NaturalLaw

“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). No immunity for wrongful imprisonment. Hallstrom v. City of Garden City, 991 F.2d 1473 (9th Cir. 1993): “..One Who Interferes with another’s LIBERTY does so at his peril.” Knight v. Baker, 117 Ore. 492, 244 Pac. 543,544 (1926). "Since it is the present policy of the Department of Justice to remove to the federal courts all suits in state courts against federal officers for trespass or false imprisonment, a claim for relief, whether based on state common law or directly on the Fourth Amendment, will ultimately be heard in a federal court." Brief for Respondents 13 (citations omitted); see 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a); Willingham v. Morgan, 395 U.S. 402 (1969). "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 essential elements of the action are: (1)Detention or restraint against ONE’S WILL and; (2) The unlawfulness of such detention or restraint. Sergeant v. Watson Bros. Transp. Co., 244 Iowa 185, 52 N.W. 2d. 86, 93 (1952), Sinclair Mining Co. v. Meek, 62 Ga. App. 850, 10 S.E. 2d, 76, 79 (1940), Southern Ry. Co. in Kentucky v. Shirley, 121 Ky.863, 90 S.W. 597, 599 (1906). 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). "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). Imprisonment is any restraint of the personal liberty of another; and prevention of his movements from place to place; or his free action according to his own pleasure and will; *** it is false imprisonment when this is done without lawful authority. Griffin v. Clark, 53 Idaho 364, 42 p.(2d) 297, 301 (1935); citing Cordell v. Standard Oil Co., 131 Kan. 221,289 P. 472, 473 (1930); Johnson v. Thompson, 13 Fed. Case 840, 853, No. 7,416 (1833). The temporary detention of individuals during an automobile stop by the police, even if only for a brief period, constitutes a seizure within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Therefore, an automobile stop is subject to the Constitutional requirement that the seizure not be ´unreasonable´ under the circumstances.” Litzenberger v. Vanim, No. 01-5454, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13843 (E.D. Pa. July 31, 2002) (citing Whren v. U.S., 517 U.S. 806, 809-10 (1996). The Infraction of personal LIBERTY has ever been regarded as one of the greatest injuries. The injuries to LIBERTY are principally termed False Imprisonments, or Malicious Prosecutions. Joseph Chitty, Esq., The Practice of the Law, vol. 1, chap. II, p. 47, London, 1837. Unlawful detention or deprivation of liberty is the basis of an action for the tort of false imprisonment. Actual seizureor the laying on of hands is not necessary to constitute an unlawful detention. Hanser v. Bieber , 241 Mo. 326, 197 S.W.68, 70 (1917). ”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).

"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). "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). Every confinement of a person is an imprisonment, whether it be in a common prison, or in a private house, or in the stocks, or even by forcibly detaining one in the public streets. Cited by: Fox v. McCurnin, 205 Iowa 752, 218 N.W. 499,501 (1928); Sergeant v. Watson Bros Transp. Co., 244 Iowa 185, 52 N.W. 2d. 86, 93 (1952). False Imprisonment is akin to the wrongs of assault and battery, and consists in imposing, by force or threats, an unlawful restraint upon a man’s Freedom of Locomotion. Thomas Cooley Treatise on the Law of Torts. 205 Iowa752, vol. 1, 4th Ed. Sect. 109, p. 345, Meints v. Huntington, 276 F. 245, 248, (1921). False imprison is classified as a tort in Common Law, and also as a crime. Kroeger v. Passmore, 36 Mont. 504, 93 Pac.805, 807 (1908). McBeath v. Campbell, 12 S.W. 2d, 18-18, 122 (Tex. 1929). FALSE IMPRISONMENT is necessarily a wrongful interference with the personal liberty of an individual. The wrong may be committed by words alone or actions alone, or by both, and by merely operating on the will of the individual, or by violence, or by both. It is not necessary that the individual to be confined within a prison, or within walls, or that he be assaulted or touched. It is not necessary that there should be any injury done to the individual’s person or his character or reputation; nor is it necessary that the wrongful act be committed by malice or ill will, or even the slightest wrongful intention; nor is it necessary that the act be under color of legal or judicial proceeding. All that is necessary is that the individual be restrained of his liberty without any sufficient legal cause therefor, and by words or acts which he fears to disregard. Granier v Squires, 62 Kan. 321, 62 Pac. 1005, 1006 (1900); Kroeger v. Passmore, 36 Mont. 504, 93 Pac.805, 807 (1908). FALSE IMPRISONMENT is the unlawful and total restraint of the liberty of the person. The imprisonment is false in the sense of being unlawful. The right violated by this tort is “right of free locomotion”. It belongs historically to the class of rights known as simple or primary rights. *** The theory of law is that one interferes with the right of locomotion of another at his own peril. Riley v. Stone, 174 N.C. 588; 94 S.E. 434, 440 (1917). FORCEFULLY to deprive a man of FREEDOM to go wheresoever he may is clearly a TRESPASS. False imprison was indeed one of the first trespasses recognized by the Common Law. Street’s Foundation of Legal Liability, Vol. P.12, citing Bacon’s Note Book, Vol. 2, P. 314 (1229), pl. 465. "He must show it (warrant) to the accused, if requested to do so." Smith v. State, 208 S.2d 747 (Miss., 1968). “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 is equally plain, however, that the length of confinement cannot be ignored in deciding whether the confinement meets constitutional standards. A filthy, overcrowded cell and a diet of "grue" might be tolerable for a few days and intolerably cruel for weeks or months.” Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678, 686-87 (1978).

FALSE IMPRISONMENT [lots from US, any references for UK?] The court awarded and set precedence of One thousand dollars per minute for unlawful detention. Trezevant v. City of Tampa (1984) 741 F.2d 336, hn. 1,5. see also, 42 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1983. Where an individual is detained, without a warrant and without having committed a crime, the detention is a false arrest and false imprisonment. This is case law in Florida. Trezevant v. City of Tampa, 241 F2d. 336 (11th CIR 1984). Trezevant was illegally held for 23 minutes and was awarded $25,000 in damages. The above case sets the foundation for $1,086.00 per minute, $75,000 dollars per hour, or $1,800,000 dollars per day. TREZEVANT CASE DAMAGE AWARD STANDARD "Evidence that motorist cited for traffic violation was incarcerated for 23 minutes during booking process, even though he had never been arrested and at all times had sufficient cash on hand to post bond pending court disposition of citation, was sufficient to support finding that municipality employing officer who cited motorist and county board of criminal justice, which operated facility in which motorist was incarcerated, had unconstitutionally deprived motorist of his right to liberty. 42 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1983." Trezevant v. City of Tampa (1984) 741 F.2d 336, hn. 1. "Jury verdict of $25,000 in favor of motorist who was unconstitutionally deprived of his liberty when incarcerated during booking process following citation for traffic violation was not excessive in view of evidence of motorist's back pain during period of incarceration and jailor's refusal to provide medical treatment, as well as fact that motorist was clearly entitled to compensation for incarceration itself and for mental anguish that he had suffered from entire episode. 42 U.S.C.A. Sec. 1983." Trezevant v. City of Tampa (1984) 741 F.2d 336, hn. 5. Habeas Corpus. Article 1. Constitutional Provisions. § 17-1. Remedy without delay for restraint of liberty. Every person restrained of his liberty is entitled to a remedy to inquire into the lawfulness thereof, and to remove the same, if unlawful; and such remedy ought not to be denied or delayed. (Const., art. 1, s. 18; Rev., s. 1819; C.S., s. 2203.) § 17-2. Habeas corpus not to be suspended. The privileges of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended. (Const., art. 1, s. 21; Rev., s. 1820; C.S., s. 2204.). ************************************************ 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.) *************************************************** "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).

Last day: Live - A Simple Roadmap To Straighten Your Life And Business Affairs… To Be Free Of The Rules And Influence Of Others November 18 & 19 | 2-Day Live Training | Followed by a 7-Day Implementation Challenge. If this sounds like it could be for you, read more https://tinyurl.com/Private-Life It will take you through the full process to establish all aspects of your life fully in the private – work/business, personal, familial... everything. Whilst also serving as a great introduction to the knowledge share for those who haven't already taken it. For the Knowledge Share https://tinyurl.com/law-mankind Free Q&A Clinic Funnel click here https://tinyurl.com/law-QandA

https://www.reuters.com/article/britain-slavery-idUSL171535320090701 UK law firm and bank regret slave trade links LONDON, July 1 (Reuters Life!) - British investment bank Rothschild and top law firm Freshfields said on Wednesday they “greatly regret” past links between their founders and the slave trade. The 19th century founders Nathan Mayer Rothschild and top law firm Freshfields said on Wednesday they “greatly regret” past links between their founders and the slave trade. The 19th century founders Nathan Mayer Rothschild and James William Freshfield both supported the abolition of the slave trade, with Freshfield having been an active member of the Church Missionary Society. But new historic research shows both were engaged in business linked to the slave trade, the Financial Times has reported. Both companies issued statements on their websites on Wednesday in which they said they had been unaware of the connection. “We greatly regret that the firm is linked in any way to the inhumane institution of slavery,” said Freshfields’ Bruckhaus Deringer. Rothschild said the company greatly regrets being linked in any way “to the abhorrent institution of slavery”. The links could prove contentious for both firms’ operations in the United States, where numerous banks and other bodies have been pressured to make amends for profiting from slavery, the FT said. Documents from Britain’s national archives,which academics at University College London are studying, showed that Rothschild, a founder of the banking dynasty, had allowed the use of slaves as collateral when banking with a slave owner, the FT said. The documents also indicated that Freshfield, an early partner in the law firm, acted as a trustee for some clients in deals involving Caribbean slave plantations. “James William Freshfield was an active member of the Church Missionary Society ... (which) was committed to the abolition of slavery,” the company statement said. Rothschild himself arranged a loan on behalf of the British government which accelerated the abolition of the slave trade by facilitating the payment of compensation to slave owners, the company said.

Live - A Simple Roadmap To Straighten Your Life And Business Affairs… To Be Free Of The Rules And Influence Of Others November 18 & 19 | 2-Day Live Training | Followed by a 7-Day Implementation Challenge. If this sounds like it could be for you, read more https://tinyurl.com/Private-Life It will take you through the full process to establish all aspects of your life fully in the private – work/business, personal, familial... everything. Whilst also serving as a great introduction to the knowledge share for those who haven't already taken it. For the Knowledge Share https://tinyurl.com/law-mankind Free Q&A Clinic Funnel click here https://tinyurl.com/law-QandA There will be a lot of things that aren't included in the knowledge share (mastery of relating, preserving the private perimeter, structuring business affairs, etc.), as well as an introduction to some things that are. If you'd like to join, you’ll need to clear out the weekend to do it, and have an hour per day free for the implementation challenge later in December. https://solutionsuneed.co.uk

This video has absolutely blown up on twitter and I am being told it might be removed from YouTube, so here it is...🔥🔥🔥

Some success stories 👏👏👏 a rarity these days! Using the equitable side of the trust, understand the trust and know how to be the beneficiary... https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/successes-from-solutions-you-need/

By rights you are beneficiary, this is due to the Birth Certificate, you did not create it, you were unaware of its significance and you have no right to know about it. You are simply the beneficiary. But what does that mean? liable – able to be lied to. There are never contracts in this financial system, only trusts – hence the term ‘agreement’. The trustee has a fiduciary duty to the beneficiary, but presumes we don’t know who we are and assigns the agent bank, who now has a fiduciary duty to…https://solutionsuneed.co.uk/an-introduction-to-using-equity/

ok, so there's this and that..all very confusing...but What is the real problem? First we need to know the truth of our history. We know the victor writes history and we know we don't trust many narratives because the victor controlls them. So...who is the victor and what is the true history? Maybe, you will not see the world in the same way again. You shall have clarity and be free of doubt. The Rulers And Their Secret Signs https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/the-rulers-and-their-secret-signs:8 Kabbalah And Freemasonry: The Origins https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/kabbalah-and-freemasonry-part-1-the-origins:1 The Knights Of Zion: Freemasonry [repeat of title video] https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/the-knights-of-zion-freemasonry-extended-documentary:f The Occult Art Of Law https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/the-occult-art-of-law:65 EUROPA: The Last Battle https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/europa-the-last-battle-full-documentary-2019:6 In The Name Of Zion https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/in-the-name-of-zion-full-documentary:2 9/11 - CGI Or Real Planes https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/nine-eleven-cgi-or-real-planes-2019-documentary:2 September Clues - Simon Shack https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/september-clues-simon-shack:6 The COVID Injection Depopulation Perpetrators https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/the-covid-injection-depopulation-perpetrators:6 Jew Donald Trump Satanic New Age Doctor Network https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/trump-new-age-doctor-network:a Reiner Fuellmich - A Lawyer For Jewish Great Reset https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/controlled-opposition-reiner-fuellmich:e The Jewish British Royal Family https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/james-wickstrom-englands-royal-family-polluted:d The Jewish Saudi Royal Family https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/the-jewish-saudi-royal-family:5 Playlist: https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/mirror-documentary-collection:b https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/corona-scamdemic:0

what is really happening? maybe... https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/the-knights-of-zion-freemasonry-extended-documentary:f

Missing parts in history and some whys? a sequel to zeitgeist it could be. https://odysee.com/@coronamirror:d/ring-of-power-empire-of-the-city:a or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ka5ZjRNdQnc&t=6933s Ring of Power Ep 1 - 0:01 Hidden Empire Ep 2 - 34:56 Trail of the Pharaohs Ep 3 - 54:09 Gods & the Queen Ep 4 - 1:23:37 All the Queen's Men Ep 5 - 1:55:37 The Godfathers Ep 6 - 2:18:08 Cheating at Monopoly Ep 7 - 2:48:39 Asses of Evil Ep 8 - 3:39:10 King of Hearts Ep 9 - 4:06:26 Real Solutions Ep 10 – 4:27:37

Has anyone else heard of the “cow share” strategy? A man who at times acts as farmer sells a portion of his cow to another man who at times acts as a drinker of milk. Apparently about 10 years ago a cease and desist order was dispatched, and the charge was dropped because nobody was selling anything illegal.

The people have the power

There's less than 3 days left for 40% discount from https://tinyurl.com/law-mankind which offers Module one for free to see if you're ready for the journey, or if it is a journey you want to take. Nothing to lose and I'm sure you'll take some important tips on how to operate above the matrix.

for any that have been hit with this: https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/23674896/ulez-expansion-landmark-legal-ruling-unlawful-signage/

interesting (but do I remember correctly?) is / isis = magic ra = underworld (creator of) el = god

a thought...we're construed a birth certificate title (beneficiary) that is a tool to allow us to intercourse with commerce. so with "criminal" offences, we are presumed surety for this name, an entity (not living) but what do the policy officers obtain from us...our DNA and fingerprints. Does this not destroy any claim they make against a dead entity???