Rich, you HAVE to be desperate to ask for MY help. All I'm going to do is to be frankly honest and tell you where I think you and everybody else is making mistakes.

**Gentlemen, **

In a republic where titles of nobility are not granted and religious tests of office are not required I'm not even sure that "gentlemen" is a reasonable term or politically correct ESPECIALLY since ladies have made some significant contributions to freedom (and are more fun to kiss.) You may consider me a GENTILE but don't even have to call me "Mister."

**I think I have a slight problem and seek your imput.**

You got it freely and without purchase but I'm not a nice person - just ask Larry.

** I have been doing affidavits, and instead of using a notary, I have had at least two people sign as witness to my signature. Also, I have signed some affidavits with 28 USC 1746 prior to my signing.**

Did you get that "28 U.S.C. § 1746" from me or come up with it on your own? In a country where you can confess without a notary and anything you say in admission to a crime would be held against you on the record when you cannot be made to testify against yourself then why would you be obliged to need a notary to petition redress which right cannot be abridged by the congress OR the state legislators?

When most people couldn't write and could not sign their own name then a notarization had some significance to prove the proceedings. HAS there been any question brought up on the record about who you are and your right to equal protection of the law?

** It appears that those ways of doing affidavits do not fall within the definition of MIssouri statute 575.010 RSMo. **

This would only apply if you were in a Missouri chancery and not in United States Court. You DO understand the substantial and material difference between state police power and national judicial power don't you?

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.

**Does anyone have any authority that I can rely on which would overcome or permitt me to do affidavits as I have been doing without a notary? **

You mean BESIDES the Constitution for the United States of America?

WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws, prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

**Please, I need some help with this one.**

Why? This isn't YOUR case here is it? It DOES demonstrate what I have been saying about jurisdiction but you are missing it.


"In order to "verify" a written instrument that is executed in Missouri, the proof or acknowledgment must be taken "by some court having a seal, or some judge, justice or clerk thereof, or a notary public." § 442.150(1) in accordance with provisions of § 442.155.1." - JIMMY DEAN BAKER v. STATE OF MISSOURI, 796 S.W.2d 426; (1990)

IF you have the jurisdiction to conduct Court then you are presiding upon the tribunal and your signature IS the seal! IF you are a subject person practicing law in a municipal chancery then you are regulated by the bar association of that state.

I think the best swindles are those done out it the open where no one questions the obvious admissions of corrupt court officials pretending to be the voice of justice.


"Movant's reliance upon 28 U.S.C. § 1746 as a substitute for verification as required by Missouri law is misplaced. 28 [**4] U.S.C. § 1746 applies to matters subject to federal law, not to matters subject to the law of the State of Missouri. This subject was addressed in the Alabama case, O'Such v. State, 423 So.2d 317, 319 (Ala.Cr.App. 1982). n3 In O'Such, the Alabama court stated: There is no collision between the federal law and the state law on the subject. The federal law controls, of course, as to procedure in federal courts, and the state law controls as to procedure in state courts. Otherwise, turmoil results." - JIMMY DEAN BAKER v. STATE OF MISSOURI, (Supra)

OTHERWISE I would believe that your constitutional solution is not in wasting time fawning upon the state chancellors and pleading for their mercy but through affirmative action at law in real Court.

"He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation..."
- Unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

DO let me know when your judge or justice states that you have no rights of a United States Citizen in a Missouri court (and I bet he won't sign it under penalty of perjury OR notarize it!)


James Alan Daum, Civilian Jurist
Ignorantia Jus Neminem Excusat
=============================

Supreme Law Library : Court Cases : Dime Savings Bank v. Hand ...
... of the US Constitution show a 13th amendment which bans titles of nobility, and those ... Square [zip code exempt] NEW YORK STATE Sylvain R. Jakabovics, Esq. ...
MORE:>>


The Original 13th Article of Amendment
The Original 13th Article of Amendment. What was , by law, to be included in the
re-publication (a special edition) of the Virginia Civil Code? ...