed on Angela's at : http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Guest-Speaker-Pages-Info.html http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Talkshoes.html **************************** Howard Griswold talks about contracts and the application of the law on the KMA Club. ***************************** http://geminiinvestmentsresearchgroup.wordpress.com/forms *************************** http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d8IanYOTLI8 ******************************

Note: there is a hydrate water call 8 PM, Eastern Mondays, 218-844-3388 966771# Howards home number: 302-875-2653 (between 9:30, a.m, and 7:00, p.m.) Check out: www.escapeharrassment.com www.escape-tickets-IRS-court.org All correspondence to: Gemini Investment Research Group, POB 398, Delmar, Del. 19940 (do not address mail to Howard Griswold since Howard has not taken up residence in that mailbox and since hes on good terms with his wife he isnt likely to in the foreseeable future.) Donations are accepted. "All" Howard's and GEMINI RESEARCH's information through the years, has Been gathered, combined and collated into 3 "Home-Study Courses" and "Information packages" listed at www.peoples-rights.com "Mail Order" DONATIONS And/or Toll-Free 1-877-544-4718 (24 Hours F.A.Q. Line) Dave DiReamer can be reached at: notaxman@dmv.com Peoples-rights has a new book available from The Informer: Just Who Really Owns the United States, the International Monetary Fund, Federal Reserve, World Bank, Your House, Your Car, Everythingthe Myth and the Reality. Hell take $45 for the book to help with ads, but $40 would be ok which includes shipping ($35 barebones minimum) www.peoples-rights.com c/o 1624 Savannah Road, Lewes, Delaware 19958 ******************** I am not a public servant {officer or employee} and any claim to the contrary must be proved by payroll records and my alleged public servant {officer} title and sworn under penalty of perjury with full commercial liability for the person who swears to it. Im not an officer or agent or employee of the government. I am not resident within the government and any claim to the contrary must be proved by payroll records. Prove that Im being paid by the government to be a government employee. If you cant then your law doesnt apply to me. Government has all the right in the world to make laws and rules regulating itself. When they impose any of these rules and regulations beyond government upon any of us {private} theyre breaching their fiduciary duty {as public officers and trustees of government}. All employees of government are in a trustee position. The courts have said this emphatically Public means governmentprivate means non-government.

Your acceptance of anything that government offers you at any level in any way, shape or form is a consent to cooperate with them and to put yourself under their authority and control. Governments have all the authority, rights and duties to make all the laws necessary to regulate themselves. Their law, rules, regulations, codes and so-called statutes do not apply to the people outside of government. ***************

It is a dishonest act of enforcing a law upon a private individual that government has no right, no power, no authority whatsoever to enforce upon the private individual. That is breach of their fiduciary duty with no stupid questions asked. When you file a breach of fiduciary duty case you are actually filing in equity. Leave out all statutory references even though that example that we send around came out of Colorado forms and it refers to a Colorado statutory representation that does put it in equity but it isnt necessary to quote any statutory reference in order to open the court of equity which is the Article 3 courts (unless youre a teacher or government worker or have contracted with the government with full disclosure, etc whereby youre not private anymore and youre resident within the government.) You got to party to government to enjoy governments benefits, privileges and opportunities. ******************** This defendant states that he is without knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the correctness of the statement of the claim of the plaintiffs and he neither admits nor denies the allegations concerning the claims of the plaintiffs but demands the plaintiffs strictly prove their claim. *************************************** Theyll always say that we need the information from you. The burden of proof is upon the complaining party, not upon the defendant. That, again, is a violation of due process. **************************************** You didnt give me enough knowledge or information about what youre talking about to give you a responsive answer. *************************************** How can there possibly be a credit card when the law forbids the banks to lend credit? ************************************** Dont give them the facts that they want. Dont give them the answers to creates facts or even the appearance of facts that they want. The burden of evidence according to the law is upon the complaining party, not upon the defendant. The defendant doesnt have to produce or admit to anything. *************************** Their own paperwork is your evidence to prove their dishonest act, have a copy of the statute, for instance, that shows what they were supposed to do which they didnt do or a

copy of the rule that shows what they were supposed to do that they didnt donot that complicated for any of us to do. **************************************** The state of some name is the government. We have been so misled into thinking that we live in the state of something but when in fact the only time youre in the state of something is when youre employed as an officer or an employee of the state government or any of its political subdivisions. *************************************** Look it up in the states laws. Every state has laws on the procedure of how theyre supposed to do things, even the rules of filing a complaint. They can be found and those rules require things that are commonly left out of complaints. *************************************** The whole basis of appeal is based on whether or not due process was met and whether the judge erred in the due process. **************************** Resident means located at, an agent of or associated with the state government when you admit to being a resident of the state. When they make a claim that youre a resident of the state you can rebut that claim by an affidavit stating that you are not a resident of the state. You are not employed by the government and if they want to claim that you are all they have to do is come up with payroll records to prove it. Caution: The Department of Education is an agency of the State.

Christian Walters (trusts) is on Mondays, Tuesdays and Saturdays at nine o'clock, Eastern Time. The number is 1-712-432-0075 and the pin is 149939# (9 pm EST). Wednesdays number is 1724-444-7444 and the pin is 41875# (8 pm, Eastern) or tune in on Wednesday at Talkshoe.com at http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=41875&cmd=tc Often you can find a transcript or a partial one for the weeks call at the following website: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/peoplelookingforthetruth Howard approves or disapproves all postings to this yahoo group. Send potential posting to Howard.

Note: questions to Howard are now submitted to Howard, preferably typed, to Gemini Research rather than fielded on the call live. It would be desirable to send a couple of bucks for mailing, copying and printing costs. ********************* Extra legal help is available from the firm, Ketchum, Dewey, Cheatham and Howe.

******************************************************************* ****************************************

For reference: Jersey City v. Hague, 115 Atlantic Reporter 2nd, page 8 (A 2nd ) ********** Project for all: Howard needs information on how to write a complaint for breach of the trust. Hit the libraries! He would appreciate any research help. ***************************************************** Start ***************************************************** {01:24:43.869} [Howard] Tonight Im going to talk about how we get cheated in the courts by evidence or the lack thereofback to that discussion about God and light and heat and the lack thereof. (Albert Einsteinevil is the absence of God; cold is the lack of heat; darkness is the lack of light). {silence is the lack of Howard??} The word, probative means provable. Thats a term used in legal language to describe something that is living proofthat is, proof by the mouth of a living witness, someone who has experienced something. It may well be a law professor. It may well be a lawyer of old times or more recent times or it may well be what was learned as living proof through the experience of court cases that has coming to an understanding of whats living proof of a fact is. The law dictionary refers to that as probative evidence. In the law of evidence it means having the effect of proof, tending to prove or actually proving an issue. Tending to prove would mean more than one piece of proof might have to be put together to actually prove an issue. So something tending to would be leading toward the rest of the proof to actually prove a fact. The average person would probably have a little more common sense than a lawyer and be able to recognize what real proof was and real evidence was better than a lawyer because I have sworn for yearand I dont mind swearing at allGod doesnt seem to mind that eitherIve sworn that lawyers wouldnt know what evidence was if they stumbled over a pile of it because they never produce any. The reason why cases like the KC Anthony case in Florida was lost by the prosecuting attorney was because he had no evidence to connect her to the death of the child. Im sure a lot of people have an opinion of what may have happened there and it might very well be possible that KC Anthony did have something to do with the death of her child but they didnt have any proof. No matter how you may feel about that decision of the jury the jury was absolutely correct. There was no evidence to connect her with to the death of the child. There was no evidence to prove a criminal act. They could not convict. I wouldnt say that that was the effect of a good defense. It was the effect of a poor presentation of the offense. That got through to the jury and the jury that was paying attention because there was no evidence. A case that I tracked down called Dualaby v. the State of Illinois {sp?} Mr. Dualaby along with his wife of killing their young daughter. The young daughters body was found a couple of miles away from the house in a field naked with blood stains on her little panties laying next to her in the field. That doesnt sound like something that a parent would normally do anyway, does it? But they took him to court with absolutely no evidence. Somehow in that case they managed to convince the jury that it was only possible that he could have done it because there wasnt any signs of any

forcible entry into the house. Well, that doesnt mean anything. It could have been window open. Didnt have to force their way in. There was no proof brought up of anything in that case. It went to appeals and the court of appeals threw out the conviction of Mr. Dualaby because they had presented no evidence to connect him to the crime. It happens rarely that these things are brought that far and argued correctly but it happens constantly that evidence is never properly produced, never done in accordance with the rules of evidence and definitely not in accordance with procedural due process. But Ill tell you how they get most convictions whether it be a criminal conviction or a judgment conviction in a civil action. They get it by putting the so-called defendant on the stand and asking very pointed questions and stupid people who dont know the difference between day and night, dont know the difference between light and dark or good and evil or much of anything else because theyve been taught to go along with the program and believe all the foolishness that the program teaches {sufficient unto the day is the bullshit thereof (often leads to foot in mouth disease).} and think that theyre telling the truthwill blurt out any foolish thing at all to answer the question and usually put their foot in their own mouth and provide for the offense the circumstantial evidence, not real evidence but circumstantial, needed to get a judgment of conviction in both criminal and civil cases all because the people know so little thanks to edu-ma-kation. Edu-ma-kation is such a great thing I cant even spell the word properly but I got an edu-ma-kation. It destroys the minds of people. It has misled us. It is our own fault that we have not overcome it or corrected it so you cant blame what was done. They just offered stuff to you and you accepted and went along with it. It is our own fault for not finding out on our own, for not spending a little bit of time in life to learn a bit more, to recognize the absence of light, the absence of good. The absence of good certainly shows its ugly face in the courts in this country by the things that they to trick people, deceive people and mislead people into admissions of things that are absolutely untruelacking of truth. But anyway, let me read this probative evidence a little bit further. It is that which furnishes or establishes or contributes toward the truth that which is real testimony carrying quality of proof and having fitness to induce the conviction of truth consisting of facts and reason cooperating and coordinate factors. All that gibberage says what I just said, testimony, they get you on the stand to testify, ask you these pointed questions and trap you into the admissions that appear to be probative evidence rather than doing it according to the rules. Now, heres where the rules fall into place, part of it, theres a bit more to this so just hang in here with me. In the law of evidence facts which actually have affect of proving the facts sought, in other words, something real that proves that the fact that is alleged is something real. It is evidentiary in nature when it is a fact that actually relates to the subject. Well get into relative evidence in a few minutes briefly but this is important that you realize that the evidence has to be connected to the case. Lets just take a real quick scenario herecredit card collection casedo you have a credit card? No, sir. Do you have a job? Whats the relevancy? What point does whether I have a job have toward the probative facts, the provative facts, of whether or not I have a credit card? But theyre the kinds of questions they will ask. How much money do you make? I didnt even say I had a job. How can I say how much money I make when I didnt even say I have job? Shut your mouth. None of this is relevant so you must object and say, this is not relevant to the facts that are sought. The facts that are sought are whether or not I had and used a credit card. Well, theres no such thing as a credit card although that word is commonly used to refer to a piece of plastic. The banks of the United States are forbidden by law to lend credit. How could there possibly be a credit card? See how we are deceived and mislead? But 99% of the people in this country will admit, yeah, I had a credit card. Guilty! Judgment against you. You owe whatever

amount of money somebodys claiming that you owe on the alleged credit card which doesnt even exist. See how they trick you into this stuff. Some of these questions have absolutely no value as evidence. So one of the definitions here is evidence has a probative value to it if it tends to prove an issue. The questions we were just talking about do not tend to prove the issue. Why would you bother to answer them? Why would you answer any of their questions with anything except an answer that says, you didnt give me enough knowledge or information about what youre talking about to give you a responsive answer. What do you mean, a credit card? How can there possibly be a credit card when the law forbids the banks to lend credit? I dont know what youre talking about. Now, a person who acts stupid like that would think that theyre acting stupid and the fact is theyre a thousand times smarter than the average yo-yo. They just look like theyre dumb in the court, so what? Youre smart enough that youre going to walk out of this court with no judgment when you play your cards the right way. Act like you dont know what theyre talking about. Dont give them the facts that they want. Dont give them the answers to creates facts or even the appearance of facts that they want. The burden of evidence according to the law is upon the complaining party, not upon the defendant. The defendant doesnt have to produce or admit to anything. And if you noticed the K.C. Anthony trial if any of you were watching parts of it when you had time or listening to the news reports on it and they would show her, especially when they asked her some questions, she was very quiet. She didnt even take the stand in her own defense, if you remember. She was very quiet. She wasnt going to acknowledge anything at all, make any statements whatsoeververy quiet. That was smart. That part of the defense lawyers approach was smart. Now, lawyers whether theyre defense lawyers or prosecuting lawyers, whether theyre prosecuting criminal or prosecuting civil cases, defending criminal or defending civil cases are all bound by what is known as procedural due process. Now, this is very related to this probative evidence. Procedural due process requires the guarantee of procedural fairness which flows from both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments due process clauses or the Constitution. For the guarantee of procedural due process to apply it must first be shown that the deprivation of a significant life, liberty, or property interest has occurred. When the evidence is trumped up, when the evidence is phony, when the evidence is presented to the court that is not presented according to the rules of evidence then it is a deprivation of some aspect of either life, in case its a criminal charge like murder and you might go to jail for life or you might be put to the death penalty, liberty if its a minor term in jail or property. If it has to do with the taking of property under the pretense of some type of tax which may or may not apply to you substantively so the guarantee of procedural due process does apply to those aspects and must first be shown that the deprivation of a significant interest in those aspects of life, liberty or property have occurred due to the improper handling of the trial by the misuse or lack of use of proper evidence. Very simple, isnt it? This is necessary to bring the due process clause into play that you show that something substantially deprived the interest in life, liberty or property. Now, minimal due process requirements are that the party whose rights are to be affected are entitled to be heard and in order that they may enjoy that right they must be notified. Pay attention to the laws in the state that youre located near. When I say near I mean the state capital is where the state is. You dont live in the state just because you live in a place by a similar name. The state of some name is the government. That some name is a place. I dont know how much weve talked about this in the past or how many people are on that are new but by golly we have been so misled into thinking that we live in the state of something but when in fact the only time youre in the state of something is when youre employed as an officer or an employee of the state government or any

of its political subdivisions, county, city or town governments. Youre not in the state unless youre in one of those positions though look into the states codes. A lot of times now you can do this on the computer. Some people who know how to use it can look up specific things by Googling a term and the term could be notice or service of process. You will find that there are certain rules that the state code lays down for how that is to be done and it is rarely ever done properly. So youre not given proper notice to start with. When they file a court case against anybody even a written allegation of criminal conduct written by a cop in what they call an information or an indictment coming down from a phony lawyer who represents himself as being the grand jury. They dont put very many things in front of the actual grand jury. Most of this stuff is done by some lawyer in the back room and he just stamps it a grand jury indictment gets some clown who works in his office to sign a name and say thats the name of the grand jury chairman. And we found this out quite some time ago that grand jury indictments are mostly phony. You will never prove that. They wont let you in to get it proved. So, the most important thing then is to prove that they did not inform you of what this case was all about. They did not inform you by service of process which means delivering the papers to you timely. Some of these tricky dirty little lawyers will send it to an address down the street but theyll swear to the court that they served you and you never get it. This is not procedural due process and this violates either life, liberty or property rights. Theyre supposed to be protected by due process. The evidence is never put in the complaint. There is nothing there to back up or prove their allegations. Its nothing but a bunch of, I would say, wild allegations. In a lot of cases thats all they are, wildly laid out allegations disturbing as all get out to the average individual out here in society because, first of all, they dont even understand the wording very well, its all done in legal terms. Second of all, it is very threatening and puts you in a state of fear and upsets you terribly. And they didnt do it right. And if you can just read a little bit of this procedural stuff, look it up in the states laws. Every state has laws on the procedure of how theyre supposed to do things, even the rules of filing a complaint. They can be found and those rules require things that are commonly left out of complaints. The procedure which due process requires beyond the minimum of proper service to you and letting you know and be aware of what the claim is about, beyond that minimum will be determined by the balancing analysis based on the specific factual context of what went on from there on. Well, thats where it falls into the category of understanding evidence and understanding the rules of evidence. If its not probative evidence which will actually prove the facts in the issue and its not presented in accordance with the rules of evidence then it would be a procedural due process error. And in most cases it is done that way by the lawyer in error and the judge allows it. So the judge is in error in case youre appealing the case and thats what you appeal. The whole basis of appeal is based on whether or not due process was met and whether the judge erred in the due process. That summarizes how an appeal has to be done. Who struck John, ding-a-ling this and ding-bat that and fill in this and cite all this crap you hear from speakers all over the place. What you think or what they think or what you believe or what they believe thats not what goes into an appeal--simply, and enough to show that due process was not properly met, that the evidence was not done in accordance with due process, that perhaps even the complaint was not done in accordance with due process. Service may not have been done in accordance with due process. Any one of those things reverses any kind a decision. Now, under procedural law, that is that which prescribes a method of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their invasion. Now, this is what I just said to you about looking up the states laws related to procedural due process is. What they are supposed to do is written in the law book. They have to follow the law. They rarely ever do. So theyre not

following procedural law. Theyre not doing what theyre supposed to do. By the way, Im just reading out of Blacks 6th edition Law Dictionary. You can find this on the internet and look these kinds of things up and read this. The law is the machinery for carrying on procedural aspects of civil or criminal actions. The law must be followed in order to maintain procedural due process. Thats what thats telling you. It is in accordance with the rules of civil or criminal procedure depending on what kind of a case it is and the rules of appellate courts. Those rules must be followed. That includes the rules of evidence. That includes all of those things that the rules require to be done, being done in accordance with the statutory requirements of how its supposed to be done. It does take you a little time to search some of this but its well worth your effort to beat these scumbags in these court. If nothing else you will walk away a happy person realizing that you outsmarted them even though you acted stupid. You acted like you didnt know what they were talking about. That might seem to act stupid but youre a hell of a lot smarter than most of the stupid people who go into court and try to show them how much they know. Anyway, procedural law as a general rule is laws which fixed duties, establish rights and responsibilities among and for persons both natural and otherwisenatural or fictitious, artificial called corporationstheyre fictitious people. Theyre in accordance with the substantive laws. This is where the connection gets complicated now, for all of us including me. Im no smarter than the rest of you people. I just did a little bit more reading in this area in life out of curiosity. That doesnt make me that much smarter than you are, at all. I can now teach on it because I read so much of it but I didnt understand this stuff when I first got involved in it. It was a little bit hard to comprehend what they meant by the definitions. It didnt fit good because of the way its worded. It didnt sink in good at first but after reading it over and over again and finally narrowing things down over the years a lot of the reading that I did turns out to have only been necessary to lead me to the things that Im now teaching and leading you to. You only need to study these little parts that were talking about. You do not need to spend the 33 years almost that Ive spent doing all this studying and trying to learn the whole process. It isnt necessary for you to do that. You just need to understand these simple little things that were talking about tonight. The general rules of law which fix the duties and establish rights and responsibilities among persons whether theyre natural or otherwise and that those rules are in accordance with the substantive laws which were mentioned up above under procedural due process as stemming from the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments due process clauses of the Constitution. Thats the substantive laws. Their actions in accordance with their code rules and laws have to be in accordance with the substantive laws of the Constitution. And 99 and nine tenths times percent of the time they are in the writing but they arent in the execution and this is where you can cut them off at the ankles. Their execution is not in accordance with what the law requires them to do, not that it isnt constitutional in what the law says because the law usually is within the Constitution. It is the application of the law improperly to you and I out here in society that makes it unconstitutional. Unconstitutional applicationdid you hear me? Do you get my point? It has nothing to do with whether or not the law itself is constitutional because as I said most of them are. These people that pass these laws in the state legislatures and in Congress have researchers and advisors that do a lot of research and can tell them just how far they can go with the laws and still stay within the bounds of the Constitution. They rarely ever make a law that goes outside of it. And when they do theyre usually overturned quickly such as the Graham Rudman Act when Congress tried to give the paying of the debts of the United States away to a executive branch officer and slip out from underneath the responsibility of paying the debts of

the United States which was mandated in the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8. That was declared to be unconstitutional very quickly and shot down. They cannot give away to somebody else their constitutionally mandated authorities. Well, theyve done it in a few other areas and it hasnt been challenged like income taxes being collected by the IRS under the Secretary of the Treasury which is an executive agency when the Constitution says, Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes. Now, these taxes are not constitutionally done. So theyre misapplied. But as far as the law goes the entire Title 26 is within the limits of the Constitution because it can only apply to those people that fall into the category of havingCongress has the power to lay and collect taxes on imposts, duties and excises. Imposts and duties has to do with import and export taxes. Most people are not involved. The only other thing is excises. The word excise means privileges. If youre receiving a privilege from the government such as a license to peddle drugs called a doctors license then youre receiving a privilege that is taxable. A privilege to manufacture and sell alcoholic beverages. Youre receiving a privilege that is taxable. A privilege to manufacture and sell firearms and explosives that privilege is taxable. A privilege to peddle securities which means like stocks, bonds, and insurancethey are securities. The privilege to peddle securities to sell them is a privilege granted by government and regulated by government and taxed by government. You have a gambling operation of some kind that you are licensed by government to do and you can get a license to do that. Well, that is another privilege granted by government, an excise. That is taxable. Beyond that most of the conduct of life and work that people do in America is not under a licensed privilege from government such as what I just named. The misapplication of the tax laws to an individual who does not have a excise privilege license from government is a wrongdoing, a procedural due process violation that definitely interferes with life, liberty and property because it upsets your life, it distracts your liberty to go about life by having to fool with these morons and it definitely is an attempt to take property from you so it covers all three of them, doesnt it? And they have no evidence whatsoever to prove that you have a privilege from government but you never object to what they present. They present some argument that you had income and income is taxable. Well, income for persons with these privileges from government is taxable. See how they pervert words and misapply things in order to create the appearance of evidence but its not real, its not real proof. So this is procedural due process violations that they do. Im leading up to showing that all this stuff Im talking about tonight fits and it fits in many other ways. Im picking on the IRS right now because thats a real simple one. Social Security is a privately owned operation, a privately owned corporation. Conducting a business for the benefit of the federal government and the state government employees. It is not a privilege from government granted to you upon your request to have one of these excise privileges that Congress has the right to control and regulate. So, another deception, the Social Security should have been stopped within six months after it was invented back in 1935 and nobody took it to the courts and took it up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court would have struck it down immediately as improper to apply it to the people because if youll read the lawas a matter of fact it can be found in Title 42 of the United States Code, Section 401 on through under social security that it was created for the benefit and use by federal government employees and it was later amended to extend it to state and local government employees and officers. And thats the end of the story. It was never extended to apply to anyone else other than government employees. It is a misapplication to put it into our hands, to put it in our face and make this offer that we could join Social Security but we accepted the offer, didnt we? Everybody in America that worked for a living was told that you have to have a social security number. Did anybody question why? No, they just went and

got a social security number, put it on their application forms for employment and went to work and taxes were taken out of people who were not government employees. So the lawyers create the pretense in the courts using specific words like the word, resident. You are resident in the State of Maryland. That implies that youre an employee or officer of the state government. It does not mean what we think it means that we reside or live in the state of blank, whatever state. There was an interesting case quite a few years back in Maryland. It went to the Maryland high courts pertaining to income tax, state income tax. And the high court ruled that the tax is figured mathematically upon the amount of income but the tax is not upon the income. The tax is for the pleasure and enjoyment, I think it was, and privileges of being in the state government. Pleasure, enjoyment and privilege of being in the state governmentnow, they didnt say it that clearly, they said residents within the state. But thats what residence within the state means. Resident means located at, an agent of or associated with the state government when you admit to being a resident of the state. When they make a claim that youre a resident of the state you can rebut that claim by an affidavit stating that you are not a resident of the state. You are not employed by the government and if they want to claim that you are all they have to do is come up with payroll records to prove it and they will go away. They cant come up with payroll records unless of course you do work for the state and by the way, you stupid people that are school teachers, the Department of Education is an agency of the state. Im telling you that they got to be the dumbest people on the face of this earth that we have for teachers {they used to be good at flaybottomry, however, in the old days} I dont know how many of them Ive talked to that said, oh no, the Department of Education isnt part of the state. Oh, yes it is. Where do you people come from that become teachers? No wonder our kids are so stupid. {Check out Finland for real education in the modern times. Any method that gets real educational results is ok and it works!} And by the way, I meant to insult you. You must know these differences. You must understand this separation of government from private people. Government is fictional. It is a fictitious corporation. Everything they do is Alice-in-Wonderlandfiction. Your real life does not actually fit into that fiction and you have to learn to separate their fiction from your reality of life and not try to mix the two together. Procedural due process requires that they not mix the two together, that they keep all of their fictitious laws, rules, regulations, money, banking and everything that they do and handle all within government and not to extend it out to the private sector of people like you and I. They have violated procedural due process from the getgo by bringing all this crap out here and making us, tricking us, deceiving us into believing that we have to cooperate with it. The first and most responsible people that have really violated any form of due process is the preachers of religions that required you to have a birth certificate before they would perform any religious ceremonies like Bar Mitzvah, baptism, and any other sacrament type of religious function that goes on in the religions. They wont do it unless you have a birth certificate. They drove you to a connection with the state. {the State wants to own you so much for (in)voluntary servitude. It would seem that throughout the millennia men wanted to make slaves of other men, especially narcissistic exploitive types which most of them were.} by recording that birth certificate if the hospital didnt already to it. {janissaries, janissaries everywhere} The hospitals usually do it before the church gets a chance to tell you that you have to have it. {I really dont think that the Lord would require a birth certificate but the preachers seem to think so or was it that they bend over for the State?} But they will not perform any type of religious ceremony whatsoever unless you can prove that you have a birth (berth?} certificate so theyre deceiving you into going along with the deception of the fiction of government and the doctors and nurses in the hospitals are doing the same thing {janissaries all}

and tricking you into believing you have to have birth certificates {I bet theres a pile of birth certificates just outside the pearly gates} when in fact there is no need for a birth certificate except to be able to receive government benefits {Caesar wins again.} and if you receive them then you put yourself in a liable category and thats all a violation of due process. Thats not permissible, it constitutes a taking of private property for public government use {I thought the preachers knew that Thou shalt not steal They probably were teachers before they were preachers.} without just compensation. It creates an infringement into the liberty violating the 4th Amendment to the Constitution of being secure in your houses, your papers and your chattels and effects {whats left of them.} Everything theyve done that has in some way or another tangled you up in the wonderful weave of government has been a procedural due process violation by them. And they can be held liable for this if you want to go far enough, if you know who to go after. Go after the preacher who wouldnt marry you unless you had a State birth certificate, a state marriage license. Go after the doctor who enforced and insisted that you get a birth certificate for your children because these are all government agents, believe it or not. Preachers are authorized by government {too bad God lost out} to conduct religious activities. They are, most of them, incorporated and that puts them right under government. Theyre agencies of government. Doctors are licensed by government to peddle drugs. Theyre an agency of government. They come under this procedural due process requirement. They come under the duty to be honest and conduct themselves with loyalty to the substantive laws {does that include the laws of nature?} and they dont do it. So they can be sued for breach of their fiduciary duty. I havent covered lawyers {too slimy, eh?} because every lawyer could be sued for breach of his fiduciary duty for any conduct of any kind that he would apply to you because everything hes applied is fictional and it does not apply to you unless you have a fictional license from them as I just described to do something that they have the right to regulate. Then its all fiction and youre in the fiction and it can be applied as fictional but when youre not anything that they apply, anything that they force you into to have a license that wasnt necessary is also a breach of their fiduciary duty to be honest because of the separation of power between the private individual and the government. Those powers are separated by the laws of this country. It was referred to in some cases as the separation of church and state {Only referenced inThomas Jeffersons private letterotherwise non-existent} which has been definitely perverted by linguists who have twisted the word church around to mean religion when in fact the original people back in the early times of this country knew that in the old language that the word, church meant mans physical body and your physical body was separate and distinct from the body politic called government. So that was the separation of church and state. Well, that is more specifically defined as the difference between the democracy which is the government and the republic which is the people in their private capacity. So either way you want to look at this, either language you want to apply to it we as private individuals were not supposed to be pushed, forced, tricked, threatened into cooperation with activity with the government. We were supposed to be able to make a logical choice and theres nothing wrong with that logical choice if it is logical, if its based on knowledge and understanding of what youre doing and where youre going to choose to be part of the government. Nothing wrong with that at allthe government is a wonderful institutionits a damned poor investment but a wonderful institution. I wouldnt suggest you invest in it at all. But if you wish to invest your time and efforts the return on the time and effort as an employee has usually been pretty good pay, pretty decent position. The problem is that you may be walking into a position where youre being required to do these procedural due process violations to the rest of the people and that puts you

into the category of lacking goodmakes you dishonest, makes you liable for anybody who are among those few that are starting to get smart enough to be able to file these complaints for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of trust because the government is a trust at all times. All employees of government are in a trustee position. The courts have said this emphatically that all employees and officers at all times at every level are trustees or the public wheal and as such they have a duty to act with the highest level of honesty, integrity and good faith which they dont. And when they dontIve never seen them act with good faith. When they dont they can be held personally liable for their conduct the courts have said. Im just repeating court language to you about this type of case. This is not my personal opinion. Im repeating what theyve said in the courts. You have the ability to learn this little bit of evidence and procedural due process and due process, specific or general due process and be able to go after them if you have a notion to do so but also to be able to beat them in any claims they bring against you because when theyre not doing it right you can cut them off at the ankles. You can expose the fact that theyre not doing it right, that their evidence is not in accordance with the rules of evidence, in accordance with the rules of procedure, that their questions are not in accordance with the rules of evidence, evidentiary procedure and not in accordance with the rules of a proper complaint according to the court rules. Now, you got to do a little digging because the court rule just says a complaint is done by starting it and filing it and serving it. The rule doesnt go on and explain whats needed but there are rules of procedure for putting it together that can be researched and found. And you need to look them up because they very slightly from state to state. So if I look them up for instance for Delaware and you need them in New York these Delaware rules may not fit exactly what they say in New York You need to look up the New York rules. You need to look up the California rules. Ill almost guarantee you the New York rules and the California rules will be very similar but different wordingsame meaning of words in many casestwo different words that mean the same thing. And one of them will use one word and the other one will use another word. If you dont use the correct words for the area of courts that youre in they will say, we dont know what youre talking about. Thats not the words we use. This is a little babyfied sort of fictional game that they play and its all based on words. So you really do need to look up the words from the state youre having difficulties with of what their law says. It is critically important that you do look them up and use their words because like I said, they vary from state to state in how theyre worded. Basic functions of the laws are pretty consistent but the wording is not consistent and they rely on their own wording in each of the states so you must look it up. You must find these procedural requirements, you must be able to show that their statute says this, their procedure says this, they did that and its not in accordance with those rules. Its not hard to do, it really isnt. It does require that you apply your brain. All of us have one, God gave it to us. Its there, never seen it, never smelled it, never touched it but its there and it functions within your head and you can use it. You just need to have the initiative to do it. And some of things that are going on in this world I cannot understand why its not causing more people to have an initiative and a frustrating anger to go look into it and find out how they can get back at these people, how they can stop the things that these people are doing because you know its wrong. You just have a feeling inside that what theyre doing is not right. But for some reason most people are letting them get away with it even though they know its not right. So, procedural due process, procedural law and evidence, understanding evidence, following the rules of evidence, they dont come up with the evidence and present it to the court in accordance with the rules. For instance, Rule 901 says that the instrument has to be an original and it has to be verified that it is true and correct by someone

who has first hand knowledge of the transaction that the instrument was created in. Rule 1003 says it doesnt have to be an original. It can be a photocopy but it has to be verified in accordance with the rules of 901 which says it has to be verified as true and correct. So either a live signature, a real document, or a photocopy can be used as evidence but they have to be verified as true and correct. They never do this. That is never done with any documents that they put into the court. Some lawyer will write an affidavit stating that he has first-hand knowledge because he reviewed the record. Well, he just lied right there on an affidavit. He doesnt have first-hand knowledge if he wasnt there and see it happen. Reading the record doesnt prove anything because records could be altered. They need to show the chain of title of who had control of these records and whether or not there was any altering of those records. They never do that. They dont prove that the record is correct. As a matter of fact, 99% of the time the record is not correct. It is altered to suit their needs for the benefit of government and its control, not you and protecting your rights in life, liberty and propertyagain, a procedural due process error and violation of substantive rights of individuals as private people. But were not even smart enough to know that were private people because education didnt teach it to us. Im sure youve heard the word but you dont really know what it means because education didnt tell us the difference between public government officials and private sector people. And the difference is like day and night. Private sector people are the absence of government connections. Without that connection government has no authority because they have no authority outside of government except the common law prosecution of the duty of government to protect each and every one of us from each and every one of us and that is to bring charges criminally of robbery, rape, murder, assault and battery. That authority exists outside of government. All the rest of governments internal rules and regulations, codes that they call law are internal laws for government. They only apply to people and things that are in government and theyre misapplying them to you and I and our property out here in the private sector of society simply because, like Ive said, education never really explained the difference between the private individual and the public government and what authority each one of us had. As a matter of fact I remember back in school way back in elementary schoolback in those days they taught from a book trying to remember the name of it now. Its not the same anymore thats in the schools but it was all about governments. In this book they taught about this wonderful government we have in this countrywhich I agree it is a wonderful government, its just misrepresented in the teaching but this wonderful government is a government of the people, by the people and for the people which sort of leads you to think that were part of the people, but, no, you have to learn to read. The beginning of the United States Constitution is a perfect example to look at but you got to understand the rules of grammar in order to be able to read it and what it says is, We the People of the united States of America do ordain this Constitution for ourselves and our posterity. Who done it? Thats not very good grammar, is it? But Ill tell you who done it. The people of the United States Corporation did it for themselves and their own posterity. It had nothing to do with the American people. We are not the people. It is not a government of the people, by the people and for the people of America. Its a government of the people, by the people and for the people of government. They didnt teach it to us this way. But after reading enough court cases I have found that the courts have verified what I just said, that the governments have all the authority, rights and duties to make all the laws necessary to regulate themselves, the court have saidto regulate themselves. One of them said to regulate itself because it was specifically talking about one particular state government. What is so hard about understanding themselves or itself meaning government, itself, themselves, the

government people? Not us the private sector. Their law, rules, regulations, codes and socalled statutes do not apply to the people outside of government. It is a procedural due process violation to apply it and they do it to us all the time. Theyve been doing it to us for years, coming around and tell you that you got to paint spouts because theyre getting rusty and if you dont were going to fine you because its part of our laws. We enforce this law because it comes from the Code and we call it code enforcement. Well, that Code doesnt apply to the rainspouts on your private house. It only applies to government buildings. They misapply it on purpose because theyre making profit. Theyre making money off of us and this is where the breach of fiduciary duty and breach of trust really comes into play because anytime that the trustee makes a personal gain or profit off of the beneficiary which is uswere the beneficiaries of this trust for his own profit he has breached the trust. By golly, think about that. Everything this government has been doing to us, the American people, for years has been a breach of their trust and we are so well educated to be stupid that were stupid enough not to know or understand it and the education is just phenomenally outrageous in that it leads you down the rosy path of self-destruction and gives you no knowledge whatsoever of facts or truth. Education has destroyed this country. George Washington once said, and I quote him, education has destroyed this country. He said that education will be the ruination of this nation. What an intelligent man he must have been to realize that the educator would pervert the truth and lead people away from the knowledge and understanding of the actual concept of this government that he and his cohorts had designed back in those early days of this country and indeed the educator has done that. It is up to you to self-educate now to correct this problem. Now that weve done so much work for so many years to find out where to look and what area could be used to sue them. Now, you have most of the answers. You only have a little bit of studying to do, a little bit of putting forth an effort of your own mind to grasp the intent of what this is all about and put it to use. You dont have to do all the work we did. You dont have to go to the library weekend after weekend, Saturday and Sunday all day and study, study, study and make photocopies and go home and study the photocopies all week long. You dont have to do that. You only need to look up these few things that were talking about, the rules of evidence, the rules of court, the statutory reference to whatever is going on. You dont have to go through the whole statute. You dont have to understand the whole codebook. You just have to look up the specific sections in the Code and the first part of that section, the introduction to it, because the introduction always tells you what its for. Vague words in many cases, but read it carefully and even the vagueness disappears and it becomes evident that the motor vehicle laws are for government employees. Motor vehicles are for government but why in the hell do police pull you over and write tickets to your private vehicle then if motor vehicle laws are only for government motor vehicles, government cars and trucks and government people? Because somebody deceived you into believing that you had to register your car with the government with the Department of Motor Vehicles. Well, we got in touch with a couple different Department of Motor Vehicles in different states around the country and we asked them with what they call FOIA, Freedom of Information Act requests. If they had registered so-and-sos car as a private automobilewe knew they didntbut we asked that question anyway and we got an answer back and the answer was that we dont have that kind of a category. The only category we have is residential, commercial and agricultural. Well, whats residential mean? I just told you a few minutes ago, within government. Commercial: licensed by government to be in commerce. Agricultural: Large agricultural is always licensed by government because they claim they have the right to regulate the food supply in order to protect the good interest of the people. Its all

governmental control. It has nothing to do with a privately owned automobile. They dont have a category for it because they have no authority to register private property of any kind in government. See, some of the little things that we played with over the years led us to look up more and study further and learn these little specific details that Im giving you that they dont have the authority to regulate private property of any kind and that comes right out of the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution and some part of the Bill of Rights of each of the state constitutions that states that government shall not take private property for public use without just compensation. In some similar language every state has said that in their constitution. Well, their constitution is the by-laws by which their corporation is set up. It rules and regulates their limited authority and when they go beyond it theyre breaching the trust that theyre supposed to be. It makes for a very interesting story, doesnt it, and fits every bit of what theyre doing of registering private peoples private children, private peoples private automobiles, private peoples private houses. Registering is definitely a procedural due process violation with no evidence that they have any right to do it and no real evidence to prove that they have the right to regulate it when they take you to court in an attempt to do the regulating of it. A little thought, a little effort to study this and a little bit of thinking, learning to think on your own you people are capable of making these law suits, going after them or going into court when they bring you to court and defending yourself by, as I said, it may look like youre acting stupid but youre ten times smarter than most people by saying that you dont know what theyre talking about. They have the duty to produce evidence, where is your evidence to prove. You havent shown me anything. You have no evidence here in this complaint. You have a bunch of words. They really dont mean a thing. You havent proven anything at all by giving me any evidence so you havent given me anything that I can make a substantive answer with. Now, if you dont answer, guess what? They did not create a controversy in that complaint. They wait for you to come into court and argue with them and try to show them how smart you are and how much you know. Stupid, you create the controversy by doing that. So, you really want to be stupid or do you want to be smart and look stupid? Its smarter to look stupid and say, I dont know what youre talking about, I dont know what you mean. You havent shown me anything. Wheres the evidence? Where are the facts? Theres nothing here except a bunch of statements that say things and you backed it up with nothing. Wheres the contract? Wheres the agreement that I made to cooperate with any of this stuff? They cant come up with it. There are agreements. You signed an application to register the automobile. You signed an application to get a drivers license. You signed an application to get Social Security. There is an agreement but they wont produce it because its fraudulent and if it was brought into the courts and the fraud was exposed it would really open up a can or worms that the government doesnt want opened. So they wont produce it. But they have to. The rules of evidence require it, procedural due process requires it. Wheres the agreement? Some judge will tell you, you dont have to. You say, judge this is procedural due process. Im sorry but yes they do have to and you know better. He wont like you much but Ill tell you what hell do. Hell figure out some cockamamie way of dismissing the case. I dont think the state has enough evidence to proceed with this from what Im seeing here. Im going to dismiss this case for lack of evidence to proceed, and out the door you go. You didnt win the case by arguing with them. You won the case by evading them, evading their accusations, evading anything that they might try to bring up as evidence because it isnt and you know it isnt. But you have to know. You have to read some of this stuff and do some study. Then you will understand how to do it. Listening to me is not enough. You cant go into court completely unprepared. Its like somebody who knows nothing about the rules of football going out on a

football field and trying to play football against a professional football team. They know the rules, you dont. Theyre going to clobber you. Well, these courts know the rules, know how to circumvent their rules, know how to twist and bend their rules and you dont understand any of their rules. Youre going to get clobbered until you spend a little bit of time looking at some of this stuff. First, we had to understand the law. Then we had to understand their codes. Then we had to understand procedure. Thats why its taken so many years. Now I can tell you what the procedure is supposed to be, where it can be found in their codes under the headings of whatever it is theyre claiming against you. Its very simple to look it up being we have this piece of junk called a computer that if it works it will actually search under a particular word and find it in the books for you. So, it has become somewhat of a help. Dont trust a lot of the other crap thats on there. The computer is full of garbage. But when youre searching something like this, they blatantly put their codes out there for everybody to seeit can be found. Look it up whether its a traffic case or my little Debbie got arrested and charged with selling cigarettes to a minor. Looked at the Code, the code section that they charged her with said, its a violation of the law punishable by possible six months in jail and a $500 fine for selling cigarettes to a minor. This section is in accordance withnow that was something like 7208 and it said, this section is in accordance with 7202. Ok, lets go look at 7202 and see what it says that this in accordance with. And 7202 said that this entire chapter is relative to licensed tobacco dealers, the owner or operator of a tobacco store with a license. Well, little Debbie just worked for the company. She wasnt the one that had the license. It didnt apply to her so we put all this together in a little written statement and Debbie went into the court the day she was told to go and said, I dont know how to answer this. The judge said, what do you mean you dont know how to answer? What is it you dont understand? She says, well, what I dont understand is that the code book says that this is applicable to the owner or operator of the store and Im not the owner or operator. Why did they arrest me? Oh, he said, I think thats been changed. Has it, Mr. Attorney? The attorney said, well, the legislatures working on changing it. See how they lie and twist things. They come up with this stuff real quick. And he says, young lady, normally we put the trial off for several weeks but were going to have trial this afternoon at one oclock. You make sure youre back here at one oclock. Bailiff, dont call the police officer that charged her. So atone oclock she goes back. They finally call her to come up into the rail of the court and the judge said, is officer so-and-so here? Five times he asked for officer so-and-so. He said, apparently hes not here. Young lady, what do you want to do? She says, I move this court to dismiss for failure to timely prosecute if hes not here. The judge says, very good, dismissed. See, they look for a way of not addressing the issue if you know that they didnt do it right. They will find some loophole way out. He did it and he did it quicklyall that day to get rid of it. Its up to what you know. Its not up to what you think some moron with a law degree called a lawyer knows because he doesnt know anything but procedure and the procedure that he is taught is for all lawyers whether theyre defense lawyers or prosecuting lawyers to work together to try to extort as much as they can out of the private individuals in America. They are thieves, they are liars, they are cheats. And some of them are very nice people, absolutely amazing how sweet they come off, how absolutely nice and wonderful they are in life. But, boy, when they get in there and do their job in the courtroom they are what I just described, liars, thieves, cheats because thats their job, thats what theyre taught to do. They pervert the process because they know that the people do not understand, do not realize what is really going on and they can get away with doing it and indeed they do it over and over and over. And the only time they dont is when somebody like little Debbie catches them in the act and shows that their code said

something different than what they claimed. Then they dismiss the case. See how easy it is to do? And like I said, these codes can be foundmost of them can be found on the internet today. If not, they can be found on the shelf in the library in the basement of the courthouse that theyre telling you to come to. And they have to let you in to look at the books if you have a case going on in that court. They cant deny you the use of the library in the basement. They have to let you use it if you got a case going on. Now, some of them are nice, theyll just let you use it but some of them are a little bit snooty and theyll say, if you dont have a case going on right now then you can use the library. Well, if you got a case going on tell them, yes, I got a case going on, the State vs. me. You might even take a copy of the claim with you. Those librarians are not dummies. Theyre not real bright either but theyre not dummies. They know some things about whats in those law books and where to find things and they can help you to find certain things if you ask. They wont offer, they wont come over and tell you that theyre there to help you. If theres anything you need to know about a certain issue about this case that I can help you find itthey wont do that. But if you go to them and politely ask for a little bit of help, where do I find something on this particular subject? They know what book and where it is on the shelf. Theyre pretty good at that kind of stuff. they know their job. I guess they have to because the fact is lawyers dont know where to find things. So somebody has to guide the lawyer to the right book on the shelf. They have to learn this when they become librarians. So theyll help you. Theyll treat you the same way they treat the lawyer because theyve been programmed to do this. And theyre very nice and theyre good at it, most of them. Ive only met a few librarians in a couple libraries around the country that were rather snooty. Most of the rest of them were very, very nice people. They will help you. If you cant find it on a computer go to the court, to the library in the basement and that librarian in there will help you. Were now archiving these calls on TalkShoe and you just look for Howard Griswold TalkShoe program and the date and you can pull it back up and listen to it on your U-tube if you have that much computer access. So, listen to it againlisten to it againlisten to it againsometimes it takes repetition to get something to settle into your mind. I know that for a fact. Some of these court cases I have read them as much as fifteen times before I finally really grasped what the court was saying. Repetition helps. Sometimes I read it three times and I got it. Sometimes it takes fifteen times. I got a thick head. It takes a long time to penetrate it. Im sure most of you people are smarter at that kind of stuff than I am. You probably wont have to read it as much but you do have to read it more than once sometimesmost times.