Josephine County Oregon Courts and Jail: Halls of Justice or Den of Vipers?

Dialogues With A Christ - The Wisdom of Divine Anarchy

If you are ready to invite
and assist in ushering in a New
Consciousness on this Planet, then
welcome to our Spiritual Dialogue
Board

I just read something fascinating on Mr. Karczewski

By RichardChristy

Wed, 07/22/2009 - 17:04

Written by someone alleging to be his brother. The full text can be read at http://dbaspot.com/forums/linux-misc/247252-raymond-karczewski-brother-t...

"As you can see, Ray is a troubled man. He has been suffering from
schizophrenia since early adulthood, his brain is also ravaged by
syphilis... My niece Kasia and I succeeded in having him
committed to the psychiatric facility in Salem for a week but after he
was stabilized last month, he was released and immediately went off
his medication.

Ray, if you are reading this and you wish to discuss these matters
privately, then email me at abraham.karczewski@googlemail.com. Until
you make a good faith effort to contact me, I will continue to seek
assistance in these public venues under the assumption you have not
yet read my post."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have no brother named Abraham. I have no niece named Kasia. There are a host of other articles under the names of "Karczewski" who purport to be relatives of mine. They are all phonies. For those familiar with my writings on spirituality and Sovereignty, they understand that such phony articles and forgeries written under my name are part of the 14 year-long government/media agenda to destroy my reputation and credibility.

Why? Because they cannot stand up to the Truth of my message so they must attempt to destroy the messenger.

If you think not, I invite all to witness it first hand by visiting my website http://www.arkenterprises.com and its many links. See for yourselves that "All the Kings horses, and all the Kings Men" Cannot destroy a simple man of Truth, a Christ.

*********************************************
"No other man but I in the recorded History of
mankind, including JESUS CHRIST, has directly
revealed to the World the SATANIC WEAPON used to
enslave mankind -- INTELLECTUAL THOUGHT!!"

Raymond Ronald Karczewski© http://www.arkenterprises.com

The Appellate Argument which Will Set Ed and Elaine Brown Free.

Following are excerpts from the Appellant Brief filed by Attorney David Groom with the Oregon Court of Appeals. In it lies the key to liberation for an enslaved public, only this time presented by an officer of the court and member of the bar who possesses courage and integrity, a commodity not found amongst judges and lawyers practicing law in JOSEPHINE COUNTY, OREGON.

The quoted footnote below spells out the key to Sovereignty, the Lawful Liberation of an Unaware People from their CONDITIONED yoke of "Juristic" Slavery.

2 " It may be feared that if defendant's argument is correct, it would wreak havoc with the criminal justice system because the court would have to establish jurisdiction over every defendant. This would not be the case, however; very few individuals have copyrighted their names and have asserted their rights in the manner this defendant has."

Raymond Ronald Karczewski©
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Note: The Oregon Appelate Court refused to hear the Appeal without comment. The authorities "dodged the bullet". It is this question of law that would paralyze the "present" Judicial Process in the prosecution of Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient Natural Men and Women tried without their consent, and is at the Core of Ed and Elaine Brown's Unlawful prosecution. rk

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

STATE OF OREGON )
JOSEPHINE COUNTY )
Plaintiff-Respondent, ) Circuit Court No. 03CR0170 )
vs.
RAYMOND RONALD KARCZEWSKI, )
Defendant-Appellant. ) Appellate Court No.A122754_______________)

APPELANT'S BRIEF

Appeal from the Judgment of the Circuit Court
for JOSEPHINE County
Honorable WILLIAM G. PURDY, Judge
_________________________________

DAVID E. GROOM #78231
714 SW 20th Pl.
Portland, Oregon 97205
(503) 771-3587
Attorney for Defendant-Appellant

HARDY MYERS #64077
Attorney General
MARY H. WILLIAMS #91124
Solicitor General
400 Justice Building
Salem, Oregon 97301
Phone: 378-4402
Attorneys for the Plaintiff-Respondent

(7) Standard of Review

Questions involving the trial court's jurisdiction are legal questions, and decisions of the trial court are reviewed by the appellate court for errors of law. See, e.g., State v.Donovan, 307 Or. 461, 770 P2d 581 (1989)

Discussion and Argument

Defendant was convicted of seven counts of Simulating Legal Process, ORS 162.355, for causing papers to be served on seven individuals in the criminal justice system, which purported to be judgments owned to defendant by these individuals. It was defendant's position, and continues to be his position that the Josephine County Circuit Court did not have jurisdiction over him to render a judgment in this criminal matter. It may be difficult for people who work within the criminal justice system to fully comprehend defendant's position.

"Here are my . . . objections to the continuance of this case, and a request for dismissal of all charges.

1. This court is a legal fiction. It has jurisdiction only over other legal fictions. I am not a legal fiction. This court has no jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural private man. I have not nor will I confer jurisdiction to this court through consent or contract.

2. I am not the defendant whose name appears on the information. I have never been, nor shall I ever be. The burden of proof lies With the prosecution to prove that I, this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural, private man am the named defendant in this case. If the prosecutor cannot prove that, this case must be dismissed.
3. In the last eleven (11) months of case number 02CR0617 and this case, 03CR0170, in seven (7) of my last ten (10) appearances before the court, I have repeatedly challenged the court to prove in writing, as required by law, its jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural, private man. This Josephine County court has repeatedly snubbed its nose at the law and refused to do so."
1 Defendant acknowledges there is a general rule that assumes a court has jurisdiction over a criminal matter, as stated as follows:
______________________________________________________________________
1 There are a number of other objections contained in this document, but these are the arguments that are pertinent to the issue raised by this assignment of error.

"It is well settled and not disputed that a court of general jurisdiction proceeding within the scope of its powers will be presumed to have jurisdiction to give the judgments and decrees it renders until the contrary appears. In re Lyon, 128 Or. 94, 98, 265 P. 1087; Northcut v. Lemery, 8 Or. 316, 322". State v.Lillie. 172 Or 194, 139 P.2d 576 (1943).

The appellate courts have discussed circuit court jurisdiction over the subject matter and over individuals, and have noted a difference between "excess of jurisdiction" and "absence of jurisdiction." This difference was defined as follows:

"Excess of jurisdiction may be defined as the state of being beyond or outside the limits of jurisdiction, and, as distinguished from the entire absence of jurisdiction, means that the act, although within the general power of the judge, is not authorized, and therefore void, with respect to the particular case, because the conditions which alone authorize the exercise of his general power in that particular case are wanting, and hence the judicial power is not in fact lawfully invoked. Although a court may have jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties, its act or order may, nevertheless, be in excess of its jurisdiction, as being something which it has no power to do; and it has been said that any act of a court in violation of statutory prohibition may be considered to be in excess of jurisdiction." 21 C. J. S., Courts, section 25.Garner v Garner, 182 Or. 549, 562, 189 P. (2d) 397 (1948).

The Court of Appeals has even gone so far as to rule that the lack of jurisdiction of the circuit court is an error apparent on the face of the record:

"(W)here the same is apparent on the face of the record it is the duty of the appellate court to not the absence of jurisdiction on its own motion. Northern Ins. Co. v. Conn Organ, 40 Or App 785, 791, 596 P2d 605 (1979); League of Women Voters v. Lane Co. Bndry. Comm., 32 Or App 53, 59, 573 P2d 1255, rev den 283 Or 503 (1978)." Montez v Gomez, 54 Or App 996, 636, P2d 1027 (1981).

The consequence of a lack of jurisdiction was discussed by the Court of Appeals as follows:

"When there is a want of jurisdiction over the parties, or the subject-matter, no matter what formalities may have been taken by the trial court, the action thereof is void because of its want of jurisdiction, and consequently its proceedings may be questioned collaterally as well as directly. They are of no more value than as though they did not exist. But in cases where the court has undoubted jurisdiction of the subject matter, and of the parties, the action of the trial court, though involving an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction, which might be taken advantage of by direct appeal, or by direct attack, yet the judgment or decree is not void though it might be set aside for the irregular or erroneous exercise of jurisdiction if appealed from. It may not be called in question collaterally." Bank & Trust Co. v. Fredrick, 271 Mich 538, 544-45, 260 NW 908, 909, (1935)" . Wood v. White 28 Or. App. 175, 179, 558 P2d 1289 (1977).

Applying these judicial philosophies to defendant's case, it is apparent that the circuit court in the present case did not have jurisdiction over him. He made continuous requests, not only during this trial, but over the course of the twelve months leading up to this trial, that the court prove it had jurisdiction over him. As noted in the Preservation section, and the portions of transcript quoted therein, the trial court stated on the record that it "assumed" it had jurisdiction over defendant. This was not sufficient. The court should have shown to all parties' satisfaction that jurisdiction did indeed exist. Defendant contends in this appeal that the court did not, and thus could not have proven it did.

Defendant had copyrighted his name. Thus, two entities existed; one was the "juristic" person, as defendant described it, which consisted of the, incorporated name. The other entity was defendant himself, a "living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural, private" person, over whom the court had no jurisdiction by virtue of defendant having copyrighted his name.2
__________________________________________________________________
2 It may be feared that if defendant's argument is correct, it would wreak havoc with the criminal justice system because the court would have to establish jurisdiction over every defendant.This would not be the case, however; very few individuals have copyrighted their names and have asserted their rights in the manner this defendant has.

Because the court had no jurisdiction, or at least did not adequately prove its jurisdiction, defendant could not be tried in criminal court. Thus, the judgment against defendant is void and the charges should be dismissed. Defendant was deprived of his right to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Indeed, federal law provides that once state and federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven. Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1, 4, 100 S. Ct. 2502, 2504, 65 L.Ed.2d 555 (1980).

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing assignment of error, defendant respectfully requests that his convictions be vacated.

Respectfully Submitted,

David E. Groom
Attorney at Law

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION REVISITED

By Chuck Baldwin’s Son: Timothy Baldwin, Esq.

July 24, 2009
NewsWithViews.com

[Note: My son, Tim, writes today's column. He is an attorney who received his Juris Doctor degree from
Cumberland School of Law in Birmingham, Alabama. He is a former prosecutor for the Florida State
Attorney's Office and now owns his own private law practice. He is married to the former Miss Jennifer
Hanssen.]

Let’s be honest, America is facing the same legal, moral and ethical questions that our Founding
generation did, especially regarding the issue of “Who Is Sovereign in the United States.” For our
Founders, they fought, bled and died on the principles that no man or government has the right to rule over others contrary to their agreement (i.e. compact, constitution) and contrary to the principles of natural law as revealed in the Creation of God; that all men are born in nature with the power to govern themselves; and that no Sovereign government, established lawfully by the consent of we the people, can be usurped and controlled by any other entity. Thus, today in America, the question once again comes down to “Who is Sovereign in the United States?”

Today, there are 3 basic options for “Who is Sovereign in the United States”: (1) the Federal government, (2) the State governments or (3) We the People. I feel confident in stating that most contemporary Americans believe that the answer to this critical question is the Federal government–especially as it concerns any practical effect on the power of and over government. For years, Americans have been brainwashed though public education, major media networks and politicians that ALL federal laws are the “supreme law of the land” and that no state law or action to the contrary is valid, citing Article 6, paragraph 2 of the US Constitution as their “irrefutable” proof. Of course they are completely wrong: American ideology and legal fact states that sovereignty rests with “we the people.” However, the question must be more narrowly defined.

That is, does the sovereign power of we the people rest with all the people in the nation as one body, or does the power rest with the people THROUGH the respective States? The answer to this question cannot be overstated, because if the sovereign power rests with we the people collectively as one body, then the States have absolutely no power and at the ratification of the US Constitution, the States lost all powers originally granted to them by their respective sovereigns (the people of that State). To the contrary, if Sovereignty rests within or through their respective States, then the States conversely have more power than what is being admitted today by the “Centralists” of our day.

Through an honest study of the history and the context of the Articles of Confederation, the US Constitution, the Constitutional Convention and subsequent Ratification debates, the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, the rulings of subsequent US Supreme Court Rulings and the writings of political philosophers and statesmen of the 1700s and 1800s, the conclusion is undeniable and clear: We the People are the Sovereigns of the States respectively and of the States United through our respective States.

Thus, the issue is not who is Sovereign, because we know that We the People are sovereign in the US and that the Sovereigns of each State have never ceded to the Federal government any power not expressly granted to it by the Compact (the US Constitution). But rather, the issue is one of JURISDICTION: in other words, who has the power to act on behalf of and in compliance with the Sovereign? The issue of jurisdiction is so important because it acknowledges that since the Sovereign has “paramount authority” in government, any powers that are granted from the Sovereign to government are to remain within that grant of authority. Put another way, the States can no more grant authority to the Federal government against the will of the Sovereign–the people–than the Executive branch of the Federal government can give to the Judiciary branch the powers that we the people granted to it alone. To deny that such a grant exists or conversely to ignore the limitations placed on the governments by the Sovereign is to suggest that tyranny is a lawful act and that it must be complied with. America’s founders would have considered such a political theory to be treasonous. Do we the people think so seriously of the matter? According to recent events, the answer to this question will likely be answered sooner than later.

As some of you may know, several states have and are passing legislation regarding the independence and sovereignty of the people of their respective states. More specifically, the states of Tennessee and Montana have passed “Firearms Freedom Acts,” which have become law and which reaffirm their Sovereignty under the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution. This law states that any firearms that are made, sold and bought in that state are NOT subject to the Federal regulations of firearms, because they are inherently internal affairs, which exempt them from the commerce clause of the US Constitution.

As you would imagine, the Federal government, through its agency, the Department of Justice, did not take too kindly to Tennessee’s assertion of jurisdiction over this matter and position that the federal laws did not apply to the subject matter at hand. This federal opposition has become known through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), whereby they informed the firearms licensees in an “open letter” in Tennessee that the recently enacted law (Firearms Freedom Act) does not apply and is void and that they (the firearms licensees) must still obey and submit to the federal laws, regardless of the State’s statute. (See here)

This ATF response tells us the following about the federal government’s ideology of Sovereignty: (1) the federal government does not recognize the lawful and independent jurisdiction of the Sovereigns of Tennessee to operate their internal affairs as they deem proper and fitting; (2) the Sovereigns of Tennessee do not possess lawful jurisdiction to govern themselves through constitutional means; (3) the federal government has the power and authority to control the internal affairs of all States, as they deem fit. Bottom line, the Federal government is Sovereign. With their theory in mind, however, what commodity, what relationship, what contract, what service, or what molecule in this entire country would not be subject to their control and power?

This issue is the very same reason why the Colonists declared their independence from Great Britain in 1776 and why Great Britain declared the Colonies to be in a state of rebellion against the government. The conflict was in fact the application of their Constitution: whether it be a “living” constitution or whether it be “fundamental laws” based upon the intent and will of the people. The fact is, it was the Great-Britain-view of their constitution verses the American-view of their constitution that caused the conflict between the crown and the colonies. One historian summarizes the conflict this way:

“The contrast cannot be too strongly insisted upon. [The colonists], on the one hand, believed that the British Constitution was fixed by ‘the law of God and nature,’ and founded in the principles of law and reason so that Parliament could not alter it, but [Great Britain believed] that ‘the constitution of this country has been always in a moving state, either gaining or losing something,’ and ‘there are things even in Magna Charta which are not constitutional now’ and others which an act of Parliament might change. Between two such conceptions of the powers of government compromise was difficult to attain . . .
Such differences in ideals were as important causes of a breaking-up of the empire [of Great Britain] as more concrete matters like oppressive taxation.” (Claude Halstead Van Tyne, The Causes of the War of Independence, Volume 1, [University of Michigan, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1922], 235, 237).

Indeed, the issues of taxation during the 1760s and 1770s were only fruits of the underlying issue, and that is, who is Sovereign in America. According to Great Britain, the government had the power to impose its will on the people of America despite the will of the colonies and despite the natural laws governing the compact between the English people and their government. In other words, the government believed that their constitution was “living,” giving the government power to impose its will on the people, without the people’s consent. The colonists, however, saw the matter to be a usurpation of their God-given right to be governed by their consent and in compliance with their constitution. The end result: the Sovereigns in each colony seceded from the empire of Great Britain because of Great Britain’s refusal to follow their constitution.

Free Ed and Elaine Brown: Jail Court Officers who Commit Fraud.

Courts which Prosecute Living Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Men and Women Without Proving JURISDICTION Commit Black-Robed Fraud.

aa wrote:

David Groom Attorney: wrote:

Raymond Karczewski (arkent3@earthlink.net) wrote:

Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:16 pm

dg: >> Defendant had copyrighted his name. Thus, two entities existed; one was the "juristic" person, as defendant described it, which consisted of the, incorporated name. The other entity was defendant himself, a "living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural, private" person, over whom the court had no jurisdiction by virtue of defendant having copyrighted his name.2
__________________________________________________________________
dg: >> 2 It may be feared that if defendant's argument is correct, it would wreak havoc with the criminal justice system because the court would have to establish jurisdiction over every defendant.This would not be the case, however; very few individuals have copyrighted their names and have asserted their rights in the manner this defendant has.

dg: >> Because the court had no jurisdiction, or at least did not adequately prove its jurisdiction, defendant could not be tried in criminal court. Thus, the judgment against defendant is void and the charges should be dismissed. Defendant was deprived of his right to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Indeed, federal law provides that once state and federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven. Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1, 4, 100 S. Ct. 2502, 2504, 65 L.Ed.2d 555 (1980).

Conclusion

dg: >> Based on the foregoing assignment of error, defendant respectfully requests that his convictions be vacated.

aa: > This is major Ray. Thank you again.

rk: aa, you're absolutely correct, this is a "major" event in the unfoldment of American Jurisprudence. We, here in these united states of America are either a nation of Laws, or merely loud-mouthed slaves living under the yoke of tyranny, cloaked by black robed hypocrites who have been put into their positions of judging their fellow man, but, who have pulled the wool over the eyes of the Sovereign American People and see themselves now as a law unto their own..

rk: In a land where our courts no longer follow the US Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land, but make up their "color of law" corporate rules as they go along and then claim them to be the law, no man or woman is safe from arrest, incarceration, and enslavement by armed corporate security agents who call themselves Police..

rk: That is the issue upon which Ed and Elaine Brown have made their stand. They represent every freedom loving, Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man and Woman who make up the Sovereign People. the True lawmakers of these united states.

rk: Ed and Elaine have been abandoned by their so-called supporters. From thousands of vocal supporters, look around you now and you will see the illusions through which most supporters have been reduced to silence through unrelenting campaigns of fear and intimidation.

rk: ORGANIZE a nationwide campaign. DEMAND the courts answer the question of JURISDICTION put forth by Ed and Elaine Brown. The Law says, the courts must prove JURISDICTION in writing when challenged by the defendant. A denial of motion set aside without proof, as Judge Singal has shown, is just another example of how such Unlawful, Unconstitutional, non-Article III courts can bend the law according to corporate legislative policy and, in one felled swoop, reduce a nation of Sovereign People into a nation of Corporate slaves.

rk: Send this article far and wide on and off the Internet. Contact the New Hampshire Courts via phone, email, fax, etc, and let them know that you as a man/woman of the Sovereign People demand JUSTICE prevail in the Ed and Elaine Brown Case, and the Judge and/or Prosecutor answer, once and for all,via their Oath or Affidavit, upon their own private, unlimited Commercial liability the PROOF OF JURISDICTION, which if not answered is an admission that the courts have proceeded unlawfully in the Fraudulent prosecution of Ed and Elaine Brown.

rk: That is how Ed & Elaine Brown will be Freed from their unlawful incarceration.. That is how we, as a free, Sovereign People imbued with the Unalienable Rights of LIfe, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Property will TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY WITHOUT FIRING A SHOT IN VIOLENT REVOLUTION.

rk: You already know what the alternative is. The question remains, are you LIFE ORIENTED, OR DEATH ORIENTED?

Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

Re: THE REJECTED PLEA BARGAIN

Shaun Kranish wrote:

Raymond Karczewski (arkent@earthlink.net) wrote:

Jul 30, 2009 12:29 pm

sk: > I had to read it twice -- I didn't read the entire plea bargain the first time. I was wondering how in the HECK they could try to get a person (legal fiction) to waive the right to lay claim against another. This would completely prevent someone from operating in commerce!

sk: > Then I read it the second time and noticed the little "without the express approval of a member in good standing of the Oregon State Bar." They would be requiring you to attach any and all actions to a bar membership (insurance policy). You'd have to find an attorney who doesn't understand any of this stuff in order to get him to do something so stupid as to put his bar membership on the line.

sk: > You know with the right moves you could get the judges and prosecutors disbarred right?

rk: Shaun, I perceive myself and the American People are well beyond such superficial measures designed to keep spinning our wheels and going nowhere because those with the guns and the gold make the rules and enforce them.   I understand your concern, and your insight. I applaud your participation in continuing the American fight against a Tyrannical government.

rk:   My 7 year odyssey from a 65 year old retired Police Sergeant, with no blemishes on my record into at "Color of Law Juristic Felon" for having the courage to hold my appointed and elected public servants accountable for their Crimes and corruption has been a life-changing experience for me, and instrumental in the death of my Wife Anita.

rk: My case was a trial balloon. It heralded in the shift from our then Constitutional Republic by bypassing protections heretofore afforded the Sovereign People of America via their UnAlienable Rights, Common Law, etc,

rk: Such attack adopted the form of stripping away of our Rights and openly declaring war upon Free Men and Women of America.   Its design was and is to destroy our Constitutional Republic and usher in the death of these united states of America, replacing it with a worldwide New World Order.

rk:   Peter D. Sparacino, (now deceased) a friend and Josephine County Activist and internet journalist, confided in me that he had inside Intelligence information that former US Attorney General ASHCROFT, met with Oregon Governor KULONGOSKI prior to my trial to assure a successful Prosecution and conviction of me for "Simulation of Legal Process" (Paper Terrorism). Such Trial was to test the public's reaction to the newly passed Unconstitutional "Patriot Act"

rk: Read my Communication with Ed Brown, another patriotic American who, along with with his wife Elaine has also stood their ground against a tyrannical government bent on destroying the Rights of the American sovereign People . See:
http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch247.html#INSIGHTS

rk: Since then, even the Blind (who can not see) and the Dead (who cannot act) have gained spiritual sight that our Government has gone NUTZ with unlawful prosecutions of the American People designed to destroy our society..

rk: That is the simple fact which has allowed such socially destructive turn of events designed to destroy a Government Of the People, By the People, and For the People to occur.

rk: Our very lives and liberty are at stake. My personal journey seeking Remedy for Fraudulent arrests, prosecutions, and incarcerations has taken me into the dizzying maze of bureacracies of a Corrupt Government network spanning County, State, Federal, Supreme court, and yes, even the Whitehouse, who all play the age old government self-protective game of "CYA", i.e., COVER YOUR ASS.

rk: I have been writing of my experiences with this tyrannical government now for 7 years. Human history has shown that Conditioned Sheeple are oblivious to events until "their ox has been gored."
see: http://www.arkenterprises.com/index11.html

rk: It is summed up well with the following two quotations: AMERICA; Read them and Weep:

1.    "TO THE YOUNG AND NAIVE, THE OLD AND DECEIVED"
The Satanic Formula for Hell on Earth

"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the
citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has 'closed', the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. AND I AM CAESAR." --Julius Caesar

2.   Pastor Martin Niemoeller (1892-1984): wrote

    In Germany, they came first for the Communists,
         and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists,
         and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews,
         and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
    And then, they came for me,
         and by that time there was no one left to speak up.

Below is the Plea bargain referred to:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Fri Jun 05, 2009 4:05 am

THE REJECTED PLEA BARGAIN

Note: June 6, 2009: This is the pretrial Plea Bargain Offered by the State Of Oregon which I rejected and stood my ground in Two Trials.

Be advised I have continued to do the very same things today for which I was arrested in 2002. Since being thrown out of Jail, despite the orders of the court and the OREGON Attorney General's Office, I have continued to secure Commercial Defaults against Oregon Governor KULONGOSKI, Attorney General HARDY MYERS and Sheriff DAVE DANIEL, yet they have not come to arrest me. Why? Because they face having to answer the question of Sovereignty that they have been avoiding for the last 7 years.

So much for the State of Oregon and County Of Josephine in "Following the Law." Is this the "Bogeyman" you armchair patriots are afraid of? Hold NEW HAMPSHIRE Judge SINGAL to His Oath of Office and COMPEL him to answer the question of JURISDICTION over the Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man and Woman, Ed and Elaine Brown, for the same Point of Law exists for them as it had for me.

Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This offer was presented to Ray by Attorney CHRIS MECCA on September 1, 2003.

Anita Karczewski

Attorney CHRIS MECCA has been assigned to the case by the court. The Plea Bargain was typed on the Josephine County District Attorney's stationery and dated August 8, 2003. It came from the Department of Justice.

The STATE OF OREGON offered to drop five (5) counts of "Simulating Legal Process," and to prosecute only two (2) out of the seven (7) original charges.

The STATE OF OREGON is willing to go from the thirty-five (35) years possible sentencing on the seven (7) original Class C Felony charges down to ten (10) days on each of the two remaining charges -- a total of twenty (20) days on the condition that Ray agree to twenty-four (24) months probation and that he pay monetary obligations. No amount was specified.

It specified that Ray agree to have "no contact" with ALLAN H. COON, CLAY THOMPSON; NEIL MOREY, LISA TURNER, MICHAEL BURKE, DAVE DANIEL, JOHN JUSTEMA;

and that:

"defendant may not submit any documents to any person, court or other Federal or State government agency that purports to exercise jurisdiction, represents a claim against a person or property, directs a person to appear before a court or tribunal, or directs a person to perform or refrain from performing a specified act without the express approval of a member in good standing of the Oregon State Bar. Gives a full, complete and truthful (to be determined by the Department of Justice) interview with Oregon Department of Justice investigators."

It was signed: DAINA VITOLINS, Special Deputy District Attorney

Ray will reject the offer as simply being another way for the court to gain "consent, a contract, an agreement, and then they've got jurisdiction. He feels that "they're looking for an out, and this is the way they're trying to do it."

_________________
Raymond Ronald Karczewski© http://www.arkenterprises.com

What Remedy Is Left to the Sovereign People Of America When Its Government Sanctions Piracy On the Highway.

This article arises from the question posed by a fellow patriot in Re: THE REJECTED PLEA BARGAIN see:
http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch260.html#BARGAIN

In effect, I have been blocked from any lawful Remedy available to any man or woman of the Sovereign People as our Government no longer sees itself as operating within the parameters of a Constitutional Republic.

What does that mean to a Sovereign Man or Woman who understands who they are and remains clear in their relationship with their Servant Government.

The Sovereign People are the Law. The government remains to be their servant, their administrator of law. When such government no longer serves that purpose, it no longer can hide its corruption, criminal and fraudulent policies behind the shield of law in order to avoid responsibility while it conducts warfare upon the American People, by sanctioning Piracy on the Highways.

On my linked POLITICAL page see: http://www.arkenterprises.com/index11.html the serious researcher will see what this Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man has gone through for the last seven years to seek Remedy for the wrongs committed to him and his now deceased wife.

I have sought legal Remedy by going through all the Channels of Redress open to the American Man/Woman, wronged by his/her government.

What is left?

The answer at first appears to evoke an aura of hopelessness. But that is the natural instinct of the Slave, not the Sovereign.

The Sovereign Understands who he is. He is imbued with Unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Property.

These God-given Rights cannot be destroyed by government dictum, for the fictional corporate government fully understands it cannot supercede the limited rights granted it by the Sovereign People which created the Fictional Government. It other words, the creation cannot be greater than its creator. Therein lies the key to a return to a way of life that has been under attack by Satanic Forces over the milleniun.

One has a right to exercise Self-Defense and the defense of one's property with deadly force if necessary when their life and their property is being threatened by armed Pirates, operating under the "color of Corporate law."

Their badge, their uniforms do not offer them protection when carrying out criminal activities backed up with the barrel of the gun such as Piracy because they are merely following Department Policy.

Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Property is the Right of Every Sovereign man and woman who live in this Constitutional Republic we call the united states of America.

I have utilized every channel available for redress in government, and they refuse to acknowledge it. They will not answer the question of Jurisdiction. and they will not remove the bogus information on the police computer responsible for automatic actions taken by officers on patrol. The mindless inhuman monster of a computer now dictates life and death on the highways.

What I am saying here is that I, as a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man of the Sovereign People am no longer left with any remedy as an individual but to exercise my Right to Self-Defense and Defense of my property the next time I am robbed at gunpoint of my property.

Every officer who puts on the uniform and badge swears to uphold and defend the United States Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. It is a shame they do not see the true enemy to be the Corporate POLICY MAKERS, who put them in harms way when they demand such violation of the law be conducted under the umbrella of "Color of Law."

This comes from an honorably retired California Police Sergeant living his retirement days in Souther Oregon. .

Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

It Ain't Over Till Its Over!! Letter from Elaine Brown

Elaine Alice: Brown
c/o 266 County Farm Rd.
Dover, N.H. [03820]

July 30, 2009

Dear Ray,

     As I do not have my address book here and do not have your PO Box, I pray this reaches you.

    I have received some of your email postings including the July 27th one.

    You mention an appellate attorney David Groom. Is the following text his words or yours. We need a good appellate attorney. Is Mr. Groom someone we should contact? If so, can you send me his address?

   Thank you and God bless you for your continued support. Many have turned away due to fear and intimidation or simply by virtue of the ongoing assault by the Mainstream Media. Tell a lie often and people believe it.

    Ed and I have missed your letters. I hope all is well with you. Are you enjoying your motor home?

    Yashua's blessing to you, my friend.

                                             Love

                                             Elaine

Dear Elaine,

    I am so glad you wrote. My last 4 letters to you and Ed have been kicked back by the system. I have no understanding why. As such I thought it was futile to continue writing until I heard from you or ed. . . . and here you are!!.

As a matter of fact, earlier this day, I emailed Shaun to see if he had contact info regarding you and Ed.   Here's a copy of it.

Shaun

I hope this reaches you. If you can get this message to someone who is in contact with Ed and Elaine NOW, (prior to sentencing) send this message to Ed and Elaine. Suggest Ed and Elaine, separately and individually, when addressed at Sentencing, refuse to accept the offer of Sentencing given by the judge based on the fact that JURISDICTION was NEVER proven in writing as the law demands. They have, from the beginning, stood on their Unalienable, Common Law and Constitutional Rights. They had been denied Due Process by such evasion of the law, (denial of motion without comment) and therefore any ruling derived therefrom are Unconstitutional, Null and Void, and carry with it, no force of law.    No contract breaks the nexus between Ed and Elaine with the Unconstitutional Contract Administrative court.

It worked for me.

Shaun, if you get this out to them get back to me and confirm it. If you have email info of anyone (Elaine's Son) who can get this info to her, send me his email address and I will contact him personally.

                                                       Ray

Elaine, If you and Ed silence your public defender and speak for yourselves at sentencing, do not consent to, nor accept the sentence rendered, you shall pose a unresolvable problem for the judge and prosecution. Your repeated demand to be Tried in a Common Law, Constitutional Court, having been arbitrarily and repeatedly denied without comment by the Judges is a denial of Due Process. This question of JURISDICTION must be answered by the court/prosecutor for any of its limited administrative court rulings to be lawful and valid. This is not a case of my practicing Law in advising you.. I am just telling you what worked for me.

Elaine, I'm afraid David Groom can't help you, He is a State of Oregon court assigned Appellate Attorney.

As to attorney David Groom (by the way, the following words are his gleaned from his appeal, i.e., 1 "There are a number of other objections contained in this document, but these are the arguments that are pertinent to the issue raised by this assignment of error".

"It is well settled and not disputed that a court of general jurisdiction proceeding within the scope of its powers will be presumed to have jurisdiction to give the judgments and decrees it renders until the contrary appears. In re Lyon, 128 Or. 94, 98, 265 P. 1087; Northcut v. Lemery, 8 Or. 316, 322". State v.Lillie. 172 Or 194, 139 P.2d 576 (1943).

"The appellate courts have discussed circuit court jurisdiction over the subject matter and over individuals, and have noted a difference between "excess of jurisdiction" and "absence of jurisdiction." This difference was defined as follows:"

"Excess of jurisdiction may be defined as the state of being beyond or outside the limits of jurisdiction, and, as distinguished from the entire absence of jurisdiction, means that the act, although within the general power of the judge, is not authorized, and therefore void, with respect to the particular case, because the conditions which alone authorize the exercise of his general power in that particular case are wanting, and hence the judicial power is not in fact lawfully invoked. Although a court may have jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties, its act or order may, nevertheless, be in excess of its jurisdiction, as being something which it has no power to do; and it has been said that any act of a court in violation of statutory prohibition may be considered to be in excess of jurisdiction." 21 C. J. S., Courts, section 25.Garner v Garner, 182 Or. 549, 562, 189 P. (2d) 397 (1948)"

"The Court of Appeals has even gone so far as to rule that the lack of jurisdiction of the circuit court is an error apparent on the face of the record:

"(W)here the same is apparent on the face of the record it is the duty of the appellate court to not the absence of jurisdiction on its own motion. Northern Ins. Co. v. Conn Organ, 40 Or App 785, 791, 596 P2d 605 (1979); League of Women Voters v. Lane Co. Bndry. Comm., 32 Or App 53, 59, 573 P2d 1255, rev den 283 Or 503 (1978)." Montez v Gomez, 54 Or App 996, 636, P2d 1027 (1981).

The consequence of a lack of jurisdiction was discussed by the Court of Appeals as follows:

"When there is a want of jurisdiction over the parties, or the subject-matter, no matter what formalities may have been taken by the trial court, the action thereof is void because of its want of jurisdiction, and consequently its proceedings may be questioned collaterally as well as directly. They are of no more value than as though they did not exist. But in cases where the court has undoubted jurisdiction of the subject matter, and of the parties, the action of the trial court, though involving an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction, which might be taken advantage of by direct appeal, or by direct attack, yet the judgment or decree is not void though it might be set aside for the irregular or erroneous exercise of jurisdiction if appealed from. It may not be called in question collaterally." Bank & Trust Co. v. Fredrick, 271 Mich 538, 544-45, 260 NW 908, 909, (1935)" . Wood v. White 28 Or. App. 175, 179, 558 P2d 1289 (1977).

Applying these judicial philosophies to defendant's case, it is apparent that the circuit court in the present case did not have jurisdiction over him. He made continuous requests, not only during this trial, but over the course of the twelve months leading up tothis trial, that the court prove it had jurisdiction over him. As noted in the Preservation section, and the portions of transcript quoted therein, the trial court stated on the record that it "assumed" it had jurisdiction over defendant. This was not sufficient. The court should have shown to all parties' satisfaction that jurisdiction did indeed exist. Defendant contends in this appeal that the court did not, and thus could not have proven it did.

Defendant had copyrighted his name. Thus, two entities existed; one was the "juristic" person, as defendant described it, which consisted of the, incorporated name. The other entity was defendant himself, a "living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural, private" person, over whom the court had no jurisdiction by virtue of defendant having copyrighted his name.2
__________________________________________________________________
2 It may be feared that if defendant's argument is correct, it would wreak havoc with the criminal justice system because the court would have to establish jurisdiction over every defendant.This would not be the case, however; very few individuals have copyrighted their names and have asserted their rights in the manner this defendant has.

Because the court had no jurisdiction, or at least did not adequately prove its jurisdiction, defendant could not be tried in criminal court. Thus, the judgment against defendant is void and the charges should be dismissed. Defendant was deprived of his right to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Indeed, federal law provides that once state and federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven. Maine v. Thiboutot, 448 U.S. 1, 4, 100 S. Ct. 2502, 2504, 65 L.Ed.2d 555 (1980).

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing assignment of error, defendant respectfully requests that his convictions be vacated.

Respectfully Submitted,

David E. Groom
Attorney at Law)

   As you can see, Their method of getting out from under a pile of doo doo was to AVOID even looking at the appeal.   That's the corruption of LAW actually being conducted in the Satanic courts which rule over these united states of America.

Elaine, you and Ed shall never be forgotten for your contribution to justice and liberty in our country. No errant government can destroy your contribution with their force and intimidation. Have faith in yourselves. Your path requires that you must be immersed in darkness before being rescued by the Light.

Elaine, See if you can't get Ed's Address for me.

                              Chin up Kiddo,
                        It ain't over till its over

                                  Ray

Notice of Sovereign Ownership of Travel Conveyance to Traffic Enforcement Officers

By Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

     The times, they are a-changing. No longer does Law Enforcement serve and protect the Sovereign People who hire them as public servants. Instead war has been declared upon the Sovereign People by the Corporate police agencies and employees.

     Admittedly, I, Raymond Ronald Karczewski, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural man have been lonely voice in the Right to Travel v. the Privilege to Drive Issue for the last 7 years. But the People of America are now waking up to recognize the Satanic forces which have ruled over them while they remained asleep to the changing political scene. A scene which threatens to destroy their freedom and their Constitutional Republic.

    I have now seemingly achieved some special status as the JOSEPHINE COUNTY OREGON Law Enforcement Agencies will no longer arrest me and take me before a JOSEPHINE COUNTY OREGON JUDGE fearing they would have to answer the question of JURISDICTION. They merely confiscate my automobiles based on Bogus Information inserted upon the Police Computer that I am "driving with a suspended license." That allows them to commit such crimes as Kidnapping and Piracy, supported by Judges such as Judge Thomas M. Hull who reduces the Driving While Suspended Charge cited but unilaterally reduced such charge to Failure to carry or to present a license to a Police officer which carries a $8 fine. .see: http://www.arkenterprises.com/hullcort.html and http://www.arkenterprises.com/hull1.jpg

Although I have not appeared at any of the Traffic Court hearings, they have not sworn out a warrant for my arrest.

Nevertheless, the 5 Driving While Suspended charges recorded with DMV, have caused my insurance rates to soar. Yet the JOSEPHINE COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITIES WILL NOT ARREST ME.

You see, I have had no license to suspend or revoke as I rescinded my Oregon Driver License in 1999. and my Registration License Plates for my Jeep in 2003, and Cadillac in 2005 See: http://www.arkenterprises.com/rescind2.jpg

Josephine County Sheriff's Office has gone to extremes not to arrest me, yet they do not hesitate to impound my car, a conveyance over which the State has no interest or claim, costing me $1500.00 to retrieve them.. See:Josephine County Sheriff's Deputies Committing Piracy on JOSEPHINE COUNTY Highways. http://www.arkenterprises.com/piracy.html

I have followed every conceivable channel open for redress the government purports to offer the public, yet the doors are closed at every level, i.e., County, State, Federal, White House, Supreme court.
see: http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch91.html#SUPREME

The Grand Jury System, the last Bastion of Justice in America has been nullified by Political chicanery. See: Josephine County District Attorney and the Grand Jury Foreman: STONE WALL OF SILENCE!   http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch259.html#Jury and Attention Any Member of the Josephine County Grand Jury, I AM TRYING TO REACH YOU! See http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch234.html#Grand

If you are not familiar with my 7 year battle for Justice in Josephine County Oregon, here are more background links which can bring you up to speed.:

I, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© Demand You STEPHEN D. CAMPBELL, JOSEPHINE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY File Charges on OREGON STATE Troopers "WALKER" and "TRAVIS LEE" For Theft and Piracy.
http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch258.html#Karczewski

Kidnapped in Cave Junction: Letter to Editor George McElroy
http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch256.html#Kidnapped

What Does It Take To get Justice In Josephine County Courts?
http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch255.html#Justice

I continue to display my Private Plates on my automobiles See:
http://www.arkenterprises.com/sovplate.jpg
and have added the following notice to Law Enforcement Officers..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                               PRIVATE PROPERTY

This Privately owned Automobile is the "Travel Conveyance of the Day" used by Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, "a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient Natural Man, not a "PERSON" as defined in the Vehicle Code and IS NOT ENGAGED in Commerce therefore Automobile and Traveller are not subject to Commercial Police
Regulatory VEHICLE CODE Rules.

                               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Any Police Computer records which claim this private automobile or Its Owner Raymond Ronald Karczewski© to be required to be Licensed "To Drive" or display Privileged Tax Registration are without merit and foundation.since the "intent" and the "real" use are the Controlling Points of Law and "Evidence of Record" and therefore require Government PROOF OF JURISDICTION before any Enforcement Activity may ensue.

                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This TRAVEL CONVEYANCE is used under Common Law SOLELY for the Purpose of PRIVATE TRAVEL Any enforcement of Commercial Vehicle Code Rules by Corporate Government Enforcement Officers Constitute an Unlawful Infringement upon one's
Unalienable Right to Travel.

                             ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"The officers of the law, in the execution of process, are obliged to know the requirements of the law. and if they mistake them whether through ignorance or design and anyone is harmed by their error, They must respond in Damages. " Rogers v Conklin 1 Wall. (US) 644 17 L E.D 714

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We are each responsible for our actions and our lives. Would it not be interesting for a nation of conditioned Slaves to realize their true status as Sovereign People and DRAW THEIR OWN LINE IN THE SAND by displaying such notices on their automobiles. Is it not time that We Americans TAKE BACK CONTROL OF OUR COUNTRY?

For full info on my 7 year battle, see: http://www.arkenterprises.com/index11.html

        Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

Letter from Elaine Brown: Voice of a Patriot, Abandoned by the People

Elaine Alice: Brown

c/o 266 County Farm Rd.

Dover N.H. [03806]

August 19, 2009

Dear Ray,

It was good to hear from you.again. So many people have not written because they did not know where we are. Deliberate actions by the Feds.

August 21, 2009

September 3 is sentencing We will probably get moved right after that. so check out the Internet for our whereabouts

So many laws have been broken by them. My mind is reeling with the immensity of their crimes.

We are putting together a claim/appeal but are not sure how to do it. or where to take it. I am interested in the U.S. Court of Claims in D.C. for those with claims against the government.

Before the trial, Ed and I were able to meet every day.to work on our case. Since then, only 1 or 2 a week. That is the hardest part.

We continue to deny their jurisdiction, refuse to accept any of their decrees. We can only continue to do so and pray that God's will is for our release. There's so much to be done, we need to be out there to do it.

God's Blessing to you.

Elaine

Dear Elaine,

My heart goes out to you and Ed. I know how you are feeling. Alone, and seemingly abandoned by your friends and supporters. What you are learning through such experiences is the fragility of such conventional friendships and support coming from conditioned people who have not yet faced their own fears when their own life-long, conditioned theories are taken to the level of action in a Satanic realm of control.

You and Ed are Sovereign, you are Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural woman and man, created by God. You are real. The Government remains to be a Satanic fiction, created by the Intellect of unaware people who follow the Law of Mammon rather than the Law of God.

As long as you and Ed continue to realize who you truly are, you WILL BE PROTECTED, even at the darkest of times. How do I know? Been there, done that. You and Ed have been deprived of your right to stand in a Common Law Court, an Article III Constitutional Court before a jury of your peers to face bogus charges laid against you by a court system which is not Constitutional, but an Administrative Court based in Maritime Law/Contract law. A court which requires your consent to the "Color of Law" , victimless Corporate policies used to break your spirit. .

As in all Color of Law Issues, there had to be consent, a contract, an agreement involved between the defendant and the government. The courts and goverment have the People of America reeling in fear and confusion over such conspiratorial bluffs made at the threat and actual point of a gun. You and Ed called their bluff. Stood your ground. Now they have to tough it out or allow the American People to see that Law is not being practiced in America's courtrooms, but our courts have become a focal point for the open enslavement of the American People.

I cannot tell you what to do, for in these dark "Moment of Truth" events one either faces his/her imposed plight with courage or cowardice. Yours and Ed's courage to date has been an inspiration to all those Americans who still have the eyes to see, and ears to hear." Unfortunately what is dominating the public media and Internet is the cacophony of the "spiritually blind and dead" mutually engaging in fear, anger and paranoia in reactions to the well-orchestrated fictional power of government. They have lost sight that they are the Sovereign People, and the government is merely their servants hired to carry out the will of the People. That can change in any given moment when the years of smoldering doubt ignite into the explosive force of God-given clarity.

No corrupt, crime-ridden government has ever stood up to an aroused and outraged public. That outrage is being seen and demonstrated with each passing day at Town Hall Meetings throughout the land where the normally isolated politicians cannot evade direct contact with their constituents.

When my time came for sentencing, after having challenged the courts on some 20 plus prior occasions to prove their jurisdiction over this Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural man of the Sovereign People, I simply refused to accept the courts offer of Contract (Sentencing). That ended it right there. They put me back into custody for a few more days in order to save face, but then they were forced to unceremoniously throw me out of their jail. From their original threat of 35 years in prison, they wound up "eating crow" when the Josephine County Sheriff's Department was forced to dump me off at the Emergency room of Three Rivers Hospital to fend for myself

Elaine, you and Ed have done a service the American People cannot deny. You are the "Davids" to the government's "Goliath." Have no fear. You are doing God's Work.

Ray

STATE OF OREGON CONTINUES THE DRIVER LICENSE FRAUD WITH UNWARY TAXPAYERS.

From:   Raymond Ronald Karczewskiª
C/O PMB 115, P.O. Box 1459
Cave Junction, Oregon [97523]

TO:   K. FRANCES HANSON
PROCESSING SERVICES MANAGER
Driver And Motor Vehicle Services
1905 Lana Avenue N.E.,
Salem, OR 97314

                             CHARGE BACK AND PROOF OF CLAIM

                     U.S.P.O Registered Mail Article 487 238 858 US

                                                   August 31, 2009

Ms K. FRANCES HANSON

      Attached is the return Copy of Notice of Suspension dated 8-25-09. I accept for value the document and its content upon PROOF OF CLAIM, that I Raymond Ronald Karczewskiª, a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man am required to have an Oregon Driver License and be under the jurisdiction of the Corporate Rules of the State of Oregon and County of Josephine..

     I, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a natural born American citizen, am a common man of the Sovereign People, arising under the original jurisdiction of the de jure Constitution of the united States of 1789 as amended by the qualified electors of the several States of the American union and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 for the Territories of the de jure united States.

     I, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man, am the Secured Party/Creditor, Holder in due course, and Authorized Representative for the Juristic Person RAYMOND RONALD KARCZEWSKI©, I am not an accommodation party nor a surety for the debts of RAYMOND RONALD KARCZEWSKI© .

     I, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, am held harmless by RAYMOND RONALD KARCZEWSKI© in HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNITY AGREEMENT NO: RRK-050302-HHIA, dated the Third Day of the Fifth Month in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Two, against all claims, legal actions, orders, warrants, judgments, demands, liabilities, losses, depositions, summonses, lawsuits, costs, fines, liens, levies, penalties, damages, interests, and expenses whatsoever, both absolute and contingent, as are now due, and as might become due, now existing, and as might hereafter arise, and as might be suffered by, imposed on, and incurred by RAYMOND RONALD KARCZEWSKI© for any and every reason, purpose, and cause whatsoever. Said Hold Harmless and Indemity agreement is filed with the Josephine County Criminal Court Clerk's office.

     Since 2002, I have been the victim of Institutionalized false arrest, false imprisonment, infringement of my Right to Travel, and have had my automobiles impounded on six occasions without cause, costing me hundreds of dollars to have my autos returned to me.

     I've committed NO CRIMES. I stand under COMMON LAW AND the US CONSTITUTION, THE "LAW OF THE LAND." I am not a 14th Amendment Citizen, nor a subject to the Corporate STATE OF OREGON and/or JOSEPHINE COUNTY and therefore are not within the JURISDICTION OF their legislative Corporate Policies, i.e. "Color of Law."

    Your records will show that Oregon driver license 4142036 was rescinded by me on my Birthday of 1999 as an invalid contract for lack of full disclosure of all terms at the time of application. . Since that time, no such Oregon Driver license has existed and so COULD NOT BE SUSPENDED OR REVOKED, as I had reclaimed my Unalienable Right to Liberty which included the Right to private Travel upon Oregon Roads without first seeking permission or licensing from the State of Oregon as long as I am not engaged in Commerce.

   I have repeatedly challenged the State of Oregon and County of Josephine Government and Courts to prove Jurisdiction over this Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man for the last 7 years. They have not done so. They refuse to answer the questions of Jurisdiction under oath or affidavit and thus are in Commercial default establishing that my position is True and valid.

   I grow weary of these repeated "color of law" presentments which are null and void, as long as the question of Jurisdiction is not established.

   I thus present you MS HANSON, with the following 23 questions which, if answered under oath or affidavit by yourself, or your legal department would constitute PROOF OF CLAIM by the State of Oregon and County of Josephine that Such License lawfully exists and through it, the OREGON DMV, Dept of Transportation, Courts and Traffic Enforcement Officers have JURISDICTION over this Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural Man.

    1. PROOF OF CLAIM on how the Oregon Constitution operates upon me, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man.

    2. PROOF OF CLAIM on how the State statutes by and through the Oregon Legislature and the DMV operate upon me, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man.

    3. PROOF OF CLAIM that the name appearing on the charging instrument, in capital letters; RAYMOND RONALD KARCZEWSKI, is not a corporate fiction, but is the name of the living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man in his private capacity.

    4. PROOF OF CLAIM that the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) describe any other class of license other than for commerce or for commercial trade, occupation or profession.

    5. PROOF OF CLAIM that this private man is specifically named in the Oregon State Statutes and more specifically ORS cites as applied in this matter. (See the PEOPLE v. HERKIMER, 15 Am Dec 379, 4 Cowen (N.Y. 345, 348 (1825)

    6.   PROOF OF CLAIM that the STATE OF OREGON, in its Corporate capacity, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless consented to, and/or contracted for, by that natural person/private man.

    7. PROOF OF CLAIM that the COUNTY OF JOSEPHINE, in its Corporate capacity, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless
consented to, and/or contracted for, by that natural person/private man.

    8.   PROOF OF CLAIM that all "Officers of the Court," which include members of the JOSEPHINE COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S staff, are under oath of office to support and defend both U.S. and OREGON Constitutions.

    9.   PROOF OF CLAIM that Deputies and/or Jail Staff, in their capacity as Agents for the CORPORATE JOSEPHINE COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, are bound by their oath of office to support and defend both U.S. and OREGON Constitutions.

    10.   PROOF OF CLAIM that the CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
FOR JOSEPHINE COUNTY, in its Corporate capacity, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless consented to, and/or contracted for, by that natural person/private man.

    11.   PROOF OF CLAIM of the existence of the liability and how it was created.

    12.   PROOF OF CLAIM of what 'state' the liability came from, the de jure state ('The State') or the de-facto state ('This State'), a mere corporation.

    13.   PROOF OF CLAIM that the State of Oregon DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, DMV, through its Administrative Drivers Licensing process, has Jurisdiction over this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person/private man, the Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© in his private capacity unless consented to, and/or contracted for, by that natural person/private man.

    14. PROOF OF CLAIM that in my private capacity, that I, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, is subject to Class A, B, and C commercial driver license.

   15. PROOF OF CLAIM that the State of Oregon via the DMV sells any other ‘driver’license.

    16. PROOF OF CLAIM that the Motor Vehicle code does not operate upon all ‘drivers’ of ‘all’ vehicles owned or operated by ‘the United States,’ ‘this state,’ ‘or any county,’‘city,’‘district,’ ‘or any other political subdivision of this state’ … and thus operates upon this private man. (see ORS 801.020)

    17. PROOF OF CLAIM that my ‘private' vehicle is not a ‘recreational’ vehicle that is operated solely for personal (private) use. (see ORS 801.208)

    18. PROOF OF CLAIM that my ‘private' vehicle is used for the transportation of persons for compensation or profit, or designed or used primarily for the transportation of property (for hire). (see ORS 801.210)

    19. PROOF OF CLAIM that Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and- blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, was a licensee at the time of the ‘stop’ to subject himself to the motor vehicle code by agreement and as a signatory. (see Vehicle
Traffic Law, 1974 Rev Ed., page 238, 239)

    20. PROOF OF CLAIM that, “In view of this rule a statutory provision that the supervision officials “may” exempt such persons when the transportation is not on a commercial basis means that they “must” exempt them, generally applies in this matter. (State v. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; 60 C.J.S. section 94 pg 581)

    21. PROOF OF CLAIM that Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, does not have the right in light of ORS 801.305.

    22. PROOF OF CLAIM that the ‘entity’ bringing forth this claim can testify on the witness-stand of the same and bring all relevant evidence.

    23. PROOF OF CLAIM that the prosecutor, as an agent of the State, has established a ‘liability bond’ in this action to indemnify Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, the private man, in the event of any damnification.

      The Secured Party/Creditor Raymond Ronald Karczewski© respectfully asks that you answer these Jurisdictional questions regarding the Natural Man Raymond Ronald Karczewski within 10 days of this personal service and/or registered mailing. A non-response and/or failure to provide proof of claim will constitute agreement that charges brought against this living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural person, Creditor and Secured Party, Raymond Ronald Karczewski© are unfounded in common law and that Secured Party/Creditor's position is Truth and Lawful, and his Unalienable Right to Liberty which includes the Right to Travel is being systematically infringed upon by the Josephine County Courts, Sheriff's office, Grants Pass Public Safety, and Oregon State Police.

Failure and/or refusal to bring forth such ‘proof of claim’ within 10 days of service will jointly place you, Ms. K. FRANCES HANSON, Processing Services Manager, in commercial dishonor, and thus constitute an admission of damage and injury to Raymond Ronald ©, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural man in the amount of $1,000,000.00 (One Million Dollars) See Charge back on Attached facsimile.
See Also: http://www.arkenterprises.com/tortjoco.html

                                                   AFFIDAVIT

    Affiant, Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, Common Law Trade-Name/Trademark, © 2002, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural man, does swear and affirm that Affiant has scribed and read the foregoing facts, and, in accordance with the best of Affiant's firsthand knowledge and conviction, such are true, correct, complete, and not misleading, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

This Affidavit is dated the Thirty First Day of the Eighth Month in the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine.
____________________________________________________________
Raymond Ronald Karczewski©, Secured Party/Creditor, Claimant

STATE OF OREGON

     County of Josephine    } ss.

     BE IT REMEMBERED, That on this _______ day of ______________, ______,
Before me, the undersigned, A Notary Public in and for the State of Oregon, personally appeared the within named
______________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
known to me to be the identical individual AS described in and who executed thewithin instrument and acknowledged to me that ___________ executed the same freely and voluntarily.

                    IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set My
                    hand And affixed my official seal the day and Year last above Written.
                    _________________________________________
                            Notary Public of Oregon

                    My Commission expires: _______________________

Ed and Elaine Brown: LET FREEDOM RING!!

NOTE: Following is a commentary based on the exerpted words of Elaine Brown, who along with her husband Ed, are being unlawfully held prisoners by the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT.

eb: > Dear Ray,

August 21, 2009

eb: > "September 3 is sentencing We will probably get moved right after that. so check out the Internet for our whereabouts"

rk: That was my last word received from Elaine. i.e., "September 3 is sentencing." Please read http://www.arkenterprises.com/dialch260.html#Patriot

rk: "September 3" has come and gone with no word on the disposition of the case. A Government/News Blackout??? Curious, is it not?

rk: The Concord Monitor, a New Hampshire newspaper which has strictly monitored the Brown case since its inception, now lays fallow in its information on the Brown Trial. Not a word has been published since Sept 3, 2009..

rk: Anyone see a red flag waving?

rk: My take is that the court now finds themselves between a "rock and a hard place" were Ed and Elaine Brown to have acted upon their Unalienable Rights by rejecting the court's offer of sentencing thereby negating any legal presumption of any corporate contract existing between them and the Unconstitutional Corporate Administrative Court based on consent.

rk: Throughout it all the highly publicized unlawful but "legal" "color of law" actions taken by the Unconstitutional, Non-Article III courts, its prosecutors and enforcement minions, all of whom function within the narrow constraints of Administrative (contract) Law have repeatedly refused to prove in writing, accompanied by oath or affidavit the challenges of JURISDICTIONS made repeatedly by the Browns.

rk: The Challenge is based in the fundamental question of Law of whether they, a fictional corporate court/agency ever established jurisdiction over Ed and Elaine Brown, a private, living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural man and woman standing on their Unalienable Rights to Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Property.

rk: After all, that fundamental Maxim of Law worked for me in my unlawful prosecutions as a "Paper Terrorist" (i.e., Simulation of Legal Process) by the Oregon Courts regarding case #02CR0617 and 03CR0170 and remains the Fundamental protection of All citizens of the DeJure Constitutional Government of these united states of America. After threatening me with 35 years in prison, and convicting the JURISTIC PERSON they threw me, the Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient Natural man out of their jail with no charges, no legal entanglements whatsoever upon this free man.

rk: There is much ado in the mainstream and alternative media about the Tea Bag movement, now underway in America. The vast majority of its emotionally charged participants DON'T KNOW THE HALF OF IT when it comes to the real power possessed by the Sovereign American People.

rk: No need to fight the government, BOYCOTT, BOYCOTT, BOYCOTT IT!!