I copied this from someone a while back, and now that I look at it, it makes perfect sense, since what courts do is to SILENTLY claim that the STATE is the paramount security interest holder in all property of the gov't franchises JOHN DOE, JARO HENRY SMITH, etc. So when YOU claim it, you're forcing them to PROVE that silent claim of theirs ON THE RECORD, and they just aren't ready to do that.
And since THEY DON'T, your claim STANDS. And as long as it does, they got NO CASE, since the prosecution failed to state a CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED. So here it is, although it might need to be asserted in PRIVATE, i.e. in judge's chambers.
I.e. you DON'T admit to being the NAME/defendant, say "I'm here for that matter", make your "paramount security interest holder" declaration, and ASK to approach the judge in private:
"As the paramount security interest holder in all property and collateral registered and unregistered for your trust/gov. NAME, you must be the creditor in public and help them set off any commercial presentments. Taxes, tickets, loans, court cases etc. etc. it's all commercial and as the man, you can set off all debt in private.
When they bring u to the public you simply remove the presumption that you're the gov. NAME/debtor and hold your private contract. You don't need to prove anything. You ask them to prove that you're not, which they can't. He who has to prove anything will lose.
So in private just ask for the original charging instrument, with the government NAME/TRUST/STRAWMAN on it, and A4V it. Or create money order or bond. As long as you have a birth certificate and social all you do is write Strawman's name and social on the instrument and send it to the CFO. YOU DON'T NEED TO DO A UCC 1 ON YOUR BIRTH CERTIFICATE or your STRAWMAN, all you need to do is establish a contract by tacit acquiescence/non-response."
And here is a post from Anthony who handled his case similarly, and it wasn't until he asked to move it into the PRIVATE, that it was SET OFF. Also note that when he accepted the case for value in PUBLIC, the judge threatened him with contempt. But he was later able to set it off, in the PRIVATE. That shows you that you won't be recognized as a creditor in PUBLIC, but only in the PRIVATE.
"Anthony Cicalla Junior - I went into court told the administrator that I was there in regards to the matter, however, I did not understand the nature of the charges and had questions before I could enter a plea. I fired the public pretender and told the administrator I was a living being over 18 and competent to handle my own affairs. That I understand these courts work on presumptions so I would like to correct some of them up front. One it's my understanding that you can't issue a valid judgment without jurisdiction. Once subject matter jurisdiction is challenged it must be addressed. So for and on the record, I am challenging subject matter jurisdiction. Also, it is my understanding that all parties must be present and accurately identified before and proceedings can commence. So I am here today to confront my accuser and see who is here with sufficient pleadings to invoke the jurisdiction of this court. Once the prosecutor begins to speak, interrupt them. Excuse me your honor but I've never seen this man/woman before in my life. Turn to them and ask if they have a claim. When they say no, tell them they are fired. He/she might say they are representing the state. Your honor, I don't know what imaginary friend he has or if he needs to be in the hospital but I don't see anyone else over there and last time I checked. All parties must be present and accurately identified before any proceedings can commence. Also, Tinsley v paggliaro says statements of counsel are not facts before the court. Why? Because it's hearsay. This court would be involved in fraud by allowing hearsay in the record, would it? That's when I accepted the case and returned it for closure, and then he threatened me with contempt. I asked why he would threaten me with contempt for doing what I needed to remain in honor. Then I offered that we move the case to private and the administrator jumped on it. The prosecutor did not even speak again in chambers after he was fired.
I did this is court and was threatened with contempt. My case was moved to private and then it was set off."
AND Ask WHICH the State of Texas and where is the ACT of Congress which created that State. That'll shut them up since only the FIRST State Constitution was approved by Congress as a state of the Union. All the subsequent ones are PRIVATE. I.e. if you don't contract with them they got no authority. So if they ID the STATE with the SECOND or later State Constitution, then you can ask them where's the contract, as those constitutions are PRIVATE, as they DID NOT create a State of the Union.
And of course, if the prosecutor or the judge REFUSE to identify the STATE by its founding charter (UPON REQUEST), then THERE IS NO CASE because you can't have a case WITHOUT a charging party!!!
BTW, that paramount security interest holder assertion goes like this:
"I am the paramount security interest holder in all property and collateral, both registered and unregistered belonging to the defendant JARO HENRY SMITH. Does anyone here has a claim against me?"
BTW, the FIRST lien holder has a claim that is SUPERIOR to ANY other creditor, so until his claim is satisfied, no one else gets paid. And a person with paramount security interest IS the first lien holder.