I, me, Ralph Xxxxx: Xxxxx, Declare I am giving notice that I am rescinding, removing, revoking by cancellation of my signature from all documents held by or in the possession of the Corporation known as the DALLAS COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT, DALLAS COUNTY, DALLAS COUNTY DETENTION CENTER, CITY OF GARLAND, THE STATE OF TEXAS, and any agencies including and not limited to THE CITY OF GARLAND, any agents of the Crown with the title of Nobility of Esquire for commercial fraud, deceptive practice and failure of full disclosure to me.
[Criminal Complaint Posted March 3, 2004]
SECOND AND MANDATORY BY LAW AND MUST BE HEARD AND TRIED BY JURY
Verified Non-negotiable Civil and Criminal Complaint by Declaration in the nature of an Affidavit. Presented by me the undersigned addressee, Ralph-Kenneth: Evans one of we the People of the several united States under original common law jurisdiction in the county of Dallas Texas court of record Art 5 Section 15 1876 Texas Constitution. Demand is made for trial by jury by law in the county court of record of the County of Dallas, Texas pursuant to the original law and original jurisdiction.
EQUALITY IS MANDATORY AND MANDATED BY LAW
In the Matter of claim numbers 2000890143 and 890143 conceived in fraud and remains in fraud this Verified Non-negotiable Civil and Criminal Complaint by Declaration is against : Commissioner of the Texas Veteran land Board and agents acting in collusion with: SECURITY Bank N. A. officers heirs agents and assigns and TEMPLE-INLAND CORPORATION, officers heirs agents and assigns and
GUARANTY Residential Lending, GUARANTY Bank officers heirs, agents and assigns and
Ronald E. Shults, Traci Mahan, Caroline Jones and Dee Dee Proctor (herein after Respondents)
Mailed by first class to the third party debt collectors:
GUARANTY Residential Lending
1300 S. Mopac Expressway
Austin, Texas 78746
And county Judge and county clerk county of Dallas, Texas
Under the Laws of the Republic and Texas a Commercial STATE the peoples Bill of Rights preserved by the Laws of the Commercial State of Texas Article one of the 1876 Constitution for the Commercial State of Texas as published in the 2003 edition.
This court has Original Jurisdiction under the above entitled heading (law of the land, the rules of Common Law).
I, me, Ralph-Kenneth: Evans the undersigned one of the People, Sovereign, living soul, the posterity, born upon the land in the one of several counties within the one of the several States united of America. I, me, the undersigned (hereinafter I, myself, me, Petitioner,) does hereby solemnly declare, say, and state:
1. I, me, the Petitioner competent to state the matters set forth herewith.
2. Petitioner has personal knowledge of the facts stated herein.
3. All the facts stated herein are true, correct and certain, admissible as evidence, and if testifying in a court of competent jurisdiction I, me, the Petitioner shall so state.
Plain Statement of Facts by declaration.
A matter must be expressed to be resolve. In commerce truth is sovereign. Truth is expressed in the form of an Declaration/Affidavit. An unrebutted Declaration/Affidavit stands as Truth in commerce. An unrebutted Declaration/Affidavit becomes the judgment in commerce. A Declaration/Affidavit of Truth, under commercial law, can only be satisfied: by a rebuttal Declaration/Affidavit of truth, by payment, by agreement, by resolution by a jury according to the rules of Common Law.
I, me, me the Petitioner am expressing truth by this Verified Non-negotiable Civil and Criminal Complaint by Declaration in the nature of an Affidavit and is Presented by me the undersigned Petitioner.
WHEREAS, the public record is the highest form of evidence, I me, one of the Secured Parties am hereby timely creating public record by Declaration with this Verified Non-negotiable Civil and Criminal Complaint by Declaration in the nature of an Affidavit.
For: Willful, corruptly, knowingly, by arbitrary and caprices acts, without certain exchange of consideration for Libel, with dolus malus, misapplication of corporation statute upon a man, causing crimes against a man by agents violating the terms and conditions of the Corporate Policy and Procedures and the Substantive Rights of me the Petitioner In violation of the Reseatment Act of Texas Legislators to the U.S. Congress March 30, 1870 and the Constitution of 1836 and 1876, Bill of Rights the organic Law of the Land of Texas.
I, me, the undersigned, the Petitioner, hereby make this Declaration for Civil and Criminal Complaint in the nature of an affidavit for and on the behalf of and as myself. I hereby Declare and certify under the Federal law Title 28 USC 1746 (1) and James 5: 12 when there is no conflict. I, me, Petitioner rebut any and all assumptions that I am of diminished capacity. I, am of sound mind, I am over the age of 65, I am not a ward of the state, I am not a member of any social subversive group, I am not required by law to have a guardian, trustee or any other commercial agent to represent me or to relinquish my power of attorney to any other party. I hold claim by title to land in the county of Dallas, Texas and no party has stepped forward to dispute my title. I am capable of managing my own affairs and speaking as my self. I declare I am over the age of sixty-five, of good moral character, have firsthand knowledge, and am competent to testify to the following facts. The facts stated herein are true, correct, and not misleading to the best of my knowledge and belief, and show the following:
In the Matter of claim numbers 2000890143 and 890143 conceived in fraud and remains in fraud The Respondents through their agents Ronald E. Shults, Traci Mahan, Caroline Jones and Dee Dee Proctor have refused settlement of their claim by refusing to accept funds and release to me the said promissory note secured by a deed on a commercial address fraudulently claiming the deed is on the land when in fact it is only on the commercial address known as BEING LOT 6 IN BLOCK A OF REPLAT OF MALLARD COVE, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ROWLETT TEXAS, ACCORDING TO THE REVISED MAP RECORDED IN VOLUME 86218, PAGE 3007 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS, TOGETHER WITH CERTIFICATE OF CORRECTION RECORDED IN VOLUME 87124, PACE 1713 OF THE DEED RECORDS OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
which has the address of 3424 MALLARD PARK
ROWLETT, TEXAS FEDERAL ZONE 75088
and using it and the fraudulent note for holding me and my property in slavery.
Facts
- There was/is fraudulent concealment of material facts in the promissory note and deed.
- The alleged lender endorsed the Promissory Note and deposited it like a check thereby altering it after it was signed and did not disclose this fact to the alleged borrower.
- The lender used the endorsed Promissory Note to fund the alleged loan to the alleged borrowers by drafting out of the deposit account and calling it a loan and charging interest on it.
- There was no consideration given on the alleged lenders part for the Promissory Note. For a binding contract to be created, consideration must be legally sufficient. To be legally sufficient consideration for a promise must be legally detrimental to the promisee. In this case the promisee (alleged lender) had no cost and no risk.
- Bookkeeping entries according to GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) show that the alleged lender deposited the Promissory Note of the alleged borrowers+ and increased both their assets and their liabilities.
- There was no explanation of material facts. Therefore, alleged borrowers did not understand the true terms of the note. Therefore there is no agreement. The promise to loan the alleged lenders money or other depositors money is illusionary without consideration and unenforceable.
- GAAP (generally accepted accounting principles) require that the Respondents liability created from the promissory note shows that the Respondents owes the alleged borrowers an amount equal to the debt.
- There has been no validation of this debt sent to us which would comply with the Fair Debt Collection Practices and Fair Debt Credit Reporting Acts.
Declaration and SUMMARY OF DAMAGES BY Respondents:
1. Respondents made the alleged borrower, RALPH K. EVANS Copyright and REBECCA H. EVANS Copyright, depositors by depositing approximately 185,000.00 Dollars negotiable instrument, which the Respondents sold or had available to sell for approximately 185,000.00 Dollars in legal tender. The Respondents did not credit the borrowers transaction account showing the Respondents owed the borrower the 185,000.00 Dollars. Rather, the Respondents claimed that the alleged borrowers owed the Respondents the 185,000.00 Dollars, then placed a lien on the real property for 185,000.00 Dollars using a fraudulent deed on a commercial address and demanded loan payments or the Respondents would foreclose on the real land.
2. The Respondents deposited a non-legal tender negotiable instrument and exchanged it for another no-legal tender check, which traded like money, using the deposited negotiable instrument as the money deposited. The Respondents changed the currency without the borrowers authorization. First by depositing non legal tender from which to issue a check (which is non-legal tender) and using the negotiable instrument (the borrowers mortgage note), to exchange for legal tender, the Respondents needed to make the check appear to be backed by legal tender. No loan ever took place.
3. The transaction that took place was merely a change of currency (without authorization), a negotiable instrument for a check. The negotiable instrument was the money, which was exchanged for legal tender to make the check good. An exchange is not a loan. The Respondents exchanged 185,000.00 Dollars for 185,000.00 Dollars. There was no need to go to the Respondents any money. The borrowers did not receive a loan, the borrowers lost 185,000.00 Dollars in value to the Respondents, which the Respondents kept and recorded as a Respondents asset and never loaned any of the Respondents money.
4. The damages are 185,000.00 Dollars plus interest payments, which the Respondents demanded by mail The Respondents illegally placed a lien on the property using a fraudulent deed and then threatened to foreclose, further damaging the alleged borrowers, when and if the payments were not made.
5. The depositor being me. am owed money for the deposit and the alleged borrowers are owed money for the loan the Respondents never made and yet placed a lien on the real property demanding payment.
6. Damages exist in that the Respondents refused to loan their money. The Respondents denies the alleged borrowers equal protection under the law and contract, by merely exchanging one currency for another and refusing repayment in the same type of currency deposited. The Respondents refused to fulfill the contract by not loaning the money, and by the Respondents refusing to be repaid in the same currency, which they deposited as an exchange for another currency. A debt tender offered and refused is a debt paid to the extent of the offer. The Respondents has no authorization to alter the alleged contract and to refuse to perform by not loaning money, by changing the currency and then refusing repayment in what the Respondents has a written policy to deposit.
7. The money deposited for the check issued came from me not the Respondents. The Respondents has no right to the mortgage note until the Respondents performs by loaning the money.
8. In the transaction the Respondents was to loan legal tender to the borrowers, in order for the Respondents to secure a lien. The Respondents never made the loan, but kept the mortgage note the alleged borrowers signed. This allowed the Respondents to obtain the equity in the property (by a lien) and transfer the wealth of the property to the Respondents without the Respondents investment, loan, or risk of money. Then the Respondents received my labor to pay principal and Usury interest. What the borrowers owned or should have owned debt free, the Respondents obtained ownership in, and for free, in exchange for me receiving a debt, paying interest to the Respondents, all because the Respondents refused to loan money and merely exchanged one currency for another. This placed me in perpetual slavery to the Respondents because the Respondents refuses to perform under the contract. The lien forces payment by threat of foreclosure. The mail is used to extort payment on a contract the Respondents never fulfilled.
9. The Respondents refused to perform, so they must return the mortgage note and have refuse even after I offered to fund the debt with a certified check in full so I could be release from slavery to the Respondents. If the Respondents had wished to perform, then they must make the loan. The past payments must be returned because the Respondents had not right to lien the property and extort interest payments.
10. The Respondents has no right to sell a mortgage note for two reasons. The mortgage note was deposited and the money withdrawn without authorization by using forged signatures and; two, the contract was never fulfilled. The Respondents acted without authorization and is involved in a fraud thereby damaging me and the alleged borrowers.
11. The check was written without deducting funds from the Savings Accounts or Certificates of Deposits of the Respondents, allowing the mortgage note to become the new pool of money owed. The Respondents sold the mortgage note for Federal Reserve notes or other assets while still owing the liability for the mortgage note sold and without the Respondents giving up any Federal Reserve notes. If the Respondents had to part with the Federal Reserve notes, and without the benefit of checks to hide the fraudulent conversion of the mortgage note from which it issues the check, the Respondents fraud would be exposed. Federal Reserve notes are the only money called legal tender. If only Federal Reserve notes are deposited for credit and if the Respondents wrote a check for the mortgage note, the check then transfers Federal Reserve notes and the Respondents gives the borrower Respondents asset. There is no increase in the check book money supply that exists in the loan process. The Respondents policy is to increase Respondents liabilities by the mortgage note. If the mortgage note is money, then the Respondents never gave up any of Respondents asset. The Respondents simply used fraudulent conversion of ownership of the mortgage note. The Respondents cannot own the mortgage note until the Respondents fulfills the contract.
12. The check is not the money; the money is the deposit that makes the check good. In this case, the mortgage note is the money from which the check was issued. Who owned the mortgage note when the mortgage note was deposited? The borrowers owned the mortgage note because the Respondents never paid money for the mortgage note and never loaned money (Respondents asset). The Respondents simply claimed the Respondents owned the mortgage without paying for it and deposited the mortgage note from which the check was issued. This was fraudulent conversion. The Respondents risked nothing. Not even one penny was invested. They never took money out of any account, in order to own the mortgage note, as proven by the bookkeeping entries, financial ratios, the balance sheet, and of course the Respondents literature. The Respondents simply never complied with the contract.
13. If the mortgage note is not money, then the check is check kiting and the Respondents is insolvent and the Respondents still never paid. If the mortgage note is money, the Respondents took the borrowers money without showing the deposit, and without paying for it, which is fraudulent conversion. The Respondents claimed it owned the mortgage note without paying for it, then sold the mortgage note, took the cash and never used the cash to pay the liability it owned for the check the Respondents issued. The liability means that the Respondents still owes the money. The Respondents must return the mortgage note or the cash it received in the sale, in order to pay the liability. Even if the Respondents did this, the Respondents still never loaned the borrowers the Respondents money, which is what loan means. The check is not the money but merely an order to pay money. If the mortgage note is money then the Respondents must pay the check by returning the mortgage note. The check issued could only be redeemed in Federal Reserve notes, which the Respondents obtained by selling the mortgage note that they paid nothing for. This is fraudulent conversion making the contract, which the Respondents created with their policy of bookkeeping entries, illegal and the alleged contract null and void. The Respondents has no right to the mortgage note or to a lien on any property, until the Respondents performs under the contract.
14. All of the officials and agents, the Respondents, upheld the fraudulent conversion of the mortgage note and the subsequent threat of foreclosure. All dealt with fraudulent documents by the US Mail. All did not perform in their jobs as per the public trust, and all are liable in their job capacity as well as their private individual capacity. Therefore, all their jobs are in jeopardy, all their retirement and benefits are in jeopardy because of damage to me, petitioner and criminal racketeering.
15. Damages exist in that the Respondents refused to loan their money to RALPH K. EVANS Copyright and REBECCA H. EVANS. The Respondents denies us the issuer s equal protection under the law and contract, by merely exchanging one currency for another and refusing repayment in the same type of currency deposited. The Respondents refused to fulfill the contract by not loaning the money, and by the Respondents refusing to be repaid in the same currency, which they deposited as an exchange for another currency. A debt tender offered and refused is a debt paid to the extent of the offer. The Respondents has not authorization to alter the alleged contract and to refuse to perform by not loaning money, by changing the currency and then refusing repayment in what the Respondents has a written policy to deposit.
Verified Non-negotiable Civil and Criminal Complaint by Declaration
PERTAINING TO PUBLIC FRAUD, LAW, MONEY
AND COMMERCIAL LIENS
1. Prior to 1938, all U.S. Supreme Court Decisions were based upon what is termed: Public Law or that system of law that was controlled by Constitutional limitation. After 1938, all U.S. Supreme Court Decisions are based on Public Policy concerning commercial transactions made under the negotiable Instrument Law, as a result of the U.S. Bankruptcy Executive as declared by President Roosevelt on March 9, 1933 and codified at 12 U.S.C.A 95a. and by Executive Orders. This Bankruptcy caused the change from Public Law to Private Commercial Law and was recognized by the UNITED STATES Supreme Court in Erie v. Tompkins (1938). After that case, all the procedures of Law were officially blended with procedures of Equity.
2. The Negotiable Instruments Law is a branch of the international Law Merchant, which is now known as the Uniform Commercial Code, (UCC) that was drafted and made uniform, and adopted in whole or substantially by all commercial states. Black s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition- page 1531. Thus the several commercial states were and are bound into commercial agreements to the federal commercial United States under the Uniform Commercial Code.
3. The several (now 50) commercial States accepted the benefits of federal grants offered by the Federal commercial United States as the consideration of a commercial agreement between themselves. Under the agreement the commercial States (Conference of Governors, March 6, 1933) pledged their full faith and credit and agreed to obey the dictates of the commercial Congress, and assume their portion of the national Debt, collected as your fair share, as an example, in the nature of the unlawful income tax, wherein the IRS operates and collects such taxes under the same UCC.
4. This system of Negotiable paper has bound all commercial corporate entities (cities, municipalities, counties, etc.) of government together to the process/system of the Commercial Venue of Commercial Law as expressed and exercised within the Commercial Lien Process. This nationwide Commercial bond also altered the original (law) status of the Court to nothing more than administrative tribunals merely administering the Respondents bankruptcy (private policy) of debt collection for the Creditors.
5. By and through the Respondents bankruptcy, the UCC, and other acts, commercial Congress in failing to uphold its constitutional duty to provide a lawful medium of exchange (i.e., money backed by silver and gold, or minted coin pursuant to Article 1, section 8, clause 5) have by these various Acts created an abundance of this new type of money called currency commercial credit money to circulate within the Legislative democracy called the commercial United States...of which they are not bound by Constitutional law and limitation.
6. The Commercial Law Venue, compelled upon the people a forced benefit of limited liability for the payment of debt by the use of Federal Reserve notes (debt instruments) where YOUR debts are only discharged, (not paid) in the form of interest-bearing negotiable instruments(Federal Reserve notes, etc.). There is a distinction between a debt discharged and one paid. When discharged the debt still exists, though divested of its character as a legal obligation. Stanek v. White, 215 NWR 781 (1927). Federal Reserve notes are only evidence of debt owed to the Federal Reserve and Federal Reserve Notes are a commercial line on the Federal Reserve banks.
7. Since 1933, by the acts of the bankruptcy and the UCC, the Law has been tainted, or colored, (I.E., color of law) as it were, because the commercial law is operated in conjunction with the Negotiable Instruments Law, wherein the commercial Federal Government by and through the Respondents, can/have declared that a piece of paper has and represent value. Albeit that there is no substance (gold or silver)backing the piece of paper, which the Federal Reserve of Chicago in its publication Modern Money Mechanics, page 3, has in fact declared the use of these debt instruments (Federal Reserve notes) a confidence) game. The substance of the law (property) (I.E. gold, silver, etc.) has been removed, like the substance that is the basis of U.S.A., by and through the UCC, all contracts, agreements, (implied, or otherwise, etc.), applications, permits, etc. where the colorable consideration (Federal Reserve notes) was passed in those contracts, etc., all such contract are then also colored and are not genuine, for no lawful consideration (gold or silver)was paid by either party to the contract to, by Law, pass both the possession and the property to the lawful Buyer. See - Bouviers Dict. Of Law, 1839, TITLE, definition #5. The lawful coin of the United States will pass the property along with the possession.
8. Today, all our courts (sic) sit as Non-Constitutional-Non Article III-Commercial Legislative Tribunals administering the Respondents bankruptcy through their statutes which are in reality commercial obligations for the BENEFIT OR PRIVILEGE OF DISCHARGING YOUR DEBTS WITH THE LIMITED LIABILITY OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE MONOPOLY COLORABLE MONEY NOTES.
9. Under the current colorable legal system, the de-facto (we just do it) legislature has created colorable rights called privileges, imposes, duties, lays down rules of conduct, and the commercial legislative tribunals declare the same as rights. These privileges are granted and given upon the peoples voluntary act of asking permission, then upon providing any colorable consideration (payment = discharge) the people then come under the administrative jurisdiction of Commercial Law.
10. Today in AMERICA, everyone, all governments included, are commercial statutory law merchants dealing in commercial negotiable paper (instruments) under the UCC for the limited liability for the discharge of debts, wherein a debt remains (fraud) and nothing else. The so-called judges are operating only a commercial tribunal to administer their corporate regulations concerning all financial transactions.....both voluntary and those compelled.
11. ALL DEBTS are satisfied by one or both of two ways, a payment, or a promise to pay. Every payment is by substance, and every promise to pay is accomplished by a commercial currency or commercial paper which is technically known as commercial lien. The satisfaction of the debt by providing substance is called paying the debt. The satisfaction of the debt by a written or printed promise to pay the debt is called discharging the debt. All debts are paid by substance. All debts are only discharged by COMMERCIAL CURRENCY, COMMERCIAL POCKET MONEY NOTES, OR OTHER COMMERCIAL LIENS (Negotiable instrument, i.e., Commercial Lien Security/Asset, i.e., UCC-1 Asset).
12. All paper money consists of COMMERCIAL NOTES which declare a debt or obligation and which promise or demand payment. All such evidences of debt or obligations are technically known as COMMERCIAL LIENS. Such notes include currency, for example, Federal Reserve notes, checks, drafts, conditional checks, notes of exchange (paper money/instruments between Parties).
13. A Federal Reserve note is a commercial lien on the Federal Reserve and Respondents. A personal check is a commercial lien on the account of the maker of the check (cheque). A draft is a check (cheque) with a conditional agreement printed above the place of endorsement on the backside of the draft. A note of exchange is a commercial lien between the Parties consisting of one Party demanding payment (discharge) from another Party. A personal check (cheque), while passing from account to account, as a note of exchange is a commercial lien.
14. Banking accounts are backed (supported) either by substance money or by paper money, or by both. The substance money is called collateral. The paper money can be currency (for example, paper money notes), a loan of credit from the Respondents, or checks or other paper money as such, are commercial liens, received from other sources. Therefore the property declared/pledge or claimed to secure the obligation, and damages, is the collateral by and through the Commercial Lien process, which establishes (creates) the credit called commercial credit money.
15. Valid credit currency (commercial lien) can be established by making a valid claim of debt (based on a damage or injury) by an declaration/affidavit in the form of a private security agreement (and other related documents) and by allowing the lien to mature in three (3) months (90 days) into an accounts receivable (under commercial law) by the failure of the lien debtor to contest the agreement/lien by answering or rebutting, by his Declaration/affidavit, on a point for point basis.
16. A lien must contain 1(the names of the party/parties, claimants, and debtors; 2) an affidavit stating the events which created the obligations; 3) a ledger giving a one-to-one correspondence between events and their values; 4) a list of property pledged or claimed to secure the payment (discharge) of the obligations, and 5) any evidence of exhibits in support of the claims made against the debtor.
17. The primary method of establishing a COMMERCIAL LIEN currency/paper/negotiable instrument is to come, 1) a promise to perform; 2) a claim of breach/damage/injury/fraud, etc., and 3) a three month (90 day) default to challenge or rebut the claim/lien on said point for point basis.
18. Commercial Lien/value/currency can be in the form of a Parties check (cheque), a draft, a UCC 1 Security, and its partial assignments....that pass, and are accepted, or circulate as credit money.
19. The people, operating in their private capacity, by and through the remedy provided in the Uniform Commercial Code, pursuant to their collective sovereign capacity, upon injury or damage, may as a matter or right, proceed to utilize the Commercial Law venue against the agents of governments, their creations (corporations) and its officers (accountability = liability) to arrive at the truth and secure damages by the Commercial Lien process (to create and establish the damages in the form of UCC money, i.e., a security, an asset, and liability) supported by the full faith and credit of the United States Federal Government under the Commercial Law and the UCC....America s Federal (and State) Common Law.
20. In the Commercial Venue, TRUTH is sovereign and the sovereign must always tell the TRUTH.
Verified Non-negotiable Civil and Criminal Complaint by Declaration RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
1. This serves as notice to the court, and all officers of the court, and all other public servants, and all other people and persons that are working for, or on behalf of any public trust corporation, that Ralph-Kenneth: Evans and Rebecca H. Evans, know that we have Rights that we can demand to have protected at all times, both by the court and the police departments who follow its policies. This document serves as notice that we hereby reserve all our rights without prejudice and order all courts and related people and persons to recognize, honor, and protect All Our Rights, both today, and forever, as is in accordance with the Constitutions. Furthermore a Quo Warranto is placed upon all actions that are taken against us that might cause us legal disability, be it now or at any time in the future.
2. This is official notice that we Reserve All Our Rights Without Prejudice. We refuse this or any other court, public servant or person, the Right to take any liberties with our rights. We do not consent in any way to have our rights infringed upon. We do not give permission to construe anything we say or do as permission to Prejudice any of our Rights. Any lack of knowledge of the Law on our part at this time relating to Our Rights shall not be construed as permission to take any liberties with any of our Rights. Before Creator God, we make and proclaim this statement of Our Reservation of Rights as fact and order all public service people and persons to abide by it.
3. Any infringement upon our Rights shall serve as prima facie evidence of Intent to Violate the Law and as a threat of violence. If any action is taken against us that cause us a disability and it is later determined that said actions, lack thereof, or any part thereof, are based on policy and not Law, this document shall serve as prima facie evidence of intent to willfully violate the Law. Each violation of our Rights shall create a separate claim for damages, which shall be deemed immediately due and payable to the injured party.
4. Administrative laws relevant to rights violation by public servants include simulating legal process. (1) A person commits the crime of simulating legal process if the person knowingly issues or delivers to another person any document that in form and substance falsely simulates civil or criminal process. (a) Civil or criminal process means a document or order, including, but not limited to, a summons, lien, fraudulent deed, complaint, warrant, injunction, writ, notice, pleading or subpoena, that is issued by a court or that is filed or recorded for the purpose of: (A) Exercising jurisdiction; (B) Representing a claim against a person or property; (C) Directing a person to appear before a court or tribunal; or (D) Directing persons to perform or refrain from performing a specified act. (b) Person has the meaning given except that in relation to a defendant; person means a human being, a public or private corporation, an unincorporated association, or a partnership. (3) Simulating legal process: (a) A public servant commits the crime of official misconduct in the first degree if with intent to obtain a benefit or to harm another; (a) The public servant knowingly fails to perform a duty imposed upon the public servant by Law or one clearly inherent in the nature of office; or (b) The public servant knowingly performs an act constituting an unauthorized exercise in official duties. (2) Official misconduct All officers of the court and peace officers, such as the sheriff and deputies and all municipal private peace officers, such as all people hired for that purpose by a public corporation, such as City and State Police, are deemed to have a duty to know and uphold the law and protect the rights of the people around them.
5. The Respondent have simulated legal processes against me, Ralph-Kenneth: Evans , Rebecca Harrell: Evans and the private copyrighted property of Ralph-Kenneth: Evans known as RALPH K. EVANS and REBECCA H. EVANS, all based on the fraudulent document and processes of the Respondents. In so doing they have caused spurious liens to be filed against my private property. They have knowingly performed official misconduct in their official capacities. When it was their duty to know and uphold the law and protect my rights. The Respondents issued and delivered documents that in form and substance falsely simulated civil and/or criminal process.
6. The Respondents have and are violating my Rights by aiding others that have and are violating our rights and have and are acting in collusion with Public Servant Who Has the Legal Duty and Power to Protect Those Rights Such crime shall serve as prima facie evidence that said Public Servants did intend to, and created claims on behalf of the other Respondents. The Very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials, and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. Ones right to life, liberty and property, to free speech, free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections. Qualified immunity defense fails of public officer violates clearly established right, because a reasonably competent official should know Law governing this conduct.
7. Rights are neither accorded to the passive resistant, nor the person who is ignorant of his Rights, nor to the one indifferent thereto. It is a fighting clause. Its benefits can only be retained by sustained combat. It cannot be claimed by an attorney or solicitor. It is valid only when insisted upon by belligerent claimants in person. All Rights Reserved: When we use Without Prejudice UCC 1-207 in connection with our signatures, we are saying: We reserve our right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that we did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And furthermore, we do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement. The Sufficiency of the Reservation: any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights is sufficient, such as All Rights Reserved. The making of a valid Reservation of Right reserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such right by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel.
8. This Verified Non-negotiable Civil and Criminal Complaint by Declaration is in Law, and Must Be Adjudicated by Law. Any and All Public Servants Who Have Taken an Oath to Uphold the constitutions of the state and the united States but shall not be avoided for lack of an oath. Further, Authorities: Whereas, the exercise of a natural right needs no authority in Texas other than the Constitution.
9. We reserve all rights given us by God and protected by the Constitution for the Republican Union, and the republic and a state called Texas which places definite and unbridgeable limits upon the law making and enforcement abilities of any government body or corporate entity operating in accordance with and under color of American Law.
10. If the Respondents attempt to rebut this Declaration by me, I, reserve and exercise my sovereign power to demand that the Respondents provide full disclosure of the source of the authority and the principal they are acting under and for upon which all actions were taken. Full disclosure means: absolute in detail from its source.
11. Under American Law, I, me, recognize that codes, rules and statutes are only administrative in nature and are not the actual Constitutional Laws with proper enacting clauses. Such codes, rules and statutes, as applied as mandatory obligatory conditions to me in which I am placed under a legal disability over my objection, or through fraud and deception, are acts of slavery.
12. I, me, object to, and reserve the Right not to be subjected to slavery and reserve all Lawful Rights of redress for any act of slavery imposed upon my body, labor and/or other properties.
13. I, Further declare: the county Judge and county Commissioners of Dallas, Texas refuses to convene the court of record and bring this to trial disclose to me what system of law other than the Constitutional Common Law in which Ralph-Kenneth: Evans have Rights secure in the Bill of Rights , are they operating under.
A. Exactly the system of law the Respondents, are operating under.
B. How that system of law(s) applies to me, who understand himself to be a Man with all the Rights given to me by God and protected by the Constitutions for the republic and Texas a commercial STATE.
14. I, me further remind the commissioners the Judge of the county court of record of the county of Dallas that pursuant to law, actors engaged in any form of slavery lose all immunities from criminal prosecution and civil judgments, and any corporation, municipal or otherwise, that condones any act of slavery by any of its agents or employees or the Respondents is subject to civil and criminal judgments under the law.
15. Relief demanded: I Ralph-Kenneth: Evans Declare the jury is to determine the facts and the law as in other cases. The jury is to assess the penalties both civil and criminal.
Executed pursuant to title 28 USC 1746 (1)
by____________________________________________ this 21st day of February 2004.
Before me, the undersigned officer in and for said county and state, personally appeared Ralph-Kenneth: Evans , known to me (or satisfactorily proven) to be the man who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same for the purposes contained there of his own free will..
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal this ________day of ___________, 2004.
___________________________________________
All replies must be sent to: Notary Public 3352 Broadway Blvd. # 504 Garland, Texas 75043
[Full Disclosure N-D Posted March 3, 2004]
RONALD E. SHULTS, CFE
Vice President and Director of Security
Guaranty Bank
8333 Douglas Avenue
Dallas, TX 75225
Commerce operates in truth demand for truth is made of all parties for full disclosure this date February 25, 2004. Equality is paramount and mandatory by law.
Notice and demand for full disclosure
Dear RONALD E. SHULTS, CFE and Esquire Caroline Jones
You, RONALD E. SHULTS, CFE have noticed me to send all such responses to you. Therefore in the matter of the letter signed by Caroline C. Jones your third party debt collector stating that I the living man and not the fiction RALPH K. EVANS owed the debt in the matter of your claim number 890143 of a balance owed in the amount of 127,952.10 which I assume includes a late charge for the refused payment and the secondary P&I amount of 308.20. Therefore from your papers the alleged statement of the account owed by me for the Fictions is 127,952.10 plus 308.20 for a total amount of 128,260.30 or is your statement false and misleading. If so I again demand to know pursuant to my right to know the amount of the debt what the debt is denominated in and where can the payment be delivered and the original present day note and title be pickup by us.
You informed me the note is in a vault in Austin and I offered to take the funds to Austin and pick up the note and you refused to allow me settlement or delivery of said note to me.
I then made an agreement with third parties and gave them authority as my assigns to make settlement with you on my behalf you also refuse settlement with them obstructing my right to private contract with other parties for a private venture using said property.
It is evident from your refusal of settlement that it is your intent to hold me and my private property (that was discharge to me by the Supreme Court of Texas) in bondage to an alleged 8% note in a 4% market.
I demand to know per my right to know the following:
Who is the principal you represent?
