Belly of the Beast! pt#2


Ok, still thinking to put all the docs in one post, but I will give you the one to start committing to memory in this one.
If you can't pull these words, or words similar, out of your head, you won't like what happens to you when you begin to resist enslavement.


Lucky you, dear reader, you are about to get an excellent, free, and just for steem, lesson in how to stand up in court and defend your right to not be molested by the state, if you have created no victim.

As most laws are similar, this lesson is valid in most countries.
And all legitimate courts.

As long as your 'crime' doesn't have somebody in court that can/will claim that your actions caused them harm, the marcratic method is just for you!
Get the package.

Don't forget the course in how to make case winning paperwork!


DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF ___________ SITTING IN AND FOR ______whatever county_____
(Look at local rules for styling templates)


) No. -27529

Verified Motion to strike/dismiss complaint and request for full finding of fact and conclusions of law

Now Comes ____________ by special appearance, participating under threat, duress and coercion, not submitting to the court’s jurisdiction, who hereby moves this court to strike/dismiss the complaint filed by ___insert cop name or department____ for failure to present a cause of action or crime.  Failure to present the court a case deprives the court of jurisdiction.  Grounds are further set forth below.  The court is further requested to provide a full findings of fact and conclusions of law if the court denies this motion.  

No case, crime or cause of action.

  1. Miller v State 1992okcr8, 827p2nd875

  2. An information which does not recite facts to allege every essential element of the crime charged fails to charge a crime, and therefore, fails to confer subject matter jurisdiction on the trial court.

  3. ¶10 This pleading requirement has long been held by this Court to be constitutional. In Fletcher we held the due process clause of the Oklahoma Constitution Article II, § 16 requires notice of all the elements of the specific offense charged. Driving the point home the Court asked rhetorically,

  4. Who will contend this is done when the Indictment or Information does not contain a statement of all the particulars essential to constitute an offense or crime?

  5. ¶15 Our holding that the Information must charge all essential elements of the crime has been grounded on Section 401, Stokes, 189 P.2d at 428-9; Fish, 505 P.2d at 494; City of Tulsa v. Haley, 554 P.2d at 103-4; Section 402, Stokes, supra; City of Tulsa, supra; Sparkman, 93 P.2d at 1100; Section 409; Dunbar, 131 P.2d at 122; Wilds, 545 P.2d at 783; and sections 406, 407 and 410; Sparkman, supra.

  6. ¶17 Furthermore, the failure to "state all the particulars" to constitute a crime renders an Information void, Fletcher, 101 P. at 605, and "so fundamentally defective" that it is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on the trial court. Chandler v. State, 96 Okl.Cr. 344, 255 P.2d 299, 301-2 (1953). Therefore, an Information which does not recite facts to allege every material element of the crime charged fails to charge the crime, and therefore fails to confer subject matter jurisdiction on the district court. A challenge to subject matter jurisdiction may be raised for the first time on appeal. Buis v. State, 792 P.2d 427 (Okl.Cr. 1990). This Court has long recognized that the failure to allege the elements of the crime can be raised for the first time on appeal as an exception to the general waiver rule. Smith v. State, 152 P.2d 279, 281 (Okl.Cr. 1944); City of Tulsa, 554 P.2d at 103; Nickell v. State, 562 P.2d 151 (Okl.Cr. 1977); Short v. State, 634 P.2d 755, 757 (Okl.Cr. 1981); Byrne v. State, 620 P.2d 1328 (Okl.Cr. 1980); Laughton v. State, 558 P.2d 1171 (Okl.Cr. 1977).

  7. The foundation for the court’s jurisdiction is the purpose of American government itself, this is in the Declaration of Independence of 1776:
    “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." (emphasis added).

    This is applicable to Oklahoma governments through the Act of 1906. This is also shown in several other state constitutions regarding the establishment of American governments: “governments…are established to protect and maintain individual rights.” See Arizona, Washington and Minnesota. From Oklahoma regarding the courts specifically:
    “The judicial power here conferred by the Constitution is the power to hear and determine those matters which affect the life, liberty, or property of the citizens of the state…” City of Sapulpa v. Land, 223 P. 640, 644, 101 Okl 22.

    This is why to have a case or cause of action; a plaintiff must plead the violation of a legal right:
    “the duty of this court, as of every judicial tribunal, is limited to determining rights of persons or of property, which are actually controverted in the particular case before it.” Tyler v. Judges of the Court of Registration, 179 U.S. 405, 21 SCt. 206, 208.

“Judicial power is authority to hear and determine, where the rights or persons or property, or the propriety of doing an act, are the subject-matter of adjudication…” Ward v. Board of Com’rs, 246 P. 376, 378 [quoting In re Courthouse of Okmulgee County, 161 P. 200.

The basic elements of a case or cause of action is the violation of a legal right and loss or harm.  The alleged plaintiff, a legal fiction at best, ostensibly acting through a Deputy Sheriff has not pled any violation of a legal right or harm.  Legally there is no cause of action:

“At a minimum standing is composed of three elements. These components are: (1) a legally protected interest which must have been injured in fact-i.e., an injury which is actual, concrete and not conjectural in nature, (2) a causal nexus between the injury and the complained conduct, and (3) a likelihood as opposed to mere speculation, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision…Finally, assessment of standing is not a decision on the merits. Rather, it is a determination whether the plaintiff is the proper party to seek adjudication of the asserted issue.” Cities Servies Co. v. Gulf Oil Corp., 976 P.2d 545, 547.

This includes proceedings like these allegedly criminal in nature:

"Causation consists of two distinct sub elements. As legal scholars have recognized, before a defendant can be convicted of a crime that includes an element of causation, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's conduct was (1) the "cause in fact" and (2) the "legal cause" (often called "proximate cause") of the relevant harm...In order to establish that a defendant's conduct was the "cause in fact" of a particular harm, the State usually must demonstrate that "but for" the defendant's conduct, the harm would not have occurred." Eversly v. State, 748 So.2d 963, 966-967 (Fla. 1999).

“It is a fundamental principle of law that no person be adjudged guilty of a crime until the state has shown that a crime has been committed. The state therefore must show that a harm has been suffered of the type contemplated by the charges (for example, a death in the case of a murder charge or a loss of property in the case of a theft charge), and that such harm was incurred due to the criminal agency of another. Thus, it is sufficient if the elements of the underlying crime are proven rather than those of the particular degree or variation of that crime which may be charged.” State v. Allen, 335 So. 2d 823,825 (Fla. 1976).

Even if the absurd claim is made harm is not a necessary element of a real crime, the complaint is still fatally flawed as there is no accusation alleged defendant violated any one’s legal rights.
If there were a true adversary against alleged defendant, it would be laughable to even try to discuss causation because defendant is not accused of causing anything, real or imagined.
2.  No corpus delecti.  The corpus delecti is the “body of the crime” itself.  Virtually every American jurisdiction agrees it’s an absolutely essential element of any crime and is consistent with the stated purpose of American governments:

"In every criminal trial, the prosecution must prove the corpus delecti, or the body of the crime itself - i.e., the fact of injury, loss or harm, and the existence of a criminal agency as its cause." People v. Sapp, 73 P.3d 433, 467 (Cal. 2003) [quoting People v. Alvarez, (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1161, 1168-1169, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 903, 46 P.3d 372.] (Calif).

"In defining 'corpus delecti' Wharton says: 'It is made up of two elements: (1) That a certain result has been produced...(2) That some one is criminally responsible for the result..." McVeigh v. State, 53 S.E.2d 462, 469 (Georgia).

"In order to prove that a crime occurred, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) the basic injury..., (2) the fact that the basic injury was the result of a criminal, rather than a natural or accidental cause..." State v. Libero, 83 P.3d 753, 763 (2003), [quoting State v. Dudoit, 55 Haw. 1, 2, 514 P.2d 373, 374 (1973)] (Hawaii).

“Occurrence of injury or loss, and its causation by criminal conduct, are termed the “corpus delecti.” People v. Assenato, 586 N.E.2d 445, 448, 166 Ill.Dec. 487, 490. (Illinois).

"While the corpus delecti must be proved beyond a reasonable may be established by circumstantial evidence..." James v. State, 248 A.2d 910, 912. (Maryland)

“Criminal responsibility is imposed on the basis of the intentional doing of an act with awareness of the probability that the act will result in substantial damage, regardless of whether the injury turns out to be minor or insignificant.” Com. v. Ruddock, 520 N.E.2d 501. (Massachusettes)

“The term “corpus delecti” embraces occurrence of loss or injury and criminal causation thereof.” State v. Hill, 221 A.2d 725, 728, 47 N.J. 490. (New Jersey)

“It has long been fundamental to the criminal jurisprudence of this Commonwealth that a necessary predicate to any conviction if proof of the corpus delecti, i.e., the occurrence of any injury or loss and someone's criminality as the source of this injury or loss. See Commonwealth v. Burns, 490 Pa. 619, 627, 187 A.2d 552, 556-557 (1963); Commonwealth v. Turza, 340 Pa. 128, 133, 16 A.2d 401, 404 (1940)." Commonwealth v. Maybee, 239 A.2d 332, 333. (Pennsylvania)

“The corpus delecti of a crime consists of two elements: (1) the fact of the injury or loss or harm, and (2) the existence of a criminal agency as its cause [citations omitted] there must be sufficient proof of both elements of the corpus delecti beyond a reasonable doubt.” 29A American Jurisprudence Second Ed., Evidence § 1476.

And from Oklahoma:

“Corpus delecti means the body or substance of the crime charged. 27 Wharton’s Criminal Law 142 (14th ed. 1978). It consists of two elements: a criminally prohibited injury and a criminally prohibited act as its cause.” Fontenot v. State, 881 P.2d 69, 77 (Okl.Cr. 1994).

This is not the same as the “corpus delecti rule” which is not an element of the alleged crime, but a procedural rule.

There is no corpus delecti pled in the complaint. Without a corpus delecti there is no crime:
“Component parts of every crime are the occurrence of a specific kind of injury or loss, somebody’s criminality as source of the loss, and the accused’s identity as the doer of the crime; the first two elements are what constitutes the concept of “corpus delecti.” U.S. v. Shunk, 881 F.2d 917, 919 C.A. 10 (Utah).

3.  Lack of jurisdiction.  “Standing represents a jurisdictional requirement which remains open to review at all stages of the litigation.”  National Organization for Women, Inc., v. Scheidler, 510 US 249.  Without a cause of action (legal injury pled) there is no jurisdiction:

“Judicial power, on the other hand, is authority to hear and determine where the rights of persons or property, or the propriety of doing an act, are the subject-matter of adjudication and the judicial act involves the exercise of judgment or discretion. Ward v. Board of Commissioners of Okfuskee County, 114 Okl. 246, 246 P. 376.” Geauga Lake Improvement Ass’n v. Lozier, 182 N.E. 489, 491.

Because there is no corpus delecti, there is no crime. Yes, there may be a so-called “crime” alleged on paper, but the allegation fails to meet every legal standard of what a crime is. Also, because American governments are established for the sole purpose of protecting rights, a true crime requires the violation of a legal right. Alleged defendant is not accused of violating anyone’s legal rights, therefore, there is no crime/case or cause of action pled and the court has no jurisdiction.

  1. The complaint is “unfit for adjudication”. Because American courts are adversary systems, the complaint is “unfit for adjudication”:
    “The [Supreme] Court has found unfit for adjudication any cause that "is not in any real sense adversary," that "does not assume the `honest and actual antagonistic assertion of rights' to be adjudicated…” Poe v. Ullman, 367 U.S. 497, 505 (1961).

Even if the phrase corpus delecti is not used, there is no doubt this is not an adversary proceeding as there are no allegations I violated any legal rights.

  1. No evidence of presence within State and laws applicable. There are no facts pled to prove the laws of the state are applicable to me. Such evidence is essential to prove jurisdiction.
    Mere geographic location is not evidence of presence within the alleged plaintiff, State of Oklahoma. It’s impossible to prove my presence within the alleged plaintiff beyond a reasonable doubt or a preponderance of evidence. The State of Oklahoma, while obviously not geographic, is at best political as it did not exist prior to November 16, 1907.
    The phrase ‘State of Oklahoma’ appears to be not much more than a dba or pseudonym for lawyers and police officers.
    As the laws of the state only apply within the state, there is no evidence, and nothing alleged, the law of the state apply to me.
    If this is a criminal proceeding, then the assigned judge is obligated to presume my innocence until it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The judge may not assume the law is applicable because it is an essential element of the alleged crime.
    Also, the argument the laws apply to me simply because I'm physically in an area commonly known as Oklahoma has no factual support. All the court has at this point is an allegation I violated the laws of the “state”, that allegation is not evidence the laws apply simply because I am alleged to be physically in “Oklahoma”. At best, all the prosecution has done is offer more argument and opinion, no facts, proving the laws of the “state” apply to me simply because I am alleged to physically be within “The State of Oklahoma”. The record is devoid of any such facts. “The State of Oklahoma” is a legal fiction, at best. I contend it is physically impossible to exist with a fictitious creation.
    1. Court’s jurisdiction not enlarged by police authority. The jurisdiction of the court is limited to protecting rights; this is not enlarged by alleging the police have authority to issue allegations. Such authority does not work to trump fundamental limitations on the courts.
      No amount of police authority may enlarge the limits of the adversary system. Adversary systems require true adversaries, this requires the allegation and proof of injury. The plaintiff has failed to offer proof of injury. Yes, police may have authority to issue allegations, the state must still allege injury for the court to proceed with jurisdiction.

Because the plaintiff has failed to allege the required elements of a cause of action/crime and there is no corpus delecti, the Court has no jurisdiction. As such, the court should either strike the complaint filed against the alleged defendant, or dismiss it.

Under penalty of perjury I attest that the above stated facts and citations of law are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.

Submitted this ___ day of _______ 20___.


---next page----

DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF ___________ SITTING IN AND FOR ______whatever county_____
(Look at local rules for styling templates)

State of Oklahoma


This matter, having come before the Court on defendant’s motion to dismiss; the Court being fully advised of the premises and good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED granting defendant’s motion to dismiss with prejudice.

_________________________ Date: ___________________


I know that was a lot of typing, I've done it once, then I just changed the venue, date, and case number.
Last time I took felonies to misdemeanors.

I was overcharged because the original da was, and probably still is, a self entitled d**khead.
He likes hurting things weaker than him.

Then, I got no fines and no additional time for taking the plea.
Well, that and a summer at my aunt's lake house instead of jail.

When you put in a motion ahead of time, have the order for the judge to sign handy, too.
You don't file it with the clerk, but do bring copies for the da, judge, and clerk.
Everything you do will have 4 copies, if you want one.
You are responsible for seeing that each of the listed state agents has a copy.
Fail to do so will have the court of appeals throwing out your case.

The formatting translation of this document sucks.
I can email you an editable copy.
But I do ask that you support @marcstevens with a donation.

The prepared resistor has a friend on the outside to drop these docs on the court clerk.
Get the package ready, your friend need only file them with the court clerk.

Good luck getting that done from behind a locked door.

It can be done, but you will likely have to put down your purse and kick the door like a man.
I've found that mule kicks work best, especially if you can brace yourself with your hands.

This post is entirely tldr.
I'm afraid this will take more posts than I had anticipated.

Lucky you, dear reader,....
I can be reached in discord with this same name, if you prefer to keep things more private.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  trending

It is good to see jurisdiction challenged. Courts expect their victims to be rollovers and minions, kowtowing to their authority.


I upvoted this for fun. Not because I agreed with any of it.


Yeah, the formatting really sucks.

Congratulations @freebornangel! You have completed the following achievement on the Steem blockchain and have been rewarded with new badge(s) :

You distributed more than 62000 upvotes. Your next target is to reach 63000 upvotes.

You can view your badges on your Steem Board and compare to others on the Steem Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word STOP

To support your work, I also upvoted your post!

Vote for @Steemitboard as a witness to get one more award and increased upvotes!

Resteemed. I wish more people understood jurisdiction. Resteemed

Posted using Partiko Android