Sie sind auf Seite 1von 27

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

CLEMONS, HERBERT AND MORTON ET AL


Plaintiffs,

)
)

CIVIL ACTION NO.


______________

)
)
)
)
)
)

Versus
THE UNITED STATES,
Defendant.

COMPLAINT
I.

INTRODUCTION

This action seeks just compensation from the United States for an absolute and
whole violation of the Plaintiffs exactly named rights and birthright and for
property taken from Plaintiffs, a declatory judgment, that the Defendant is in
active default and that actions taken by the US and its officers were arbitrary
and without any factual or lawful basis and an appropriate junction.
II.

JURISDICTION

This court has jurisdiction because the US is a Defendant and this case meets
every single basis for jurisdiction named by this court itself and by the US. 28
U.S.C. 1491. Also it has been previously found twice over that the US is in
default so that this is a first time ever circumstance making this court the court
in which Plaintiffs would seek damages as this court exists to balance and then
counterbalance the US ability and capacity to cause harm without justly
compensating The People; the original intent of this courts very existence is in
play.

c. PARTIES
Plaintiffs are natural born citizens of the United States of America not of the
incorporated US. One Plaintiff is being charged with a capital offense and has a
fatal disease.
Plaintiffs sue in their own right, as they are sovereign entities and as the
successors to the American Founders and their original form, The Constitution for
the United States of America circa 1789.
The Defendants are the US and its officers who are successors to the incorporation
of the US known as The Constitution of the United States circa 1871. They are also
the successors of an action named Bush V Gore that has a basis in fact but not in
law as the Petition/Argument is not the same thing as the Opinion; the Plaintiffs
do not regard the Supreme Court Justices as Defendants.
IV. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
1.

On March 12th, 2008 the Plaintiffs directly filed a constitutional authority case
of original jurisdiction within the Supreme Court of the US.

2.

A direct challenge to Bush V Gore henceforth known as BVG the suit was won
upon filing or else it wouldnt exist; filing and adjudication in this type of
case is simultaneous or concurrent.

3.

Plaintiff/Counselor Susan Herbert understood that the argument or theory


authored by lawyers known as BVG is bad and that according to the exactly
worded Constitution (either version) that BVG the opinion as it involves the
election of a President created what is a tie as the correct, actual math is:
BVG=1 whole court as 5 as 1 vs 4 as 1 hence 1 vs 1 or BVG =1 absolute Chief
Justice as Rhenquist opined as both a part of the whole court and alone and
that this one is pitted against the absolute citizen as 1 who rises to challenge
it thereby making the case for Marbury, making the case for EP&DP for
women and children accounting for biological distinction and making the case
for the existence of the exactly named Creator and that this then creates the
venue to test the natural birth clause.

4.

The federal question becomes: If the venue to hear the case for equality and
to test the natural birth clause does not exist then does America exist? You
must create the venue via acting to enter a case of original jurisdiction.

5.

Any way you count BVG it is always and forever a tie as the nation as a whole
1 voted for Gore and we have no popular vote according to US Law; a lone
citizen acting on behalf of The People must then call it via a direct suit as
BVG seems to be an original case but it is not as it began life as Gore V FL
thus none of those present possessed constitutional authority and BVG is not
an actual original case (actual original jurisdiction does not apply); also the
winner never appeals so Bush would not bring it to SCOTUS and in the case of
a Presidential election SCOTUS has no power to install a President plus the
Constitution reads I will not my lawyer will so both Bush and Gore had to
act pro se or else all they have proven is that they have no ability thus they
cant fulfill the oath of office.

6.

Furthermore BVG was filed as an emergency when no actual emergency exists


as we have orderly transfers of power; the point of law to be had is moral
authority aka constitutional authority not legal power and not control; it is
about commanding not presiding; it is about the existence of a commission
the divine endowment - that all actual Americans are born into not
permission as nobody needs another mans permission to press suit, to ascend
to the seat in actuality or to do anything as in the US law tells you what you
can do and names a single act as criminal: treason, as you can but may not.

7.

Rhenquist effectively castled with Bush leaving the door open for the lone
citizen to rise. That citizen must file directly on behalf of the whole class of
many taking on the Chief Justice and/or the whole Court directly in order to
ascend to the seat whether they ever physically sit in it or not so to even file
the case is to have won it as you wouldnt directly appeal BVG in any other
court as it was only heard in SCOTUS; to be filed is to have won as not only is
it about exact words and good math but a pre-existing question is present:

8.

SCOTUS claims (or did at that time) on its website and in its literature that
filing is a privilege only but never a protected right; is there ever an instance
whereby filing is the protected right of a citizen and/or every citizen? YES, if
SCOTUS ever comes to hear a case concerning the outcome of a Presidential
election for if that happens then every single clause save one of The
Constitution (both versions) has been violated; all that is left is the natural
3

birth clause meaning: what is now an oligarchy as Jefferson predicted will


become a dictatorship; its alienation thus foreignization must transpire.
9.

You can logically reason this out plus the pattern is to break the color line
first by allowing a black man to succeed and then to break the gender line
not sex line by allowing a woman to follow. Note: Gender and sex are two
different things; gender discrimination and prejudice yet exists while
discrimination and prejudice based upon the act of sex is being addressed
thus heterosexual women are not actually gaining ground but losing ground.

10.

The reasoning this is being done is to keep all qualified women out of the
offices of Chief Justice and Commander in Chief in order to usurp their moral
authority; the corrupted thinking of a majority of men is that women are
inferior to men; that is their true belief; if it were not so then none of them
would be reacting out of fear; even if it is on the tiniest subconscious level
ALL men with the possible exception of those who are exactly named
Plaintiffs do truly believe that men are better than women and most women
believe this too or else they would not agree to participate. Note: Women yet
earn about 80 cents for every $1 a man earns, the highest paying jobs for
women are all in the sex industry, sex trafficking has exploded in the US,
women comprise only 4.6% of the CEOS who head Fortune 500 companies,
only 44 have served as Senators since 1789 and about 97% of all media
decisions are made by men.

11.

Although women legally secured the vote with the passage of the 19 th
Amendment in 1920 their vote is a powerless, meaningless action as it cannot
be enforced until or unless a woman sits as Chief Justice or President and
that is because no man will have the experience of life known as pregnancy
and giving birth and men perceive the world differently than women so that
they will never own the knowledge of woman as wisdom; men are relying
and depending upon what is hearsay and suggestive only in the cases of
women and each time a woman wins suit in SCOTUS it is somehow, someway
overturned or ignored by a male majority as if no action ever transpired and
as if their personal judgment values are the law and the reality of women.

12.

Confusion exists in this unique case as people assume that the Justices
answer a suit brought against the US; incorrect as the Justices are impartial
and the responsible clerks answer first by calling the point of law regarding
filing as a right by acting to file the case or not thus to file is to win and then
4

the US in the form of the Solicitor General or any other person in the chain of
command down to the lone citizen acts to answer on behalf of the US and in
defense of the 1871 version of The Constitution aka the incorporation.
13.

Its the Supreme Court of the United States of America as it was formed in
1803, before the US incorporation.

14.

SCOTUS clerks and Justices never act to answer on behalf of the US therefore
the docket entries in the case of In Re Susan Herbert are bad as in false as
the SCOTUS docket claims that the Justices answered on behalf of the US; in
reality? If the Justices only receive half of a case then the US is compelled to
answer and/or default occurs as they cannot conference half of a case and
would never need to deny hearing such a case as the point of law has already
been won if its a directly filed case. Those entries make no sense; theyre
illogical and they violate or pervert the correct, actual process.

15.

This is the exact threat made against Herbert when she first contacted
SCOTUS as a clerk named Will told her that as he knew she is the case for
equality that he would sink it - he exactly said that he hated women, mothers
and the pro se - and who controls the files, the docket? The clerks. Making
false entries is the means to sink a case; the Plaintiffs are not the only
victims of this as licensed lawyers have filed complaints about this that are
being ignored.

16.

Knowing all of this and knowing that a waiver on the US behalf in this type of
case then officially null and voids the 1871 version of The Constitution that
was never legal and which was forced upon The People without their
informed consent (women were not allowed to vote at all in 1871, not even
as a meaningless action) thereby dissolving it then the Plaintiffs logically,
reasonably and rationally expected default to follow this waiver.

17.

The US waived its right on April 1 st, 2008 (no joke). See attached docket,
Exhibit A. Note: Plaintiffs had filed their initial objection in December of
2000 as BVG was being heard in order to preserve their suit and filed within
SCOTUS before the deprivation of the right and the birthright transpired, as
they must. Plaintiffs have already won a point of law regarding any time
limit, as now there is none.

18.

Plaintiffs then returned to SCOTUS in order to secure what had to follow:


Official, legal default, as now the Plaintiffs were directly appealing the
original governing contracts as authored by our Founders and any other
answer would constitute an admission of guilt upon the US part. Plaintiffs are
asking questions regarding the exactly worded original contracts, as they are
elegant or perfect; they are universally true.

19.

Plaintiffs are also doing something else: In America we previously accepted


only three pieces of paper as proof in our courts: The Declaration, The
Federalist Papers and The Constitution for the United States of America dated
1789 not The US Constitution or The Constitution of the United States dated
1871 as that is an incorporated business entity or a dead institution that is
real on paper but not in actuality; no other paper is accepted as proof but
only as evidence; to file In Re Susan Herbert I & II as it was entered directly
and to no other court, as it tackles an original case and as its line of
reasoning is without fault is to accept the paper that she produced her own
self without the help of any other living person as proof so it thus she too is a
written yet living authority upon matters of law.

20.

Only Plaintiffs correctly reasoned the case accounting for every single thing
you must account for including: universal law as US Law as authored by our
Founders matches universal law.

21.

The unique knowledge that Plaintiffs brought to the table concerns work
Thomas Jefferson published in the Congressional record that men have
ignored and denied as they do not and/or cannot comprehend it: Using A
Summary View as you trace allodial title to the Creator so that Jefferson
authored the perfect theological, legal and scientific case for mankinds
sovereignty (we did not popularly vote for Independence as we first reasoned
our case for sovereignty and then we issued our Declaration as a Petition!)
and using Jeffersons unique, original system of measurements that resulted
in an elegant form of currency Herbert was able to discern the correct weight
of Earth and to resolve Uniformity; she was also able to define and prove how
and why magnetic north behaves as it does and how and why people behave
as they do as she had to predict this previously unknown behavior of nature in
order to prove the case and that universal law is at work.

22.

Herbert also used Jeffersons work to define the smallest particle man can
measure in order to resolve Uniformity, or, in order to make this case for w/o
6

it one cannot prove the existence of the exactly named Creator. Its not the
god particle as men popularly refer to it but the Creator particle that
separates man from all other animals so Herbert jokingly calls it The Thomas
Jefferson Particle and seriously calls it the nanino; she named the force at
work the Intrinsic Force after John Marshall as he said within Marbury that
politics is intrinsic.
23.

Without realizing it (he was knowing but not wholly aware) Thomas Jefferson
was able to define the universal mean that eluded Isaac Newton; the
experiment he conducted yields the great enough difference that Newton
writes about in Principia; it is the weight of your mind or of motive and intent
as only men possess motive and intent; using this Jefferson also arrived at the
correct weight of Earth but Lord Calvert of Baltimore was erroneously given
credit for what is a bad theory by the Royal College of Astronomers as all
anybody bothered to check is his math not his theory or whether or not he
produced any proof as he didnt as you NEVER use what you used to author
your theory what you already know - as your proof for it is not proof; you
predict behavior in nature that you do not know and if youre correct
regarding nature then your theory is proven.

24.

Calvert strayed from Newtons parameters and used a whole range of


mountains rather than one lone mountain when Newton states that no
mountain thus no mountain range will ever yield the mean that you need to
use to then weigh the Earth; like BVG the weight of Earth is about zero both a
numerical and a philosophical concept and about absolutes versus wholes.

25.

We predict human behavior all of the time in SCOTUS and we correct for our
mistakes as we come to own more knowledge as the proof is revealed; we
become more self-aware and more Creator-aware.

26.

As no other living person understood what Jefferson had done and as we did
not track magnetic north until five years after Jeffersons death then
Jeffersons work languished upon the Congressional record and in his letters
as it was irrationally rejected in favor of a debt money system, the dollar and
the metric system as it (they) are incorrect as in wrong; in the case of
metrics France abandoned Jeffersons oscillating wooden rod method thus
they did not negate the error caused by a mans electromagnetic field
interacting with the Earths electromagnetic field within the electromagnetic
field the universe is.
7

27.

Jefferson enshrined the truth of this universal mean, the mean that unites it
all, in a clock that he built that yet exists at Monticello for the weight would
hit the floor and so the clock would stop ticking; while it seems to be a
mistake it is not; as Jefferson cant fix what isnt broken he merely cut a
whole in his floor to accommodate the weight; this difference is the universal
mean in the form of a clock; think of this in terms that you are familiar with
such as greatest weight,
balance and counterbalance for you
counterbalance the interest and the right both public and private; US Law
works much like a finely tuned watch; it has a heart beat and it respires
exactly as human beings do and exactly as this universe does but the paper
isnt alive as The People who are the government do live; paper is conscious
as all things are conscious but it is not consciously aware like humans are as
human beings are a special arrangement of atoms; humans have a mind of
their own while paper is inanimate.

28.

Jefferson did know what he had done concerning the universal mean but he
did know what he had done concerning a system of currency this unit is also
a mean unit of currency - as he understood that money is what enslaves
people and our modern linear calendar, as time is whole not absolute, is
meant to value people as an amount of money when this monetary value is an
ever-changing condition that allows those who control this value to then
control us as abusers (authoritarian rulers) change the condition over and
over and when they run out of gas as there are no more conditions left to
change they then become violent which has happened across this nation and
the world; the monetary system has already collapsed as evidenced by the
US inability to pay its debts and its bond rating falling.

29.

Jeffersons genius idea was to discern a universal amount that is then a term
of this universe so that no man could enslave another by artificially
manipulating this value; as its a term then its a law; its value is constant.

30.

Ray Morton had also resolved Uniformity as he was working on this answer
simultaneously, that time is a matter of mass, and he was seeking the means
to bring suit against the US based upon injury and harm he suffered when he
was told Herbert had successfully done so; Morton joined the class as
Counsel; Morton has the good math and good physics formally written out on
paper.

31.

Recently physicists announced they had discovered the magneton after


Susan Herbert and Ray Morton had already filed their knowledge in SCOTUS
thereby patenting it on behalf of The People; they state that unbonded
magnetrons form an electromagnetic field and that bonded ones form
physical matter; they do not address conscious awareness or what that is.

32.

Original US Law mirrors the good math and good physics.

33.

Official legal default occurred upon November 5th, 2008, the day after
Obamas unlawful popular election, the day the result is announced; it was
officially certified after default transpired or while the US was already in
default. See Exhibit A.

34.

Besides being in default Obama is not natural born and not a legal voter
according to law and to act nor can he defend, protect and preserve The
Constitution as he lacks the ability; not once has he reasoned US Law by his
own self, not once has he produced original intellectual property and not
once has he acted independently; often he signs work Anonymous or if he
does sign he changes his name completely or the spelling of it; Obama then is
never held accountable or responsible for his own actions.

35.

No other person appearing on the ballot was qualified either as they arent
natural born and they cannot fulfill the oath of office as they too lack the
ability; McCain appeared via a Resolution signed by those who were also
running for this office as he was born in the Panama Canal Zone and was not
grand fathered into the law.

36.

Plaintiffs then filed a Motion to Compel the US to respond in order to avoid


default and Obamas absolutely unlawful installation but male clerks hid this
motion within SCOTUS for about two weeks w/o filing it so that eventually a
Petition in Support of the Motion to Compel was mistakenly returned to
Counsel.

37.

Counsel filed it within their local federal courthouse on the day they were
notified that the Motion had not been filed and was unlawfully held
somewhere within SCOTUS.

38.

Default then means all taxes are being collected unjustly as they constitute
tribute not just taxation.
9

39.

Plaintiffs then pursued remedy and relief in the other federal court as nearly
every but not every person alive ignored and denied reality going so far as to
make up facts that werent facts and that never transpired in history; they
inserted what is their own personal belief and their own fantasy within their
rulings assigning it to us as if the Plaintiffs said it or did it when they did not.

40.

Everybody knows basic contract law but yet denies the reality of it; ideally
this very filing should be one sentence long: The US defaulted in a case of
constitutional authority and original jurisdiction so we are here to collect
upon this judgment of default; see the attached docket.

41.

More than three times a federal judge ruled upon a case that the Plaintiffs
had not filed and/or that did not exist for it never happened they actually
made up facts that are fantasy only such as Herbert was convicted of
felonies and is in state prison so she needs to petition the warden regarding
conditions when this is completely false - so it was impossible to reason with
these unreasonable people.

42.

Four events transpired in short order in 2010 and 2011: 1). The Sioux City
Iowa federal court told Plaintiffs that what it did not understand was that
universal law exists and that our law mimics it thus is also universally true
and that it had no idea that Jefferson not Calvert correctly weighed the Earth
striking upon the smallest particle man can measure; that is it knew of
Jeffersons work but it was not aware of the whole truth of it 2). Plaintiffs
filed their case to the UN suing the Un itself, then every member nation and
its own IHRC for they knew Obama was born in Kenya and that women were
yet being denied their rights and the UN was never, ever legal nor is it
actually sovereign (see attached, Exhibit B); the UN filed the case and
acknowledged defeat when it countered with this ludicrous answer, that the
UN would not hear the case in person as women and Americans are the
aggressors so that they are in violation of Art. 13 of the Human Rights Charter
when this is impossible here and now 3). Upon being served in person with
the suit that was also a warrant for his arrest Barack Obama sent a US Marshal
to Susan Herberts door threatening to unlawfully imprison her and to kill her
thus the members of the class if she filed the truth in federal court again
and Sioux City court clerks informed Herbert that they too had been
threatened with false imprisonment if they filed the suit. 4). Plaintiffs filed
suit in federal court again and Susan Herbert was wrongly arrested three days
10

later exactly as Barack Obama threatened; the suit was placed in the mail on
October 26th and Herbert was wrongly arrested on the 29th.
43.

Herbert spent 8 moths in jail learning what is unjust about the current
criminal system (what is broken) including what is localized only and harms
women in Duval County and in FL exclusively; Herbert volunteered to play out
what became a battle of the will in order to secure a ruling for the Plaintiffs
in person before a judge as it is not possible to deny and dismiss this case
lawfully based upon reading the filing alone as you MUST hear Counsel who
are also Plaintiffs in person or else you cant know something; you cannot
know it or be aware of it by merely reading the filing; this is a form denial
takes.

44.

Not hearing the case is the same as not looking at something with your eyes
in order to deny its existence; its the same as claiming I did not see it with
my own eyes so I do not know when you had every opportunity to look but
did not; youre avoiding reality to then deny reality.

45.

On April 5th, 2012, almost exactly five years to the day that the Plaintiffs first
filed in a court on April 4th, 2007, a FL State judge acting in an entirely
original venue in an entirely original jurisdiction western FL as it has never
been mapped correctly and may have been forcibly taken from the Spanish (a
case concerning this area has already been heard in SCOTUS) - found for the
Plaintiffs as FL entered the SCOTUS docket thereby literally placing the
federal question upon the table; the judge acting as Chief Justice told FL that
Herbert was correct and that no matter what else the docket said that legal
default is once the US failed to respond.

46.

Armed with this ruling and the UNs answer the Plaintiffs then filed in this
very court as this court is where one eventually lands and as the FL ruling is
ineffectual as it was created within the transcript of a sealed hearing and
ruling captioned In Re Herbert Susan, an action meant and intended to
circumvent The Constitution and SCOTUS itself as it seeks to overturn the
judgment of default and to execute Herbert via the administration of
potentially lethal drugs in order to then escape the legal consequences
including individual liability when that is illegal and unlawful; it is criminal on
the part of the individuals who acted to do this or so the injured victim/s
knows.

11

47.

When filing in this court Plaintiffs acted to negate yet another possible
threat: A Rothchild told Susan Herbert that whoever received the case
whichever judge that would be would not hear it in person and so would
deny reality thereby violating what is law while seemingly acting insanely.

48.

The manner in which this statement was made created a situation whereby
Plaintiffs did not know if an actual threat was being made or if this person
was merely stating what is a simple fact as nobody can know who will receive
the case unless they can and do control the process; was this a threat or not?
Plaintiffs then had no choice but allow the clerks to make any decision they
pleased and to write about the Rothchilds and the families that own the bank
and are the Federal Reserve; Plaintiffs had to let them know that they are
not afraid and that they could do actual damage to them to those banking
families - if they so chose; while you would not address most of these facts in
a court this served to negate any threat being made if this statement was
indeed a threat.

49.

It also avoided a possible conflict as this case should be directly filed to the
Chief Judge of this court as it is a case that was directly filed and won in
SCOTUS; the default judgment in question is one secured in SCOTUS w/o ever
having been in any other court; exactly as this case should have been handed
to John Roberts directly but was not then this case should have gone to the
Chief Judge of US Claims directly but by allowing the clerks to make their
own judgment call we could discover exactly what this Rothchild meant by
their statement without creating a new, insurmountable conflict with the
Chief Judge of this court.

50.

As soon as the Plaintiffs discovered that Clemons et al. vs the US had been
changed to Herbert et al. and that the assigned judge was named Wheeler
the Plaintiffs knew that the possible threat was nothing more than a simple
statement of fact for Wheeler is the judge who refused to dismiss a case
brought by David Boies and Starr International/AIG re mortgages and a
government bailout in the amount of $25 billion when the Plaintiffs previously
exactly named Boies as he was Al Gores counsel in BVG and as he told NY
Magazine that he planned to commit a crime what is wrong in SCOTUS in
regards to gay rights at the expense of all women and then he acted to do it.

51.

Plaintiffs had previously cited this and named Boies exactly and entered the
article containing his exact words some of which are that he planned upon
12

targeting Anthony Kennedy in order to commit this wrongful act. Boies then
acted to execute his threat.
52.

Due to the nature of the suits heard in US claims and because they are about
dollar amounts and as no pro se person/s who do not hold law licenses have
ever brought a successful suit against the US before now nor has the US ever
been in default before now then every single sitting judge except for the
Chief Judge has a pre-existing conflict that is insurmountable.

53.

The Chief Judge only has such a conflict if he or she creates it by ignoring and
denying actual reality known as contract law, default, Obamas own claims
made by he himself and the existent prejudice against women.

54.

In his ruling and order Wheeler says it seems as if the Plaintiffs are against
all forms of government or government itself when the Plaintiffs are clearly
for our original form as instituted by The Creator and as originally defined by
the Founders meaning that he is not aware he doesnt own what he is not
aware of and he may not make a decision against the Plaintiffs based upon
the appearance of the paper document alone and that some people are
prominent i.e. important implying that we are less important or not
important at all and that said prominent people should be immune from
criticism and from the named consequences or from law itself, as if we are
less than and they are better than.

55.

Wheeler claims that Susan Herbert exactly demeaned people when this is
false as Herbert and the other Plaintiffs not Herbert alone said that those
named act as if they are more animal than human as their actions are
unconscionable (fact: animals do not possess a conscience and so are not
consciously aware hence by their very nature animals are unconscionable)
and crypto-Jew is an accepted scholarly term; it is a term that theologians
and genealogists use as does Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

56.

Crypto-Jew is a term that refers to any person whose family was Jewish
originally but who converted under force during times of persecution so that
while raised Catholic or Protestant or Muslim the original tradition of their
ancestors is Judaism; they arent Jewish now but the reason their families
might yet practice what are traditional Jewish customs is that Judaism is
encoded within their families to this day; nothing stated is demeaning and
is fact and/or factual plus:
13

57.

All of those named such as Obama had to act to truly demean the Plaintiffs
and all women first or else we would not be able to name them and cite their
own words as well as their own behavior; Plaintiffs cant and didnt demean
anybody; all the Plaintiffs did is act in self-defense.

58.

Wheeler also objects to our named amount, $2 billion, when that is a


pittance and it comes out of no persons pocket as it is the amount held in
trust as interest on a legal fund, a prior award, therefore it is currency not
money; Plaintiffs legally claimed it via their case and a point of law regarding
this Treaty and federal lands. This Treaty is named in Petition 07-9804.

59.

Wheeler made no such objection when Starr Intl/AIG who perpetrated wrong
doing that they acknowledged and for which they were later bailed out by the
tax payers against our will asked for $25 billion; recently Wheeler allowed
Boies and Starr International to up their claim to over $50 billion; hes
allowing them discovery and allowing them to name any amount at all even if
it defies reality while hes denying us equal treatment.

60.

Wheeler is consciously and subconsciously admitting to being possessed of


what are mistaken beliefs as his subconscious truth is all over his paperwork
which he himself authored; Wheeler does on some level believe that women
are less than men and the pro se are less than lawyers and less than judges.
In his subconscious mind he does not believe in equality. Wheeler, in order to
rationalize his action, is ignoring and denying that the US defaulted (he
completely denies this fact) and facts that Obama has not yet disputed some
of which he himself stated and which caused Obama to threaten Herbert thus
the class with death; these are:

61.

Obama has used several different names in his life or he has signed as
anonymous; this has caused mass confusion; his actual given name is Blake
as that is the name his mother gave him as she named him after the English
poet.

62.

Obama was born in Kenya as his grandmother reported during a live broadcast
(some parts of the world received this broadcast live not delayed so that they
watched it before it was edited); his parents did not fly from one part of
Hawaii to another part of Hawaii to marry but instead they flew to Kenya
where Obama was born; at that time Kenya was a protectorate or colony of
14

Britain; Obama was then flown back to North America via Canada as Canada
too is a protectorate of Britain thus Canada holds the vault copies of Obamas
records as Canadians claim (Canadian officials labeled Obamas biography a
state secret); from Canada Obama the infant entered the US in or around
Vancouver, Washington making him a citizen of Britain and/or of Canada but
not a dual citizen of Britain and America as he himself previously claimed as
America does not legally recognize dual citizenship; upon independence
Kenya required their citizens to choose Kenya or Britain and Obamas mother
chose Kenya and then Canada for Obama and then Obama his own self chose
Britain; also according to the Nationality Act Obama was born four months
too soon to be a legal voter as he has one citizen parent.
63.

Obama has more than one social security number in more than one state (he
has a CT # when he should have only a HA #) and his selective service
documents contradict his story as they too contain social security numbers
other than the HA # and may not have been procured by he himself as mere
ID was accepted as proof plus they were not date and time stamped the same
day as they were signed.

64.

Obama also takes great pains to ensure that his representatives not he
himself make certain claims; Obama is very, very careful when he speaks so
he does not use certain words; hes too careful; for instance, he alludes to
the idea of slavery by using an African sounding name and by claiming that his
wifes relatives were former slaves but he himself never claims to have been
a slave, been a relative of slaves or to have been victimized as such.

65.

One of Obamas first actions as President was to issue an Executive Order


making it more difficult for the citizens to secure copies of his records and
that pits the Judiciary in a battle against the Executive thus The People if
these records are requested.

66.

Bill Ayers has publicly claimed to have authored Dreams Of My Father for
Obama thus it is a work of fiction not autobiography or even biography and
today this, Ayers unattributed, sole, ghost authorship, is considered to be
common knowledge; this then means that Obamas entire life story and the
person he claimed to be which he presented as true, fact and correct is not.

15

67.

Natural born or not none of this not even Wheelers actions change the fact
that the US defaulted on November 5th, 2008, before Obama was sworn in but
after the Plaintiffs initially objected to BVG and after the US waived all of its
right under the 1871 incorporation (this fact will never change until it is
addressed in court in person). Who represents the dead institution known as
the US? Obama, therefore even if he were natural born he would still be
unlawfully seated due to active default on the part of the US.

68.

Because of the pre-existing conflict and as this case should have been directly
filed to the Chief Judge then you wouldnt object to Wheelers ruling and
order but you would refile, directly to the Chief Judge.

69.

Three Plaintiffs died and Herbert became seriously ill due to one of her
injuries so she spent weeks in the hospital; then she was re-arrested.

70.

On December 30th, 2013, Susan Herbert again appeared before a FL court


acting as a federal court as she was wrongly arrested on the exact same day
two years later, October 29th, 2013, and this is not a mistake, accident or
coincidence; Herbert spent a few hours in jail this time; wishing to remain
before a relatively sane judge Herbert plead No Contest knowing that she
could overturn her own jury verdict if the terms of probation were made
impossible as she had been warned they are and they were.

71.

The action dropped dead once an employee of a county, state and federally
funded program demanded $35 or else she would call the police as she was
furious that the Plaintiffs had filed in SCOTUS and had won; she knew
immediately upon seeing the docket that she had lost and was in default as
she supported the US and so Obama; she insisted that she, a person with
black skin, couldnt be sued by a person with white skin; she reiterated this
over and over; she, when Herbert ignored her nonsense, actually told Herbert
to give her $35 or else she would call the police and falsely claim that
Herbert was trespassing for the purpose of having Herbert wrongly arrested
once more when Herbert was acting upon a valid court order (Herberts fully
informed consent and Judge Emmett Fergusons relative sanity made it valid).

72.

Herbert had filed a motion to show cause pre-emptively, on her way to this
court ordered program, as Herbert could and did know what would transpire
as corruption is now endemic and these programs fail to address the cause of
violence as the cause is always people and the first cause is always The
16

Creator who we exactly named. The Creator is not responsible for injustice as
people are; these programs often hire victims who have become victimizers
as the cause of their victimization is never addressed.
73.

Upon Herberts thus the Plaintiffs Motion To Show Cause the judge once again
recognized that DEFAULT IS and this time he went so far as to agree that the
State and Fed cannot show cause in this case, that they lack the human
ability to show cause here and now and that even if they wanted to make up
a cause they couldnt based upon reality; the State of FL did not object as it
cant (that constitutes the absolute proof); the judge and FL agreed with the
Plaintiffs on all points of law; then this judge, Judge Emmett Ferguson, fully
knowing and wholly aware that the Plaintiffs would be returning to US Claims
then revoked everything including court costs i.e. money; this is a first in
Duval County as far as the Plaintiffs can tell and it may be a first in FL but it
is not a first in this nation. See attached Credit River Ruling and see attached
Duval County docket, Exhibits C and D.

74.

Herbert also addressed Fergusons mistaken belief concerning women as being


less than as he was realizing it or making it real by instructing the court to
note the dress of men for the record if they appeared wearing a tie as if this
meant they are to be respected more and/or for what might not be the
reality of their person but he never once noted the appearance of women for
the record and when a woman would never wear a tie; Herbert pointed this
out to him and to the fact that by claiming to fear God and by asking to be
called sir he was acting upon what is manmade, what is British, what is
discriminatory and what is not the reality of women, this nation or this
universe; Ferguson stood aside by admitting to his mistake.

75.

In light of the actual facts and in light of US Law no matter which version you
use then the US had no other viable choice but to default; the US knew
exactly what it was doing and what this then would mean so then;
V. Summary

Women have never been accorded actual protection of the law; not once have
they been equally treated under the law in reality. They are equal on paper only
but not treated so in actual reality because men delusionally believe that women
are created defective or as less than men and that no woman can be born a
genius; they falsely claim that a manmade God ordains the inferiority of women,
17

that women cannot produce genius, that women lack the ability and capacity to
command and that a woman can only achieve with their approval and their help,
as if women are not persons in their own right so that women need their
permission in order to succeed. If any citizen challenges their irrational thinking
they are punished; they the US will teach them a lesson by making that citizen
afraid and breaking their will. This is why this case is being denied a hearing in
person as that then protects the deluded, overly privileged and overly empowered
majority and forces women to exist as if they are objects that are to be accorded
less protection than animals. Finally a woman has triumphed over them and they
do not personally like it or the truth; the law is the truth they act to avoid.
The US defaulted in a case of constitutional authority and original jurisdiction and
Barack Obama is not qualified to run for or hold the Office of President and
Commander but yet was installed as a direct result of the existent prejudice
against women so we are here to collect upon the judgment of default.
V.
1.

COUNTS

Violation Of All Rights Including The Birthright


By violating every single one of Susan Herberts and every womens named
rights the Defendant created a situation whereby the birthright known as the
natural birth clause was violated thus all children both male and female are
harmed; by denying the Plaintiffs substantive due process in the courts the US
has knowingly, willingly and deliberately suppressed the whole and absolute
truth in order to unlawfully enforce the existence of a ruling dead institution
over or against The People and this ultimate violation serves to kill both
America and the US as now, as a direct result of prejudice against women and
the institution of money the US can not met its debt. It is bankrupt.
In classifying the original Petition both I & II as one of appellate jurisdiction
when it is original jurisdiction the Defendants acted arbitrarily and without any
factual basis.

2.

Regulatory Takings
By first finding that all moral authority belongs to The People and that People
or Persons under the law do possess rights and are sovereign by law but then by
ruling that they are not Persons or sovereign w/o entering any evidence or
proof at all and by denying them entry to SCOTUS or any other federal court in
person by forcing the State courts to act as Federal Courts of law - the
18

incorporated US and its officers are then using private citizens i.e. private
property for public use without just compensation.
3.

Physical Takings
By confiscating and refusing to file the Motion To Compel The US To Respond
the Defendant has taken what is both private and public property belonging to
the Plaintiffs and so America for personal use. That is the incorporated its
officers and US unlawfully confiscated this property based upon an irrational
personal judgment value they possess concerning The People that targets
women and their children.
By tampering with the official docket of the Supreme Court for the United
States of America Defendants have done the same as above as the tampered
with docket exists for their personal use.

Demand For Relief

Plaintiffs demand the following:


1. Damages to compensate Plaintiffs for the taking of this property but most
importantly for the violation of every right including the birthright.
2. Hearing in person; this court can and may address any and all issues or
address only damages and send the remaining issues to SCOTUS for another
hearing in person.
3. An injunction prohibiting Defendants from collecting tribute disguised as
just taxation from the Plaintiffs, an injunction prohibiting the Defendants
from acting against the Plaintiffs at all, that is an injunction prohibiting
the Defendants from claiming that they possess jurisdiction over the
Plaintiffs, and an injunction prohibiting Barack Obama from acting as if he
is the rightful, lawful President and Commander in Chief for he represents
the Defendants only and is not qualified according to the natural birth
clause by either the original version or the 1871 version of The Constitution.
4. A declaration that women and their children are a part of mankind so are
Persons with equal rights as the correct application of the law accounts for
19

biological distinction and that The People are sovereign as Thomas Jefferson
previously reasoned in A Summary View On The Rights Of British America
and with his unique system of measurements.
5. Any other relief this court deems necessary.

____________________________
Susan Herbert, Lead Counsel
On Behalf of Herself, Co-counsel
and the other Plaintiffs

___________________
Date May 10th, 2014

Clemons, Herbert & Morton


Attorneys At Law
3760 University Boulevard South
#1102
Jacksonville, Florida 32216
Phone Number 904-343-1812

20

EXHIBITS

A.

SCOTUS DOCKET

No. 07-9804
Title:

In Re Susan Herbert, Petitioner


v.

Docketed:

~~~Date~~~
Mar 11 2008
Apr 1 2008
Apr 3 2008
Apr 21 2008
May 7 2008
May 13 2008
Jun 2 2008

March 12, 2008

~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 11, 2008)
Waiver of right of respondent Federal Respondent to respond filed.
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 18, 2008.
Petition DENIED.
Petition for Rehearing filed.
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of May 29, 2008.
Rehearing DENIED.

No. 08-6622
Title:

In Re Susan Herbert, Petitioner


v.

Docketed:

October 6, 2008

~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Oct 3 2008 Petition for a writ of mandamus and/or prohibition and motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 5, 2008)
Nov 20 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 5, 2008. [Unlawful and not legally possible
as no response ever came; in such an event the case is set for hearing automatically;
SCOTUS would never respond on behalf of the US & Motion to Compel is not listed.]
Dec 8 2008 Petition DENIED.

21

B. REASONING REGARDING UNS UNLAWFUL EXISTENCE AND ITS LACK OF


SOVEREIGNTY OVER ITSELF OR ANY OTHER NATION
Entered to SCOTUS & the UN previously:
Melvindaleonline says: Make sure youre sitting down for this one. We turn now to United States
Code (USC) Title 22 286 and read the following: " 286. Acceptance of membership by the United
States in International Monetary Fund. "The President is hereby authorized to accept membership
for the United States in the International Monetary Fund (hereinafter referred to as the "Fund"),
and in the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (hereinafter referred to as the
"Bank"), provided for by the Articles of Agreement of the Fund and the Articles of Agreement of the
Bank as set forth in the Final Act of the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference dated
July 22, 1944, and deposited in the archives of the Department of State. (July 31, 1945, ch 339,
2, 59 Stat. 512.) Short titles: May be cited as the Bretton Woods Agreements Act. "Other
provisions: Par value modification. For the Congressional direction that the Secretary of the
Treasury maintain the value in terms of gold of the Inter-American Development Banks holdings of
United States dollars following the establishment of a par value of the dollar at $38 for a fine troy
ounce of gold pursuant to the Par Value Modification Act and for the authorization of the
appropriations necessary to provide such maintenance of value, see 31 USC 449a."...The act
further transfers the assets of the United States Treasury to the IMF by stating words to the effect
of: the United States Treasury is now the Individual Drawing account of the IMF ...Think about it.
"The President is hereby authorized to accept membership for the United States in the IMF"...The
President is authorized by whom? Congress? Well, even if Congress did authorize it where did they
get the authority to so do? Certainly not from the Constitution, and Congress cant lawfully do
anything the Constitution doesnt authorize them to do. The Constitution plainly states: "The
enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage
others retained by the people Ninth amendment; and, "The powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people Tenth Amendment. Further joining the IMF is obviously an
international agreement; and, any good dictionary will define, "an agreement between nations" [or
any legal entity foreign to the Sovereign The People] as a "Treaty". The Constitution is very specific
on how treaties are to be engaged in with this nation: 1st, the President signs the treaty; and 2nd,
the Senate ratifies his signature with a two-thirds majority vote. That didnt happen here. So if the
right wasnt given in the Constitution, Congress cant take it and give it to the President. This act
states that Authorization came from the U.N. instead of from Congress "provided for as set forth
in the Final Act of the United Nations": There was no treaty with the U.N. until December 20,
1945, five months later, so the U.N. COULD NOT exercise its treaty with Corp. U.S. and MAY
NOT.
[Susan: No IMF? No UN; no UN? No IMF. One cannot exist unless the other does first so its legally
impossible. Set aside all of the legal ramifications of the constitutional violations involved. You
cannot remedy them all. If the math did not add up then it never will; this is an example of the
corporation deciding the UN would exist as a legal entity so PREDETERMINING we would
enter a treaty BEFORE that legal entity ever existed. What if it never came to be? Thats just it:
It was predetermined it would exist. And after Wilsons League of Nations failed. I exactly
named predetermined judicial fate in my petitions and brief, as this is an example of the
Executive and Legislative attempting to circumvent WE thus the federal court. It is a deliberate
act meant to violate the separation of powers thus give judicial power to those the founders
said are most dangerous: The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of
its activity, and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex, Madison, Federalist 48. The
Corporation US makes it seem as if We, the People have a voice in the reasoning and application of
the law but the People do not as it is a done deal; that is, the Corporation US was never NOT going

22

to enter this treaty thus they knew to author an act that presupposes its existence and that then is
a denial of informed consent among other things. It is forced on The People as WE had no
opportunity to volunteer with full consent. We can never know if The People would have
volunteered to conduct this experiment had We been informed but the Leagues failure suggests
no. You can never go back in time and make up that five month disparity as it is now history thus
all you can and may do? Change it in the now by addressing Obamas unconstitutional election and
Bushs unconstitutional installation. See Wallstreet Collapse and failure of the SEC to protect the
People with no trustees removed and wholly invalid and unconstitutional employee bonus
contracts enforced and paid out, which is The People being forced to pay tribute and to actual
crooks as that money is funneled right back into the IMF; its money laundering and its an actual
pyramid scheme].

C.

CREDIT RIVER RULING

A WORD FROM AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE WHO KNEW AND WORKED WITH JUSTICE MARTIN V. MAHONEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA ABOUT THE CASE:
The "Credit River Decision" handed down by a jury of 12 on a cold day in December, in the Credit
River Township Hall, was an experience that I'll never forget.
The Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court had phoned me a week before the trial and
asked me if I would be an associate justice in assisting Justice Martin V. Mahoney since he had
never handled a jury trial before. I accepted, and it took me two hours to get my car running in the
22 below zero weather.
I got to the courtroom about 30 minutes before trial, and helped get the wood stove going, since
the trial was being held in an unheated storeroom of a general store. This was the first time I met
Justice Mahoney, and I was impressed with his no nonsense manner of handling matters before him.
My object was to help pick the jury, and to keep Jerome Daly and the attorney representing the
Bank of Montgomery from engaging in a fist fight. The courtroom was highly charged, and the Jury
was all business.
The banker testified about the mortgage loan given to Jerome Daly, but then Daly cross examined
the banker about the creating of money "out of thin air," and the banker admitted that this was
standard banking practice. When Justice Mahoney heard the banker testify that he could "create
money out of thin air," Mahoney said, "It sounds like fraud to me." I looked at the faces of the
jurors, and they were all agreeing with Mahoney by shaking their heads and by the looks on their
faces.
I must admit that up until that point, I really didn't believe Jerome's theory, and thought he was
making this up. After I heard the testimony of the banker, my mouth had dropped open in shock,
and I was in complete disbelief. There was no doubt in my mind that the Jury would find for Daly.
Jerome Daly had taken on the banks, the Federal Reserve Banking System, and the money lenders,
and had won.
It is now twenty eight years since this "Landmark Decision," and Justice Mahoney is quoted more
often than any Supreme Court justice ever was.
Both Jerome Daly and Justice Martin V. Mahoney are truly the greatest men that I have ever had
the pleasure to meet. The Credit River Decision was and still is the most important legal decision
ever decided by a Jury. - Bill Drexler

23

IN THE JUSTICE COURT


STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF SCOTT
TOWNSHIP OF CREDIT RIVER
JUSTICE MARTIN V. MAHONEY
First National Bank of Montgomery, Plaintiff vs Jerome Daly, Defendant
JUDGMENT AND DECREE
The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00
am. Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel, R.
Mellby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf.
A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and sworn to try the issues in the Case. Lawrence V.
Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own
behalf.
Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19 Fairview
Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a
Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8, 1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time
foreclosure proceedings were started.
Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books
by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged
failure of the consideration for the Mortgage Deed and alleged that the Sheriff's sale passed no title to
plaintiff.
The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant
had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.
Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created
upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with
the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private Bank, further that he knew of no United
States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this. Plaintiff further claimed that
Defendant by using the ledger book created credit and by paying on the Note and Mortgage waived
any right to complain about the Consideration and that the Defendant was estopped from doing so.
At 12:15 on December 7, 1968 the Jury returned a unanimous verdict for the Defendant.
Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence,
the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution of United States and the Constitution and the laws
of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
1. That the Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County,
Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.
2. That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8, 1964 are null
and void.

24

3. That the Sheriff's sale of the above described premises held on June 26, 1967 is null and void, of
no effect.
4. That the Plaintiff has no right title or interest in said premises or lien thereon as is above described.
5. That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute binding the jurisdiction
of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and to the Bill of Rights of the
Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has jurisdiction to render complete
Justice in this Cause.
The following memorandum and any supplementary memorandum made and filed by this Court in
support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by reference.
BY THE COURT
Dated December 9, 1968
Justice MARTIN V. MAHONEY
Credit River Township
Scott County, Minnesota
MEMORANDUM
The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute of the facts for the Jury to resolve.
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all
practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking
Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and
the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by
bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and
the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it.
Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A
lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing
Company v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found that there was no
consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing.
Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this is no defense to
the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am Jur
2nd "Actions" on page 584 "no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner
depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party."
Plaintiff's act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is
unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing
or upon which any lawful right can be built.
Nothing in the Constitution of the United States limits the jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of
original Jurisdiction with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law action. Minnesota
cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. Any
provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so is repugnant to the
Constitution of the United States and void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised
by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts to the
Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit.

25

No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made
by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was direct and clear for the Jury. Their Verdict could not reasonably
been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without denial, promptly and without delay,
freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court of December 7, 1968.
JEROME DALY'S OWN ENTRY
REGARDING JUSTICE MAHONEY'S MEMORANDUM
FORWARD: The above Judgment was entered by the Court on December 9, 1968. The issue there
was simple - Nothing in the law gave the Banks the right to create money on their books. The Bank
filed a Notice of Appeal within 10 days. The Appeals statutes must be strictly followed, otherwise the
District Court does not acquire Jurisdiction upon Appeal. To effect the Appeal the Bank had to deposit
$2.00 with the Clerk within 10 days for payment to the Justice when he made his return to the District
Court. The Bank deposited two $1.00 Federal Reserve Notes. The Justice refused the Notes and
refused to allow the Appeal upon the grounds that the Notes were unlawful and void for any purpose.
The Decision is addressed to the legality of these Notes and the Federal Reserve System.
The Cases of Edwards v. Kearnzey and Craig v. Missouri set out in the decision should be studied
very carefully as they bear on the inviolability of Contracts. This is the crux of the whole issue. Jerome
Daly.
BY THE COURT
December 9, 1968
Justice Martin V. Mahoney
Credit River Township
Scott County, Minnesota
Note: It has never been doubted that a Note given on a Consideration which is prohibited by law is
void. It has been determined; by independent of Acts of Congress, that sailing under the license of an
enemy is illegal. The emission of Bills of Credit upon the books of these private Corporations for the
purpose of private gain is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States and is unlawful. See
Craig v. Mo. 4 Peters Reports 912. This Court can tread only that path which is marked out by duty.
M.V.M. [Complete reasoning of money as no good is within SCOTUS as is reasoning o.j. now is.]

D. DUVAL COUNTY COURT DOCKET DATED DECEMBER 30TH, 2013

IN

TERMINATE COURT FEES AND COURT COSTS OUT LOUD BUT THEN HE
OR A CLERK WROTE THE WORD REVOKED AND IMPOSED, IN WRITING, A COURT FINE AND
CONVERTED IT TO A CIVIL JUDGMENT; IN DUVAL COUNTY ALL COURT FINES ARE CONVERTED TO CIVIL
JUDGMENTS AS THEY USED TO BECOME A SECONDARY CRIMINAL CHARGE WHEN NOT PAID; IN OTHER
COURT THE JUDGE SAID

WORDS HIS WRITTEN ACTIONS DO NOT REFLECT WHAT THE DOCKET READS AND WHAT ACTUALLY
TRANSPIRED OR WHAT HE SAID IN COURT; DUVAL COUNTY YET HAS AN OPEN CASE REGARDING THE
INTIAL FEDERAL FILING FROM SEVERAL YEARS AGO AS IT REFUSED TO ABIDE BY THE LAW BY
CHARGING US MONEY IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY AND AS THE JUDGES INVOLVED CALLED IN
SICK THUS ITS STILL AN OPEN, NEVER AJUDICATED ACTION; AT THE TIME OF FILING THE CLERKS

26

PCS DID NOT HAVE AN EMERGENCY BUTTON THEY DID NOT KNOW HOW
TO FILE AN EMERGENCY - SO THAT THEY HAD TO CHARGE US! WE PAID THE FEE.
CLAIMED THAT THEIR

YOU MAY NOT IMPOSE A CIVIL JUDGMENT I.E. A FINE AGAINST THE PLAINTIFFS
WHEN THE US IS IN DEFAULT AND WAS SO WHEN THE PLAINTIFFS ENTERED AND
AFTER YOU HAVE OPENLY ACKNOWLEDGED DEFAULT IS. IF THE DEFENDANTS
CANT SHOW CAUSE AND NEVER COULD AS PLAINTIFFS SUCCESSFULLY ARGUED
OR RATHER REASONED? THEN THERE SHOULD BE ZERO FINE AS THE JUDGMENT
IS AGAINST THE US THAT INCLUDES THE STATES.
LEVYING A JUDGMENT AGAINST THE PLAINTIFFS UPON PAPER AFTER YOU FIRST
ACKNOWLEDGE THE REALITY THAT IT IS AGAISNT THE US? ITS HOW A HUMAN
BEING VEERS BACK INTO DENIAL IN OPRDER TO AVOID THE WHOLE TRUTH, THAT
WOMEN ARE EQUAL TO MEN AND THAT THE PRO SE ARE EQUAL TO A SITTING
JUDGE, THAT ALL MORAL AUTHORITY DOES BELONG TO THE PEOPLE.

27