NaturalLaw

Three french hens – did you know and realise the importance of the; three trust certainties: https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/

Four calling birds – the agent has no chose as evidenced by the law of assignment; four chose in action: https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/

Five gold rings – or the equitable procedure; five steps to follow: https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/

Be careful not to mix jurisdiction, especially when a DCA company writes to you...they are writing to your legal fiction, this is all that they can do. One needs to be careful how a reply is delivered, if at all...see how they get you! To defeat them legally, all one needs is the know-how to do so from the equitable position of the trust as beneficiary. A specific DSAR will expose they have no chose and make them vulnerable on the legal side...this they must comply with. This puts you in the position of claiming for distress and harassment, and a counterclaim for any payments plus interest you may have made. However, should a wo/man acting on behalf of a legal fiction interfere with you or your rights, one needs to address wo/man to wo/man in the private, and include the CEO of course. Remember equity acts in personam! And equity follows the law - what does this tell you? https://www.facebook.com/groups/1215509255752939

Six geese a laying – this is tricky, so we’ll just leave it at; six equitable remedy https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/

Seven swans a swimming – we have seven maxims a begging (to be learned) https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/ There was some issue yesterday with eight Acts a knowing; not showing, they are now available to view... apologies for any inconvenience.

How else can perpetuities interact with the living...other than by changing the meanings of words and mirroring reality with fiction; makes perfect sense really. The architects that designed the system weren't told by the controllers it was for their own gain, so no one knew or could tell you or I what was up their sleeve!

Eight Lords a’leaping off somewhere! So we have Eight Acts a’knowing https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/ Something the beneficiary ought to know 😉

Not sure where the nine ladies dancing got to, but here we have nine DSAR questions to be aware of: https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/

A push forward with halting the (system's architects) bank controllers' technocratic agenda to make all people debt slaves. An offer you can't refuse? 10 days of Christmas, from today until a week Sunday, for our offer https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/equity-bundle-offer-2/! For yourself, for family and friends so you can work together; let's get things back as they rightfully should be. Learn how to use that straw-man, it is yours to wield and use it to your benefit. We are updating our website and after 10 days the value of the offer shall increase. ps. we only ask you don't share; consider the cash savings, freedom and fun you can have! The information is designed for England & Wales legislation, however, look in the FB group https://www.facebook.com/groups/1215509255752939 as others may be working on it in different countries.

its a tool for the beneficiary to interact with corporations, have a read www.solutionsyouneed.co.uk the video highlights the way the wo/man becomes surety it's evident that the BC creation is for the benefit of the owner, when one sees the specific legislation that the website points to, for the beneficial side of the trust...this is all one needs for financial matters and tax

The birth certificate a bond

Is reality what the mind sees… Many things that we are taught are to create an illusion of reality. Have you often wondered why things don’t add up, or why the “system” does what it does to you? So many of us are “plugged-in” to the matrix. This matrix is that of the fiction all around, made up of Governments, education, media, payments etc… They are all an illusion! This has been manifested for hundreds of years by the controllers, you will learn who they are further in this site, these controllers have no empathy, but a desire to control all. Being “conditioned” by the same repetitive narratives over generations instills a belief in our minds, words are given different meanings to confuse us, fear and distractions are a part of everyday life for us. You have no time to think, it is taken by worries, worries the system has imposed upon your mind, whether of “news”, debt, illness, war…you know the stuff! Ask yourself; why would anyone want you to feel this way? Because if you were not afraid and could see everything for what it was…you are free and the controllers have nothing. https://solutionsuneed.co.uk

this is fascinating, as it is CIA file it is authentic discovery into how conscious works and what we are and life is https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf this is for the program frequencies https://brainsyncproject.com or to cut out the video (that isn't too bad) https://pay.hotmart.com/S84803235P?off=o699sy3e&checkoutMode=10

as equity follows the law, the law, the established/constitutional/common law comes first. as they are courts of equity these days, we need to revert to common law or law for mankind, very interesting read https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/law-and-society

*************************************************** Title 28. JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE Part V. PROCEDURE Chapter 127. EXECUTIONS AND JUDICIAL SALES Section 2007. Imprisonment for debt 28 U.S. Code § 2007.Imprisonment for debt (a) A person shall not be imprisoned for debt on a writ of execution or other process issued from a court of the United States in any State wherein imprisonment for debt has been abolished. All modifications, conditions, and restrictions upon such imprisonment provided by State law shall apply to any writ of execution or process issued from a court of the United States in accordance with the procedure applicable in such State. (b) Any person arrested or imprisoned in any State on a writ of execution or other process issued from any court of the United States in a civil action shall have the same jail privileges and be governed by the same regulations as persons confined in like cases on process issued from the courts of such State. The same requirements governing discharge as are applicable in such State shall apply. Any proceedings for discharge shall be conducted before a United States magistrate judge for the judicial district wherein the defendant is held. (June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 960; Pub. L. 90–578, title IV, §402(b)(2), Oct. 17, 1968, 82 Stat. 1118; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, §321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)

“The United States Supreme Court ... stressed the need for ‘individualized review’ to avoid the issuance of ‘rubber stamp’ warrants.” State v. Paulick, 277 Minn. 140, 151 N.W.2d 596 (1967). 5. False arrest is assault and battery "An arrest without warrant is a trespass, an unlawful assault upon the person ... where one is about to be unlawfully deprived of his liberty he may resist the aggressions of the offender, whether of a private citizen or a public officer, to the extent of taking the life of the assailant, if that be necessary to preserve his own life, or prevent infliction upon him of some great bodily harm.” State v. Gum, 69 S.E. 464 (1910). "An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right, and only the same right, to use force in defending himself as he would have in repelling any other assault and battery.” State v. Robinson, 72 Atl.2d 262 (1950). “Every person has the right to resist an unlawful arrest ... and, in preventing such illegal restraint of his liberty, he may use such force as may be necessary.” Columbus v. Holmes, 152 N.E.2d 306 (1958). 6. No handcuffs (sorry, OSHA) “But a constable cannot justify handcuffing a prisoner unless he has attempted to escape, or unless it be necessary in order to prevent his doing so.” 51 L.R.A. 216. “The handcuffing was utterly unlawful.” Osborn v. Veitch 1 Foster & Fin Eng Rep 317. 7. Go immediately to a magistrate (no photographs, no fingerprinting). "Any undue delay is unlawful and wrongful, and renders the officer himself and all persons aiding and abetting therein wrongdoers from the beginning.” Ulvestad v. Dolphin, 278 Pac. 684 (1929). "Compulsory fingerprinting before conviction is an unlawful encroachment...[and] involves prohibited compulsory self-incrimination.” People v. Helvern, 215 N.Y. Supp. 417 (1926). “The one arresting has “a duty to immediately seek a magistrate,” and failure to do so “makes a case of false imprisonment.” Heath v. Boyd, 175 S.W.2d. 217 (1943); Brock v. Stimson, 108 Mass. 520 (1871). "The power to arrest does not confer upon the arresting officer the power to detain a prisoner for other purposes.” Geldon v. Finnegan, 252 N.W. 372 (1934). "The taking of the plaintiff’s picture before conviction was an illegal act.” Hawkins v. Kuhne, 137 NY Supp 1090, 153 App Div 216 (1912). "To detain the person arrested in custody for any purpose other than that of taking him before a magistrate is illegal.” Kominsky v. Durand, 12 Atl.2d. 654 (1940). Summary: A warrant must be issued and be signed (no rubber stamp) by a judge who has jurisdiction; must state the facts showing jurisdiction; must be based upon probable cause; must name the offense committed; must contain an affidavit (under oath) by the accuser, stating FIRST HAND facts constituting a crime; must name the party to be arrested, or describe him sufficiently to identify him; must offer the warrant and the affidavit for inspection upon request; No handcuffs; must take me immediately before a magistrate, and hold me for no other purpose (no photographs, no fingerprinting); You are responsible for everything that happens to me even if you relinquish custody to an assign; Unlawful arrest is assault, battery & trespass; There is no immunity in a false arrest case; Good faith is not a defense to sustain false arrest. Lastly . . . If the warrant states as cause to issue, a mere civil/statutory infraction not rising to the level of a capital crime . . . the officer must produce title to your biological property/body, before said officer can make the arrest and take possession of the biological property. You do not by accommodation, accept the offer of arrest for any statutory infraction unless the statute defines a capital crime and probable cause exists. NOTE: The arresting officer that this information has been presented to, has both a civil and legal duty to become informed with the material incorporated herein before an arrest is determined to have cause to be made.

**************************************** Article 10 stipulates that “all persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.” Article 14 states that “all persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals.” Both article 14 and article 15 recognize important rights in the context of criminal proceedings such as the right to a fair,hearing, including “to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court” (article 14(3)(f)). Arrest is presumed to be false if … MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 1. Arrest is presumed to be false; officer has the burden of proof "Any arrest made without a warrant, if challenged by the defendant, is presumptively invalid...the burden is upon the state" to justify it as authorized by statute, and as not violative of constitutional provisions. State v. Mastrian, 171 N.W.2d 695 (1969); Butler v. State, 212 So.2d 577 (Miss 1968). "As in the case of illegal arrests, the officer ... must keep within the law at his peril." Thiede v. Scandia, 217 Minn. 231, 14 N.W.2d 400 (1944). "The burden is upon the defendant to show that the arrest was by authority of law." McAleer v. Good, 65 Atl. 934, 935 (1907); Mackie v. Ambassador, 11 P.2d 6 (1932). The only thing the plaintiff needs to plead and to prove if alleging false arrest, is either (1) that the defendant made an arrest or imprisonment, or (2) that the defendant affirmatively instigated, encouraged, incited, or caused the arrest or imprisonment. Burlington v. Josephson, 153 Fed.2d 372,276 (1946). ”When the plaintiff has shown that he was arrested, imprisoned or restrained of his liberty by the defendant, "the law presumes it to be unlawful." People v. McGrew, 20 Pac. 92 (1888); Knight v. Baker, 133 P. 544(1926). 2. Must show warrant upon request "A special deputy is bound to show his warrant if requested to do so, and if he omit, the party against whom the warrant issues may resist an arrest, and the warrant under such circumstances is no protection against an action for an assault, battery and false imprisonment." Frost v. Thomas, 24 Wendell's Rep. (N.Y.) 418, 419 (1840). "An accused person, if he demands it, is entitled to have the warrant for his arrest shown to him at the time of arrest." 42 L.R.A. 682, 51 L.R.A. 211, Crosswhite v. Barnes, 124 S.E. 242, 245 (1924). "He must show it to the accused, if requested to do so." Smith v. State, 208 S.2d 747 (Miss., 1968). "If demanded, he must produce the warrant and read it to the accused, that he may know by what authority and for what cause he is deprived of his liberty." State v. Shaw, 89 S.E. 322 (1916). “It is doubtless the duty of an officer who executes a warrant of arrest to state the nature and substance of the process which gives him the authority he professes to exercise, and, if it is demanded, to exhibit his warrant, that the party arrested may have no excuse for resistance.” Shovlon v. Com., 106 Pa. 369, 5 Am. Crim. Rep. 41 (1884). “It was the duty of an officer who attempts to make an arrest to exhibit the warrant if he has one.” Jones v. State, 114 Ga. 79, 39 S.E. 861 (1901). 3.Warrant must be valid A constable justifying an imprisonment under a warrant must show that the warrant on its face is legal, and that the magistrate had jurisdiction of the subject-matter. 51 L.R.A. 197, Poulk v. Slocum, 3 Blackfords (Ind). 421. (Meaning, you should also demand a copy of the affidavit giving the judge probable cause to issue the warrant. All warrants must issue upon submission of an affidavit of probable cause.). “A warrant is regarded as insufficient and thus void if, on its face, it fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a crime.” Wharton’s Crim. Proc., 12th Ed., vol. 1, p. 152 (1974). 4. No rubber-stamp “signature”