Summons Having No NCT

[Kontaktt]

Hi all, I'm looking for some advise on what to do about a summons I received the other day. I signed for it which I know is not a good thing to do. So to keep a long story short my name and address is correct as it appears on the summons but the county says Limerick when I'm living in Co. Galway. It would be good to here from you guy's about what I can do in this situation.

Thanks all...

Kontaktt.

[Kontaktt]

Ogmios said:

Is it Civil Or Criminal?

If it is Civil then where is the contract between the Judge and you?

If it is Criminal then where is the injured Party?

If he tries to hold you in Contempt then:

Is it Civil Contempt or is it Criminal Contempt?

There was another post here last week which explained all about this, did you read it and if so why not? Guys you need to start reading the stuff that people have taken the time to draft up and then post. All the answers to all these questions are there.

This might sound off putting but hey there are 4.5 million people that need help so please read what posted or search for it on here and you will get your answers.

Peace

COURT: Who's who and what to say by Mary Croft


"My position on going to court has always been: never voluntarily go to
court. Live men and women are not meant to be in any place designed solely
for the business of fictional entities." What does Mary Croft mean by this statement?.... Puzzled


My position on going to court has always been: never voluntarily go to
court. Live men and women are not meant to be in any place designed solely
for the business of fictional entities. When we attend court, we are deemed
dead, in fact, they cannot deal with us until we admit to being dead….a
legal fiction….a trust. Court is for titled persons: judge, prosecutor,
defendant, bailiffs, cops, and attorneys. Live men and women are not
recognized, so it makes sense to send in a dead person – an attorney – to
handle our cases …. except for one thing: they do not know how the system
works, due to their indoctrination. If you can find one to do as you say,
then you will prevail, but most of them would rather hang onto their BAR
cards than behave honourably. The only thing that dead, fictional entities
want from us is our life energy, and the only way they can get it is by our
agreement. Without us, they cannot function, so, they are desperate to get
us into court, to have us pay the debt which they created by charging the
trust.

Since common law courts no longer exist, we know that the case never has
anything to do with “facts” or live men and women and so, anyone who
testifies (talks about the facts of the case) is doomed. ALL courts operate
in trust law, based upon ecclesiastical canon law – ritualism,
superstition, satanism, etc. – which manifests as insidious, commercial law
and we are in court to take the hit, if they can get us to do so. They use
every trick in the book – intimidation, fear, threat, ridicule, rage, and
even recesses, in order to change the jurisdiction, when they know they are
losing, in order to make us admit that we are the name of the trust. When
we do so, we are deemed to be the trustee – the one liable for
administering the trust. Ergo, until now, it has been a waste of our time,
energy, and emotion to go to a place where it is almost certain that we
will be stuck with the liability.

We all know from our indoctrination, programming, and schooling that judges
are impartial and have sworn an oath to this effect. This means he must not
favour either plaintiff or defendant. But, our experience reveals that he
does, indeed, favour the plaintiff, indicating a glaring conflict of
interest – that the prosecutor, judge, and clerk all work for the state –
the owner of the CQV trust. So, as the case is NOT about “justice”, it must
be about the administration of a trust. They all represent the trust owned
by the state and, if we are beneficiary, the only two positions left are
Trustee and Executor. So, if you detect the judge’s partiality, although I
doubt the case will get this far, you might just want to let them know that
you know this.

If you consider court as entertainment and if you can stand the evil
emanating from its officers, the fear and angst oozing from the walls, and
the treacherous atmosphere, then go, knowing that under trust law we cannot
be the trustee or the executor of a trust, whilst being beneficiary, as
that would be a conflict. The position of beneficiary may lack clout, but
the other positions hold liability. Since state employees want to be the
beneficiaries of the trust, the only way they can do so is to transfer, to
us, the liability which they hold, as trustees and executors, because they
also cannot be both the administrators and beneficiary of the trust. So,
trusteeship and executorship, i.e.: suretyship, becomes a hot potato and
everyone wants to toss it so s/he can be beneficiary of the credit from the
trust.

When we were born, a trust, called a Cestui Que Vie Trust (“CQV”) was setup,
for our benefit. Evidence of this is the birth certificate. But what is
the value which must be conveyed to the trust, in order to create it? It
was our right to property (via Birth into this world), our body (via the
Live Birth Record), and our souls (via Baptism). Since the state/province
which registered the trust is the owner, it is also the trustee…. the one
that administers the trust. Since they, also, wanted to be beneficiary of
this trust, they had to come up with ways to get us, as beneficiary, to
authorize their charging the trust, allegedly, for our benefit (via our
signature on a document: citation, application, etc.), and then,
temporarily transfer trusteeship, to us, during the brief time that they
want to be the beneficiary of a particular “constructive” trust.

This means that a trust can be established anywhere, anytime, and the
parties of the trust are quickly, albeit temporarily, put into place. But,
since a beneficiary cannot charge a trust – only a trustee can do so – it
is the state that charges the trust, but they do so for their benefit, not
ours (albeit occasionally we do reap some benefit from that charge but
nowhere near the value which they reap. Think bank loan….. we reap a minute
percentage of what they gain from our authorization). So, the only way,
under trust law, for them to be able to charge the trust is to get the
authorization from the beneficiary – us, and the only way for them to
benefit from their charge is to get us to switch roles – from beneficiary
to trustee (the one responsible for the accounting), and for them to switch
their role – from trustee to beneficiary because no party can be both, at
the same time, i.e.: within the same constructive trust. They must somehow
trick us into accepting the role of trustee. Why would we do so when the
trust is for our benefit? …. and how do they manage to do this?

Well, the best way is to get us into court and trick us into unwittingly
doing so. But, if we know what has transpired, prior to our being there, it
is easy to know what to say so that this doesn’t happen. The court clerk is
the hot shot, even though it appears as if the judge is. The clerk is the
trustee for the CQV owned by the state/province and it is s/he who is
responsible for appointing the trustee and the executor for a constructive
trust – that particular court case.

So s/he appoints the judge as trustee (the one to administer the trust) and
appoints the prosecutor as executor of the trust. The executor is
ultimately liable for the charge because it was s/he who brought the case
into court (created the constructive trust) on behalf of the state/province
which charged the CQV trust. Only an executor/prosecutor can
initiate/create a constructive trust and we all know the maxim of law:
Whoever creates the controversy holds the liability and whoever holds the
liability must provide the remedy. This is why all attorneys are mandated
to bring their cheque-books to court because if it all goes wrong for
them…. meaning either they fail to transfer their liability onto the
alleged defendant, or the alleged defendant does not accept their offer of
liability, then someone has to credit the trust account in order to off-set
the debt. Since the prosecutor is the one who issues bogus paper and
charges the trust, it is the Prosecutor/Executor (“PE”) who is in the hotseat.


When the Name (of the trust), e.g.: JOHN DOE, is called by the Judge aka
Administrator aka Trustee (“JAT”), we can stand and ask, “Are you saying
that the trust which you are now administrating is the JOHN DOE trust?”
This establishes that we know that the Name is a trust, not a live man.
What’s the JAT’s first question? “What’s your name?” or “State your name
for the record”. We must be very careful not to identify with the name of
the trust because doing so makes us the trustee. What does this tell you
about the judge? If we know that the judge is the trustee, then we also
know that the judge is the Name, but only for this particular, constructive
trust. Now, think about all the times that JATs have become so frustrated
by our refusal to admit to being the Name that they issue a warrant and
then, as soon as the man leaves, he is arrested. How idiotic is that? They
must feel foolish for saying, “John Doe is not in court so I’m issuing a
warrant for his arrest” and then, the man whom they just admitted is NOT
there is arrested because he IS there. Their desperation makes them insane.
They must get us to admit to being the name, or they pay, and we must not
accept their coercion, or we pay. Because the JAT is the trustee – a
precarious position, the best thing to say, in that case, is “JOHN DOE is,
indeed, in the court!” Point to the JAT. “It is YOU! As trustee, YOU are
JOHN DOE, today, aren’t you?!”

During their frustration over our not admitting to being a trust name – the
trustee and/or executor of the trust, we ought to ask who they are. “Before
we go any further, I need to know who YOU are.” Address the clerk of the
court – the trustee for the CQV trust owned by the state/province, “Are you
the CQV’s trustee who has appointed this judge as administrator and trustee
of the constructive trust case #12345? Did you also appoint the prosecutor
as executor of this constructive trust?” Then point to the JAT: “So you are
the trustee”, then point to the prosecutor, “and you are the executor? And
I’m the beneficiary, so, now we know who’s who and, as beneficiary, I
authorize you to handle the accounting and dissolve this constructive
trust. I now claim my body so I am collapsing the CQV trust which you have
charged, as there is no value in it. You have committed fraud against all
laws!” Likely, we will not get that far before the JAT will order “Case
dismissed” or, even more likely, the PE, as he clings tightly to his
cheque-book, will call, “We withdraw the charges”.

We have exposed their fraud of the CQV trust which exists only on
presumptions. The CQV has no corpus, no property, ergo, no value. Trusts
are created only upon the conveyance of property and can exist only as long
as there is value in the trust. But, there is no value in the CQV trust,
yet, they continue to charge the trust. That is fraud! The alleged property
is we men and women whom they have deemed to be incompetent, dead,
abandoned, lost, bankrupts, or minors, but that is an illusion so, if we
claim our body, then we collapse the presumption that the trust has value.
They are operating in fraud – something we’ve always known, but now we know
how they do it. Our having exposed their fraud gives them only three
options:

1. They can dissolve the CQV trust – the one for which the clerk of the
court is trustee and from which s/he created a constructive trust – the
case – for which s/he appointed the judge and prosecutor titles which hold
temporary liability – trustee and executor, respectively. But they cannot
dissolve the CQV or the entire global system will collapse because they
cannot exist without our energy which they obtain via that CQV trust.

2. They can enforce the existing rules of trust law which means, as
trustee, they can set-off their debt and leave us alone. Now they know that
we are onto their fraud and every time they go into court to administer a
trust account, they will not know if we are the one who will send them to
jail. The trustee (judge) is the liable party who will go to jail, and the
executor (prosecutor) is the one who enforces this. This is why they want
us to take on both titles, because then, not only do we go to jail but
also, by signing their paper, we become executor and enforce our own
sentence. They cannot afford to violate the ecclesiastical canon laws, out
of fear of ending their careers, so they are, again, trapped with no place
to run.

3. They can dismiss the cases before they even take the risk of our
exposing their fraud …. which also makes no sense because then their
careers, again, come to a screeching halt.

What’s a court clerk to do!? Pretty soon, none of these thugs will take any
cases because the risk is too great. This will be the end of the court
system. ‘Bout bloody time, eh?

Knowledge – not procedure – is power.

The means by which we have attempted to assuage our problems, inflicted
upon us by the PTW (powers that were) have all been superficial, compared
to the origins of all the black magic, superstition, satanic ritualism,
trickery, mind-control, and clandestine practices. Under commercial law,
dating back to the Code of Ur-Nammu – around 2100 BCE – the use of
another’s property without permission puts one into dishonor and makes him
liable for any debts. So, our using UCC forms, bills of exchange, AFV, or
bonds, and altering documents of the Roman System can create penalties, as
this is trading and/or using the property of a corporation we do not own ….
the birth certificate proves that the “name” is, in fact, the property of
the corporation which issued it. We can do all the paper perfectly but, in
the end, they say, “Sorry; you’re not one of us.” But, now, we get to
inflict fear onto them. When we are forced to court, knowing that the Judge
acts as the Trustee and the prosecutor acts as Executor of the CQV Trusts
is empowering. It gives us two choices:

1. If we wish to expose the fraud of presumptions, by which the CQV trusts
still exist, then the court is the perfect opportunity to have them
dissolved or to prove the fraud because the Trustee is sitting on the
bench. Dissolving the first CQV, dissolves them all; or,

2. If we are not inclined to use something like the Ecclesiastical Deed
Poll to expose the fraud of the CQV Trusts, then, at least, we ought to
know that everything the judge says – even if it sounds like a command,
order, or sentence – is actually an offer which we can choose to decline
(“I do not consent; I do not accept your offer”). This is a fundamental
principle of testamentary trusts…… the beneficiary can accept or decline
what the trustee offers.

For 15 years, I have watched the alleged solutions in commerce come and go
and nothing has worked for enough people on enough occasions to call
anything a consistent win. Paying for information is insanity because those
who sell information clearly have not prevailed or they wouldn’t need to
sell anything, would they? Buying express, private-contract trusts, e.g.:
NACRS, is a huge waste of time and money because the entire process is too
complicated for anyone with an IQ below 400 and …. “no refunds”. I have
found no solution in commerce because those who claim to have solutions
still insist upon treating symptoms rather than curing the cause – the
fraudulent CQV trust.

If we send an Ecclesiastical Deed Poll (see: http://oneheaven.
org/canons_positive_law/article_1330.htm ), as response to a summons
or arrest warrant, then the judge who issues them has to think long and
hard: “Am I willing to gamble that the man who walks into my court might
call me on my role of trustee and expose the fraud that the CQV Trusts are
still in place?

Canons of Positive Law: http://oneheaven.
org/canons_positive_law/article_0000.htm

This knowledge is your power.
– Frank O’Collins

History of Trusts

http://one-heaven.org/home.asp

The 1st Trust of the world

Unam Sanctam is one of the most frightening documents of history and the
one most quoted as the primary document of the popes claiming their global
power. It is an express trust deed. The last line reads: “Furthermore, we
declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for
salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.” It is
not only the first trust deed in history but also the largest trust ever
conceived, as it claims the whole planet and everything on it, conveyed in
trust.

Triple Crown of Ba’al, aka the Papal Tiara and Triregnum

In 1302 Pope Boniface issued his infamous Papal Bull Unam Sanctam – the
first Express Trust. He claimed control over the whole planet which made
him “King of the world”. In celebration, he commissioned a gold-plated
headdress in the shape of a pinecone, with an elaborate crown at its base.
The pinecone is an ancient symbol of fertility and one traditionally
associated with Ba’al as well as the Cult of Cybele. It also represents the
pineal gland in the centre of our brains –crystalline in nature – which
allows us access to Source, hence, the 13-foot tall pinecone in Vatican
Square. Think about why the Pontiffs would idolize a pinecone.

See: Pharmacratic Inquisition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnvEHObMMH4
The 1st Crown of Crown Land

Pope Boniface VIII was the first leader in history to create the concept of
a Trust, but the first Testamentary Trust, through a deed and will creating
a Deceased Estate, was created by Pope Nicholas V in 1455, through the
Papal Bull Romanus Pontifex. This is only one of three (3) papal bulls to
include the line with the incipit “For a perpetual remembrance.” This Bull
had the effect of conveying the right of use of the land as Real Property,
from the Express Trust Unam Sanctam, to the control of the Pontiff and his
successors in perpetuity. Hence, all land is claimed as “crown land”. This
1st Crown is represented by the 1st Cestui Que Vie Trust, created when a
child is born. It deprives us of all beneficial entitlements and rights on
the land.

The 2nd Crown of the Commonwealth

The second Crown was created in 1481 with the papal bull Aeterni Regis,
meaning “Eternal Crown”, by Sixtus IV, being only the 2nd of three papal
bulls as deeds of testamentary trusts.

This Papal Bull created the “Crown of Aragon”, later known as the Crown of
Spain, and is the highest sovereign and highest steward of all Roman Slaves
subject to the rule of the Roman Pontiff. Spain lost the crown in 1604 when
it was granted to King James I of England by Pope Paul V after the
successful passage of the “Union of Crowns”, or Commonwealth, in 1605 after
the false flag operation of the Gunpowder Plot. The Crown was finally lost
by England in 1975, when it was returned to Spain and King Carlos I, where
it remains to this day. This 2nd Crown is represented by the 2nd cestui Que
Vie Trust, created when a child is born and, by the sale of the birth
certificate as a Bond to the private central bank of the nation, depriving
us of ownership of our flesh and condemning us to perpetual servitude, as a
Roman person, or slave.

The 3rd Crown of the Ecclesiastical See

The third Crown was created in 1537 by Paul III, through the papal bull
Convocation, also meant to open the Council of Trent. It is the third and
final testamentary deed and will of a testamentary trust, set up for the
claiming of all “lost souls”, lost to the See. The Venetians assisted in
the creation of the 1st Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540, to use this papal bull
as the basis of Ecclesiastical authority of Henry VIII. This Crown was
secretly granted to England in the collection and “reaping” of lost souls.
The Crown was lost in 1816, due to the deliberate bankruptcy of England,
and granted to the Temple Bar which became known as the Crown Bar, or
simply the Crown. The Bar Associations have since been responsible for
administering the “reaping” of the souls of the lost and damned, including
the registration and collection of Baptismal certificates representing the
souls collected by the Vatican and stored in its vaults.

This 3rd Crown is represented by the 3rd Cestui Que Vie Trust, created when
a child is baptized. It is the parents’ grant of the Baptismal certificate
– title to the soul – to the church or Registrar. Thus, without legal title
over one’s own soul, we will be denied legal standing and will be treated
as things – cargo without souls – upon which the BAR is now legally able to
enforce Maritime law.

The Cestui Que Vie Trust

A Cestui Que Vie Trust is a fictional concept. It is a Temporary
Testamentary Trust, first created during the reign of Henry VIII of England
through the Cestui Que Vie Act of 1540 and updated by Charles II, through
the CQV Act of 1666, wherein an Estate may be effected for the Benefit of a
Person presumed lost or abandoned at “sea” and therefore assumed “dead”
after seven (7) years. Additional presumptions, by which such a Trust may
be formed, were added in later statutes to include bankrupts, minors,
incompetents, mortgages, and private companies. The original purpose of a
CQV Trust was to form a temporary Estate for the benefit of another because
some event, state of affairs, or condition prevented them from claiming
their status as living, competent, and present, before a competent
authority. Therefore, any claims, history, statutes, or arguments that
deviate in terms of the origin and function of a CQV Trust, as pronounced
by these canons, is false and automatically null and void.

A Beneficiary under Estate may be either a Beneficiary or a CQV Trust. When
a Beneficiary loses direct benefit of any Property of the higher Estate
placed in a CQV Trust on his behalf, he do not “own” the CQV Trust; he is
only the beneficiary of what the Trustees of the CQV Trust choose to
provide. As all CQV Trusts are created on presumption, based upon original
purpose and function, such a Trust cannot be created if these presumptions
can be proven not to exist.

Since 1933, when a child is borne in a State (Estate) under inferior Roman
law, three (3) Cestui Que (Vie) Trusts are created upon certain
presumptions specifically designed to deny, forever, the child any rights
of Real Property, any Rights to be free, and any Rights to be known as man
or woman, rather than a creature or animal, by claiming and possessing
their Soul or Spirit.

The Executors or Administrators of the higher Estate willingly and
knowingly:

1. convey the beneficial entitlements of the child, as Beneficiary, into
the 1st Cestui Que (Vie) Trust in the form of a Registry Number by
registering the Name, thereby also creating the Corporate Person and
denying the child any rights to Real Property; and,

2. claim the baby as chattel to the Estate. The slave baby contract is then
created by honoring the ancient tradition of either having the ink
impression of the baby’s feet onto the live birth record, or a drop of its
blood, as well as tricking the parents to signing the baby away through the
deceitful legal meanings on the live birth record which is a promissory
note, converted into a slave bond, sold to the private reserve bank of the
estate, and then conveyed into a 2nd and separate CQV Trust, per child,
owned by the bank. When the promissory note reaches maturity and the bank
is unable to “seize” the slave child, a maritime lien is lawfully issued to
“salvage” the lost property and is monetized as currency issued in series
against the CQV Trust.

3. claim the child’s soul via the Baptismal Certificate. Since 1540 and the
creation of the 1st CQV Act, deriving its power from the Papal Bull of
Roman Cult leader Pope Paul III, 1540, when a child is baptized and a
Baptismal Certificate is issued, the parents have gifted, granted, and
conveyed the soul of the baby to a “3rd” CQV Trust owned by Roman Cult,
which has held this valuable property in its vaults ever since. Since 1815,
this 3rd Crown of the Roman Cult and 3rd CQV Trust representing
Ecclesiastical Property has been managed by the BAR as the reconstituted
“Galla” responsible, as Grim Reapers, for reaping the souls.

Each Cestui Que Vie Trust, created since 1933, represents one of the 3
Crowns representing the three claims of property of the Roman Cult: Real
Property (on Earth), Personal Property (body), and Ecclesiastical Property
(soul). Each corresponds exactly to the three forms of law available to the
Galla of the BAR Courts: corporate commercial law (judge is the
‘landlord’), maritime and canon law (judge is the banker), and Talmudic law
(judge is the priest).

What is the real power of a court ‘judge’?

Given what has been revealed about the foundations of Roman Law, what is
the real hidden power of a judge when we face court? Is it their superior
knowledge of process and procedure or of magic? Or is it something simpler
and far more obvious?

It is unfortunate that much of the excitement about Estates and Executors
has deliberately not revealed that an Estate, by definition, has to belong
to a Trust – to be specific, a Testamentary Trust or CQV Trust. When we
receive legal paper or have to appear in court, it is these same CQV Trusts
which have our rights converted into the property contained within them.
Instead of being the Trustee, or the Executor, or Administrator, we are
merely the Beneficiary of each CQV Trust, granted only beneficial and
equitable use of certain property, never legal title. So if the Roman Legal
System assumes we are merely the beneficiary of these CQV Trusts, when we
go to court, who represents the Trustee and Office of Executor? We all know
that all cases are based upon the judge’s discretion which often defies
procedures, statutes, and maxims of law. Well, they are doing what any
Trustee or Executor, administering a trust in the presence of the
beneficiary, can do under Roman Law and all the statutes, maxims, and
procedures are really for show because under the principles of Trust Law,
as first formed by the Roman Cult, a Trustee has a wide latitude, including
the ability to correct any procedural mistakes, by obtaining the implied or
tacit consent of the beneficiary, to obviate any mistakes. The judge is the
real and legal Name. The judge is the trust, itself. We are the mirror
image to them – the ghost – the dead. It is high sorcery, trickery, and
subterfuge that has remained “legal” for far too long.

[Ragnarok]

Don't go to court. You have already lost if you do. Ignore it, thats generally what i do. If you want to play their game thats up to you, but this is a revenue generating exercise for them, nothing more. You will be made to pay, regardless of whatever linguistic jiggerypokery you get up to. The rules of the game change to suit them as and when it is needed.

And look at all these cowards saying "this is not advice" or "i'm not advising you", when they clearly are. Has anyone around here actually got any balls. Do you think that saying "this is not advice" would actually convince the "authorities" if it really came down to it.

Mary Croft speaks sense, "Don't got to court", period.

[Finnegan]

If you don't go to court the judge will deal with the case in your absence. Eventually the cops will come to your door with a commital warrant and you'll get a short holiday at the taxpayers expense. So, you pays yer money(or not) and you takes yer choice. If you haven't any work/family commitments it might not bother you too much but I still think you should go to court and see what happens. If you get fined you can appeal it. Best of luck man.

[Jebus Christos]

No they will not come to your door and why do you think he should go to court?? or appeal anything? yes the most likely will go ahead in your absense but do you really care? if you want to bend over and take an ass fucking then head on in to court, i hand their toilet paper back to them doing this 2yrs now and i'm still here... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxueUB_xhoY&feature=channel_vide...

[Antaine]

Dont suppose anyone knows how to get car out of pound without paying. I tried the lowering of window and all the freeman stuff but Garda got his hand in window and opened door and more or less pulled me out.I succumbed due to kids crying :-)
Trip to station to verify id and then let go. Wasnt mentioned of a charge. Only told i had to produce details to get car back. Wasnt read any rights or anything. Tried explaining my thoughts to Robot Garda but not much went through.
I was driving with no tax and insurance. D'oh

[Mise]

poor children, it must have been frightening for them,

[Finnegan]

Unfortunately this is often the response when you try to assert your rights.

Mise said:

poor children, it must have been frightening for them,

[Antaine]

The kids were very upset. I actually called the Gardaí robots and asked them to remove their helmets so I could speak to the humans underneath.

[Bernard Weckmann]

Hi Ogmios,

Could not have put it any better. All the information anyone could possibly want is actually out there already. On this site and on God knows how many others. This is basic stuff!

Where I come from (Germany) there is a jocular question "Wo lassen Sie denken?" which translates roughly as
"Where do you outsource your thinking?"


Cheers