Archive for April, 2015

The Michigan Supreme Court is chipping away at our Constitution while aiding and abetting the inferior courts through the creation and implementation of Unconstitutional Michigan Court Rules that allow the inferior courts to intentionally deprive We the People of our inalienable natural rights. See MCR 3.920(H)

Our laws, along with the Michigan Court Rules, are “presumed” to be Constitutional by the courts without a second thought. This “presumption” is completely insane!

In 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court completely redefined a Michigan Court Rule with the specific intent to diminish the 1st Amendment. This court rule was MCR 8.115 and was originally titled, Courtroom Decorum and covered…

(A) Display of Flags. The flags of the United States and of the State of Michigan must be displayed in a conspicuous place adjacent to the bench at all times when court is in session.
(B) Judicial Robe. When acting in his or her official capacity in the courtroom, a judge shall wear a black robe.

In the 2009 rewrite, the Michigan Supreme Court changed the title of the court rule to “Courtroom Decorum; Policy Regarding Use of Cell Phones or Other Electronic Communication Devices and added

(C) Establishment of a Policy Regarding Portable Electronic Communication Devices.
(1) A facility that contains a courtroom may determine use of electronic equipment in nonjudicial areas of the facility.
(2) The chief judge may establish a policy regarding the use of cell phones or other portable electronic communication devices within the court, except that no photographs may be taken of any jurors or witnesses, and no photographs may be taken inside any courtroom without permission of the court. The policy regarding the use of cell phones or other portable electronic communication devices shall be posted in a conspicuous location outside and inside each courtroom. Failure to comply with this section or with the policy established by the chief judge may result in a fine, including confiscation of the device, incarceration, or both for contempt of court.

Today, this court rule is being used to pervert the state and federal constitutions and the people’s 1st Amendment right by banning the free press from our courthouses and our courtrooms.

Although our courts and our judges have no duty to enforce acts and rules that are unconstitutional, the Supreme Court mandates that all acts, codes, statutes and court rules to be presumed constitutional when “Court Rules” do not have ANY legislative oversight for their constitutionality.

The supreme court was never intended to create legislation and therefore has no duty to test it’s new legislation for it’s constitutionality before it is adopted and implemented. Interestingly enough, the supreme court has observed that it has full control over the creation and maintenance of the Michigan Court Rules and that some of the people seem willing to accept these court rules as if they were actual law. Knowing this, the supreme court is converting the Michigan Court Rules into it’s own brand of legislation over the people which is not only a perversion of the separation of powers provisions of the state and federal Constitutions, it is an intentional act of treason by the supreme court.

The unlawful creation of new legislation by the supreme court is very clever but it is Treason, none the less.

Even though the 2009 changes to MCR 8.115 only talk about “portable electronic communication devices” as a single phrase with limited meaning, any intentional misread obviously changes it’s meaning completely.

The news paper announces chief judicial terrorist Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law as a “ban on cell phones” when Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law covers everything that is specifically not a “communication device” nor “cell phone”. Even the news articles are intentionally misleading as the intent of Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law is meant to actually target recording devices.

Paul Chamberlain’s new policy/law, if it were actually intended to stop courtroom distractions such as ringing or otherwise having audible distracting features, could have been written to prohibit things that make noise.

Paul Chamberlain’s new Administrative Order is more accurately described as “Ban On The First Amendment”.

Additionally, Chief Judge made Administrative Rules are only to govern the administration of the court staff and not the people. Paul Chamberlain claims, in his same policy/law that he intends to enforce his new policy/law upon the people with the threat of confiscation, incarceration and fines of up to $7,500 in direct violation of another court rule MCR 8.112(B)(1) which reads as follows:

MCR 8.112(B)(1) A trial court may issue an administrative order governing only internal court management.

Chief Judicial Terrorist Paul Chamberlain created his new policy/law through his ability as a “chief judge”, to create an “Administrative Order” and is now enforcing it upon the people knowing that his administrative authority is limited to “internal court management”. This is an intentional act of TREASON and is also judicial terrorism.

Paul’s presumed friend and co-conspirator in this Judicial Terrorism was fingered in Paul’s own”news” announcement/press release on or about February 27, 2015 in Federal Court Judge Thomas Ludington. As a “Federal Court Judge” Thomas Ludington recently made a ruling that banning cell phones from courtroom was not unconstitutional when it is completely unconstitutional. Ludington placed the emphasis on “cell phones” but went on to expand on that by including recording devices which was his aim in the first place. This was a simple judicial “bait & switch” tactic carried out by a Federal judge!

If it were truly the intent of the Michigan Supreme Court to reduce or eliminate the audible distractions in the courtroom, wouldn’t this be effectively done by fining the holder of the distracting device $100 dollars per occurrence?

Paul Chamberlain announced his new policy/law banning not only cell phones but every form and type of electronic device by citing the alleged inappropriate acts of one man, Ted Visner.  Ted Visner, (ME), is alleged to have recorded Paul Chamberlain’s judge friend and coworker Mark Duthie lying in court. As the “Chief Judge” of Isabella County, Paul Chamberlain was required to ACT upon the judicial misconduct allegations but instead created policy/law to prevent the further capture of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct, instead electing to perform an act of treason by and through the intentional conspired deprivation of rights under color of law. A Federal Crime as defined in Title 18 U.S.C. §§ 241 & 242.

If it were truly the intent of the Michigan Supreme Court to maintain the integrity of the judiciary, it is failing miserably. So miserably in fact, that our constitutions perversion seems to be it’s specific intent.

Here is where we come full circle w/ Michigan Supreme Court complicity…

The Michigan Supreme Court is obviously aware of Michigan Court Rule MCR 8.112(B)(1) because the Michigan Supreme Court made this rule. MCR 8.112(B)(1) A trial court may issue an administrative order governing only internal court management.

So then, why would the Michigan Supreme Court add the following text to the bottom of the newly created 2009 Court Rule MCR 8.115 (C) that states as follows…

“The policy regarding the use of cell phones or other portable electronic communication devices shall be posted in a conspicuous location outside and inside each courtroom. Failure to comply with this section or with the policy established by the chief judge may result in a fine, including confiscation of the device, incarceration, or both for contempt of court.”

Since Chief Judge made policy “Administrative Orders” are only for the internal management of the court, why plaster this “Policy Notice” all over the courthouse at additional taxpayer expense when a memo could have been circulated within the court staff to whom the “policy” only applies? It is here that the specific intent of the Michigan Supreme Court is to make it appear that the creation of court policy, through chief judge made Administrative Orders are intended to govern the people in addition to court staff in direct intentional violation and contradiction of MCR 8.112(B)(1).

This is complete and utter bullshit and WILL NOT BE TOLERATED by the people! 

Paul Chamberlain and the likes of Thomas Ludington seem to think that at this point our only option is to file a federal suit to challenge the constitutionality of these conspired bullshit games mascaraing as legitimate judicial authorities.

This “only option” notion could not be further from the truth.

Judicial Terrorism and open acts of Treason perpetrated by the judiciary itself will not be fought in corrupt courts that have shown themselves to be complicate in the intentional perversion of our state and federal Constitutions!

Paul Chamberlain is supposed to be the Chief Judge in Isabella County. Are acts of treason against the people of Michigan part of the job description of a “Chief Judge”? Our current alleged judicial system allows judges do do what ever the hell they want without fear of reprisal because they have created for themselves “Absolute Immunity” placing themselves conveniently “Above the Law”. The only thing absolute about this is the “Bullshit”.

Immunity was created to limit the exposure a judge might have for making “honest” mistakes. Intentional acts of treason do not fit into any honest and honorable category and are crimes against the people of our state and our country.

 

 

11044560_10204634413072716_5508578336170258964_n

 

The system as defined to this point is only a glimpse into the criminal nature of what purports to be our “judicial system”.

The Michigan Child Protection Laws, in conjunction with the Michigan Court Rules have been tailored to streamline the kidnapping of our children to maximize federal and other financial returns to members of the BAR and to the parasitic corporations that have sprouted up around this self perpetuating criminal system of child trafficking.

CPS and the county courts of Michigan have built this empire through the exploitation of Michigan Court Rule MCR 3.920(H) which seemingly allows the courts and the prosecutors to skip the Adjudicative Phase of the proceedings against Michigan parents whom have had their children stolen by CPS.

MCR 3.920(H) allows the courts to proceed even though it failed to assume lawful jurisdiction!

This alleged court rule does the following things.

FIRST: And most important, this rule is being relied upon before proceedings are initiated against a respondent parent.

SECOND: This rule forgives the prosecution for depriving a respondent parent of their due process rights. Due Process is a right that can NOT be given away nor taken away. This right is inalienable.

THIRD: This rule allegedly removes a respondent parent’s ability to Object to terminal Notice Defects simply by their appearance and participation.

FORTH: This rule allows the court and the prosecution to merge the adjudicative phase and the dispositional phase into a single phase proceeding against a respondent parent absent due process.

With the court, the prosecution and CPS having developed a reliance upon this all encompassing “Forgiveness Clause” built into the court rules, they have become dependent and reliant upon it even though they all know it to be a Constitutional Due Process violation.

Our courts have become addicted to the deprivation of the People’s Due Process Rights because they are more quickly able to generate revenue for themselves.

Irrespective of the nature and the truth of the allegations against the respondent parent, the current system is setup for the state to WIN EVERY TIME!

The state’s specific reliance on this alleged Michigan Court Rule is an “Exigent Fraud” as it sets up the people to fail before the proceedings even begin and this is obviously outside any parent’s ability to combat.

Another functional component of this “criminal system” can be found in the court’s TAKING the liberty of assigning complicate lawyers to represent the alleged respondent parents. I say “Alleged Respondent Parents” because the parent was NEVER served and is therefore SPECIFICALLY NOT A “RESPONDENT PARENT” but rather a fly caught in the judicial web of deceit!

But it gets better!

MCR 3.915(B)(1)(b) states that the court shall appoint an attorney if the respondent parent requests the court to do so and can not financially afford to pay for one themselves.

Alleged Respondent Parents in Michigan are being assigned court appointed lawyers before they are even aware that they may need a lawyer and specifically in the absence of a request by them for a court appointed lawyer!

Michigan Courts and specifically alleged judge Mark Duthie will “order” you to have a lawyer if you want one or not.

If you think that the court is doing you a favor by appointing you a bottom feeding attorney like Tony Moses of Mount Pleasant Michigan, you are sorely mistaken. A quick look at his client “win” record should clue you in. 

The important question to ask is… If the assignment of a court appointed lawyer were actually helpful in a system created and maintained to make parents lose every time, why would a judge take away the right to refuse court appointed counsel in violation of MCR 3.915(B)(1)(b) and in violation of the Michigan Constitution’s Article 1 § 13?

It is because if the court can make you have a “lawyer” complicate in the system’s goals, to take children in the absence of due process without objection, these people get paid more faster!

I AM a simple carpenter and have figured this out all on my own using only the laws, rules and codes that I have been exposed to and I am positive that these same issues can be found in a great many other areas that I have not taken the time to dissect.  I also realize that having made my finding public has created motive for these criminal actors to dispose of me to cover their criminal acts.

Hear what Melody Lake has to say about Ted Visner without using my name specifically.

I don’t know what Melody Lake was told about me specifically but it is clear in this recording of her ranting about me that she has been told that I am “not appropriate” to ever be around her children EVER even though I have never been charged nor convicted of any crimes yet I am being classified by her as if I were Al Capone. Also here her talk about the “Rest Of Society” and to whom she is referring…

I am “Not Appropriate” because I can see what they are doing and how their acts are completely and intentionally criminal?

Pointing out the crimes of these people has been social suicide for me personally as you should be able to deduce from Melody Lake’s statements. After making this audio track public on YouTube, Melody had to follow up and make an unsubstantiated and false police report against me for allegedly threatening her.

The simplicity of the examples here in this article needs to be shared far and wide.

I never threatened Melody Lake. I did offer her a firm caution regarding her involvement with the criminal actions against Danielle Austin.

Also from this recording you can hear Melody lake state that Danielle Austin, at that time. was to have “Unsupervised Visitation” with all three of her children. This has since been taken away for no reason other than Dani getting help from me in this matter. Dani and her children are being punished by the kidnappers of her children for raising an objection with regard to the Notice Defects in her case and is now not allowed to see her children.

Shaun Hutchins has replaced Melody Lake after Melody allegedly resigned form CPS. Shaun, although ordered by the court to provide visitation, has scheduled visitation at a time her two oldest children are in school thus denying visitation with them all together. Additionally, the two older children are reported to being subjected to “counseling” four times a week.

Shaun Hutchins and the state have set out to alienate Dani and her children as if to make it appear that her children are not interested in seeing their mother.

shaunH

Danielle Austin is now allowed to see her youngest son Michael on Monday and Wednesday form 3:00 – 4:00 pm… and is intentionally disallowed to see her oldest two children at all despite a court order to the contrary. Although DHS has been ordered by the court to provide parenting time to Danielle, Shaun Hutchins is and has been placing the fulfillment of that court order on Danielle telling her that she needs to “work it out” with the father of the children herself.

Additionally, the state has also become the driving force behind the divorce of Danielle and her husband that seeks to initiate another court and another set of proceedings against Danielle that are aimed at awarding the father of the children full custody of the three Austin children. Keep in mind that Danielle left that relationship with possession of her children in hopes to start a better life for herself and her children and would have been the plaintiff in the divorce. Coincidentally, the alleged judge in the divorce proceedings is none other than Mark Duthie! Go figure!

The father of the children, the man that insisted Danielle not seek state aid for herself and her children because the state would come after him for child support (before CPS stepped in), is now the direct beneficiary of the actions of the state.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alleged Isabella County Judge, Mark Duthie either can not read or believes everyone else is stupid.

MCR3915Duthie

In a February 10, 2015 Motion Hearing, Duthie refused to allow Danielle Austin to proceed without the assistance of an attorney when the appointment of an attorney is completely at a respondent parents option according to Michigan Court Rules.

Danielle Austin did not request the appointment of an attorney nor does she want an attorney but Mark Duthie believes that he can deviate from the court rules and force her to have one despite Article 1 § 13 of the Michigan Constitution!

This mandatory appointment came after Danielle Austin filed a motion to dismiss that was hear in February to which the ONLY opposition/argument to her motion came from the same man, Mark Duthie.

Although the petitioners were represented by Isabella county prosecuting attorney Risa Scully, Scully did not offer any opposition to Danielle Austin’s motion.

 

 

This is a rather bold title wouldn’t you agree?

“Michigan Supreme Court Furthers State’s Child Trafficking Agenda”

Well… guess what folks… It is true and I am going to show you how they are doing it.

Child abduction by CPS moves Michigan “Respondent Parents” into a two phase litigation process. The first phase deals directly with every parent’s 14th Amendment right to Due Process. This initial phase of the proceedings against respondent parents has got to be done first. There are NO exceptions! Although there are NO exceptions, this phase of the proceedings is being completely SKIPPED IN EVERY CASE I HAVE EXAMINED! Skipping this phase, NULLIFIES the remainder of the proceedings all together.

The complicity of the Michigan Supreme Court is in “them” having created a Michigan Court Rule that allows county courts to forego the Due Process rights of ALL RESPONDENT PARENTS IN MICHIGAN. See: MCR 3.920(H) below…

This Michigan Court Rule “claims” that Respondent Parents that come to court and participate (Appearance and Participation) in the proceedings against them automatically cures all the notice defects in the case against them when “NOTICE DEFECTS” are “TERMINAL”  to the proceedings themselves.

As any parent will tell you when their children are absconded by the state the first thing they WANT to do and FEEL THEY NEED TO DO is to go to court and argue why they should get their children back. Little do they know that the presentment of their arguments that are intended to show the court that they should get their children back actually trap them into a jurisdiction unlawfully obtained and criminally maintained.

A parent’s own arguments trap them in a system designed to make them lose their children when a simple objection presented to the court would NULLIFY all of the proceedings against them.

law_001

When I found this alleged “Michigan Court Rule” I was completely dumbfounded. This alleged rule is a trap door that allows CPS and the county prosecutor to knowingly proceed against Respondent Parents without any Due Process while forgiving them for doing so!

Respondent Parents do not possess the ability to waive their Due Process rights either knowingly or unknowingly. The notion itself is completely Unconstitutional!

Inalienable means Inalienable!

inalienable

Why would the Michigan Supreme Court create such a “rule”?

Because they think they can? Because the majority of people don’t appear to care? Because we are believed unable to do anything about it? All of the above?

Our courts “presume” that the statutes, acts, codes and court rules are Constitutional. This presumption is arrogant and self promoting because they know that any challenge will first have to challenge the constitutionality of these so called laws and court rules which could take years to litigate before the issue itself can be addressed. This is TOTAL BULLSHIT.

What makes this completely EVIL is the fact that county prosecutors have come to rely on the trap door feature of the Michigan Court Rules in MCR 3.920(H) before the proceedings even begin!

 

Here is a video series that demonstrates the system in action.

Announcement / Trailer
https://youtu.be/tPaQ9VsCGCo

Part 1 of 4
https://youtu.be/F5-hpFkPTGQ

Part 2 of 4
https://youtu.be/Um0pgl7JYBc

Part 3 of 4
https://youtu.be/lH4gqvcUiHI

Part 4 of 4
https://youtu.be/mYva74Be32I

 

Ted Visner
Victim Advocate
De Jure Sheriff, county of Isabella
(989) 954-2814

 

 

The CPS Battle Update…

Everyone fighting a CPS case knows that what they are doing is wrong. The trouble is… they aren’t sure why. Over the last couple weeks I have been working on a video production (documentary) that exposes the inner workings of the system that will helpfully point a lot of victim parents in the right direction. This has been a learning experience for me as well and the farther I get into tearing apart the massive volumes of information, the more I learn and the more I will expose.

The point that I want to leave you with in this message is that CPS cases are broken down into two phases. These two phases need to be done in exact order or the second phase is VOID.

Phase One is the “Adjudication Phase”. In this phase, the state is absolutely required to deal with you using established procedures that are intended to protect your Due Process rights. At the conclusion of the adjudication phase, you are either forever guilty or declared innocent and your child(ren) returned. From the adjudication phase you are judged to be either a “Fit Parent” or an “Unfit Parent”.

From this determination, your case is either pushed into Phase Two (Dispositional Phase) or the case against you is dismissed.

Phase Two is the “Dispositional Phase”. For the court to enter this phase, you will have to have been adjudicated as an “Unfit Parent”. Provided that Phase One was completed properly and lawfully, you are now in the fight for your life to get your children back and you will be working against EVERYONE in the courtroom, including your own paid lawyer. (see my YouTube Channel “Kelly Lambert” video)

If your case has made it to the Dispositional Phase, you must know that you have already been classified as “Unfit” and nothing you say or do is going to change the mind and/or the opinion of all the people in the courtroom, including the judge and your own lawyer. (see my YouTube channel “Mark Duthie” video) After you are in the dispositional phase of the proceedings, the court believes that it has no further obligation to consider you anything other than an “Unfit Parent” and can order you to do anything it wants such as counseling, drug testing, anger management etc, etc…

Phase One, the Adjudication Phase”, is a nuisance and a financial burden to the state. Your Due Process rights are a burden to the state. The state courts and court cases that I have observed, do not actually conduct the Adjudication Phase which make the remainder of the proceedings a complete nullity.

The courts are required (by the Constitution) to consider every parent a “Fit Parent” unless they have “properly” adjudicated them otherwise. Without proper adjudication, parents are unlawfully considered “Unfit Parents” and then the state sees fit to molest these families as they please, leaving parents in a position where they have to BEG for time with their own children while attempting to manage the cost and time burden created by all of the court ordered services.

After you are lawfully or unlawfully declared unfit, It becomes the court’s mission to tie an anchor around your neck by choking you with all the financial burdens associated with all of the requirements placed upon you while using the return of your children as the carrot.

In a half ass attempt to meet the federal requirements to obtain federal funding, CPS is required to make every effort to keep the family together. The state believes that it meets this federal requirement by calling an independent volunteer service on one day and taking children the next. This is absolute insanity.

Here is the four part series that was just completed. Please feel free to share this and to comment.

+++++++++++++++++++

It has been a grueling 8 days to get this project done, mirrored and uploaded but feel that it was completely worth the effort. All across our nation, our alleged public officials are going into hiding to avoid public exposure for the foul deeds and crimes they are perpetrating upon the people. These people can NOT be allowed to hide. They have taken on the jobs of being public and working and getting paid to be public and therefore must accept being exposed publicly for the work WE are paying them to do.

In Isabella county I caught judge Mark Duthie lying on the public record and this was published on my YouTube channel. The county’s “official response” by the alleged “Chief Judge” was NOT to address the facts presented but rather to create policy/law banning recording devices to prevent the further capture of further EVIDENCE of further judicial improprieties in Isabella county. THIS IS COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE!

Announcement

Part 1 of 4

Part 2 of 4

Part 3 of 4

Part 4 of 4

Yesterday, (4-13-2015), there was a hearing in the Danielle Austin case and SHE DID NOT GO!

Why would she? She has proven to the court (and to herself) that the court has never had jurisdiction. She has proven to the court (and to herself) that everything the court has done up to this point is a complete nullity… a total fiction, absolutely devoid of ANY meaning.

If your judge demonstrates his own willingness to lie on the court record, why in the hell would you stick around to hear what else he/she has to say?

Once you have the proof and evidence in your court case that the chief judge is a thief, and the judges in the case are liars, why would anyone go to proceedings being allegedly adjudicated with these same people that are promoting frauds against the people?

It’s simple folks! Remove your consent! Refuse to participate!

DO NOT ALLOW yourself to be subjected to the crimes and frauds being perpetrated against you in court BECAUSE YOU WILL NEVER WIN & YOU WILL NEVER FIND JUSTICE!

 

The Michigan Supreme Court (our judicial branch of government) has taken over the duties (through usurpation) of the Michigan Legislative branch of government, effectively merging these two separate branches of government into a single entity in violation of the separation of powers provisions of the state and federal constitutions. Treason. Additionally, both the legislative branch and the executive branch of our Michigan government is aware of the takeover by the judiciary and is complicate.

michigan supreme court_002

Although this can be seen and proven in many different ways, I will show you just a couple here in this article that are very obvious and easy to demonstrate.

FIRST
The Michigan Supreme Court is basically in charge of the “Michigan Court Rules”. These “rules” were initially established to create uniformity in all Michigan courts and were originally called “Administrative Court Procedures”. The Administrative Court Procedures were to establish a level playing field for the court officers (not people) that were participating in courtroom proceedings. These Administrative Court Procedures were initially for the court staff, judges and lawyers only. This is why lawyers are “Officers of the Court” and is that which makes them subject to the jurisdiction of the original“Administrative Court Procedures” now known as the “Michigan Court Rules”. to which we are all being unlawfully subjugated.

These Administrative Court Procedures were never intended to govern the people and the title of these Administrative Court Procedures could never remain “as-is” if the judiciary wanted people to come to believe that they were to govern the people themselves so the name was changed to the “Administrative Court Rules” and then to “Michigan Court Rules”. Over time, these rules have been continuously imposed upon the We the People as if we were under the same jurisdiction as court officers.

I recently read an article that talked about the courts giving precedence to Michigan Court Rules over established Michigan Law if ever the two were in conflict. I have to find that article again and verify it’s legitimacy and it’s authority & authenticity but found it very compelling on it’s first read an had seen it in practice myself personally. The article also discussed that whenever an issue were to arise not covered by Michigan law that the Michigan Court Rules would prevail. This is extremely disturbing and very dangerous.

Since the Michigan Supreme Court makes up the Administrative Court Procedure, I mean the Michigan Court Rules, isn’t the Michigan Supreme Court now a legislative body through usurpation and deceit??? TREASON!

This may fail to mean anything to you unless you understand the importance of the separation of powers provisions in the state and federal Constitutions.

This will also lack importance in your life if you place no value on freedom and liberty.

This may also lack luster if you are among the few that benefit from this scheme, or their spouses or other close family.

The Michigan legislation is aware and complicate. The Michigan executive branch is also obviously aware and complicate for each has the DUTY to prevent the encroachment of the others.

Example One:
MCR 8.115
In its original state, this Administrative Procedure/Court Rule was very much like it is today with the exception of the rule title and the entire section of (C) having been added. The original “title” was “Courtroom Decorum”. Shown below.

8.115_Prior_to_Sept_2009

In August 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court, in and of it’s own volition, changed the hell out of it while we were all distracted with the New Great Depression. Shown below. Take special note that everything underlined was added by the Michigan Supreme Court and became effective on September 1, 2009.

8.115_Change

Since the Michigan Supreme Court is NOT the Michigan Legislature, what mechanism is in place to test and to insure the constitutionality of it rules written on the whims of men who incorporate these changes without notice to the people? You see… rules written for the administration of the court can be done without our knowledge and without our approval because these rules DO NOT GOVERN the people.  This would be like asking the people of Michigan to authorize the employee handbook for Wal-Mart before it’s implementation on Wal-Mart staff and employees.

Did you see this shit on the ballot? And why not?

The answer to those questions are very simple. Employee handbooks do not need to be constitutional and the Michigan Court Rules were intended to be the employee handbook for court staff (public servants) and do not govern We the People. They were established to govern the public servants that work in the judiciary. See below.

8.112_Scope_002

Paul Chamberlain didn’t make a “local court rule”, he created an “Administrative Policy” intended to govern ONLY court management. This is further proved by the title of Paul’s announcement as it conforms to the rule MCR 8.115(B)(2) above which dictates how Administrative Orders are to be numbered. Paul’s is numbered “2015-2″ clearly identifying it as an Administrative Order rather than a Local Court Rule which would have been titled much differently. Like LCR 8.115(C)(3) Paul’s Law.

Below, I will show how the Dishonorable Chief Judicial Terrorist in Isabella County announced a new policy which is actually an administrative order. Alleged judge Paul Chamberlain announced his policy on February 27, 2015 and made it effective on all of the people in Michigan, not just the county court staff, on March 9, 2015. See below.

cmlife_001

Not sure why CM-Life edited my name out of the article but is you search CM-Life with “visner” or click on this link, you will see how the article was originally written. At least the top part.  http://www.cm-life.com/search/?a=1&o=date&s=visner The full artile link is here. http://www.cm-life.com/article/2015/02/isabella-county-trial-court-to-adopt-new-policy-prohibiting-cell-phones

Judicial terrorist, Paul Chamberlain, slammed the door on the Constitution with this administrative order that he plans to enforce on We the People through the contempt of court penalty provisions! Using fines and incarceration provisions from something else entirely, to enforce policy, converts policy into law.

Paul Chamberlain knows that the court rules and the penalty provisions of contempt of court are NOT enforceable on the people but he doesn’t need to convince the people, he needs only convince the county paid security staff acting as court bailiffs whom have reported to me that they have not sworn an oath to the Constitution, therefore no obligation to defend it and no obligation to serve the people. Basically the court bailiffs in Isabella county are a contracted private security force working for an employer.

Below is Chief Terrorist Paul Chamberlain’s personally created policy/law.

0001s

Good thing the Michigan Supreme Court changed these rules back in 2009! The trouble with subtle changes is that they sometimes are not subtle nor fast enough to meet future objectives. Paul Chamberlain has to take the changes made in 2009 and change them further, all by himself. The court rule, created in 2009 talks only about “Portable Electronic Communication Devices” which is a classification of devices used for communication and covers everything pagers to walki-talkies to cell phones and even to laptops equipped or presumed to be equipped with communication software such as email and skype etc.  As a single classification regarding communications, it does not speak of anything other yet terrorist Paul Chamberlain has expanded the definition by inserting commas into the classification “Portable Electronic Communication Devices” and effectively changing the meaning of court rule completely. From the single classification described in the Court Rule that covers every communication device that is both portable and electronic, Paul’s deviation through the addition of punctuation now converts the court rule to include digital audio recorders. Paul’s intentionally distorted view of the court rule below also excludes everything “electronic” from the courthouse. Things like electric wheelchairs, insulin pumps, pace makers etc are no longer allowed in the courthouse according to Paul Chamberlain. If that weren’t enough, Paul add this… “communication devices of any kind”. This would be to cover not only cell phones and pagers but also 2 cups and a string.

10526122_10204634137145818_5536776231706557451_n

So why did the Dishonorable Chief Judicial Terrorist Paul Chamberlain do this? Why did this alleged chief judge levy direct allegations against me personally and as a lone actor and as if I had already been convicted of doing something wrong?

Quote: “Prompted by several recordings of courtroom actions uploaded to YouTube by Mount Pleasant resident Ted Visner…” “Unfortunately the irresponsible act of one person is causing us to respond at this juncture.” said Chief Judge Paul Chamberlain.

Chief Terrorist Paul Chamberlain is calling me irresponsible? To this I say, ummm, what the hell am I supposed to say to this! It’s laughable really!

Paul doesn’t know that I made the recording and he doesn’t know that I uploaded those recordings to my YouTube Channel but in this article he is claiming that I did…  Awfully presumptuous of any “judge” wouldn’t you think?  But I don’t even care about any of that crap because it is nothing more than a distraction. Let us get to the meat and potatoes shall we!

Paul Chamberlain’s official response to uploaded “court actions” on YouTube was to bastardize the meaning of Michigan Court Rule MCR 8.115(C) and make it mean what he needed to prevent me from recording public servants performing their public function.

Lets face it folks… Tape Recorders have been around almost 80 years longer than cell phones without the need for additional court rules to be shoved into a “courtroom decorum” rule…

The question Paul Chamberlain is and continues to refuse to address are the allegations stated in the uploads to YouTube themselves. These allegation, using the accused own audio tracks, points out specific violation of the public trust. These audio recordings capture alleged judge Mark Duthie lying on the record to try and make it seem to the appellate court on appeal (prepping the court transcript for appeal… for preservation of self) that the recorded hearing on February 10, 2015 was the first time he had participated in that particular case when he had signed the original order on the same day the case was initiated more than 200 days before the hearing! What say you Chief Paul???

Why do you have the trust of the people when you fail and refuse to address judicial misconduct in the court and county where you are “chief” and “circuit court judge”? Gotta maintain the illusion right Paul? You are pathetic Paul and you make me want to vomit!

Directly below are links to the YouTube posts that Chief Judicial Terrorist Paul Chamberlain refused to address. The first link is the entire <10 min> hearing. Each of the videos are of the different aspects of the same 10 mion hearing with different notes on the different aspects.

___

Below: This 10 minute clip is packed full of jewels that are broken down further in the following clips.

___

Below: Mark Duthie makes a statement to be picked up on the court transcript at the beginning of this hearing in an effort to deceive the Michigan Appellate Court when he states that this hearing was the first time he was involved in this case knowing that he had signed the original order some 200+ days prior at the start of this case.

___

Below: Grand Rapids attorney Kelly Lambert had been fired more than two weeks before this hearing. Instead of filing a stipulated withdrawl, the county made him come to and participate in this hearing and do what he does here.

___

Below: Prosecutor Risa Scully talks about everything except the motion in front of the court.

___

Below: Prosecutor Risa Scully Lies to delay Kidnapping Charges against herself.

___

What is critical for We the People to recognize here is that the Michigan Supreme Court is actively working to unlawfully create Unconstitutional Michigan Court Rules that are to be intentionally forced upon the people through the inferior county courts and the courts at every level and as if these rules were law when they clearly are not.

Paul Chamberlain calls his new Administrative Policy, a “cell phone ban” when it is actually a “Ban on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights”. Private courthouse security has been tasked with enforcing Paul’s Policy upon the people, removing the people’s ability to freely offer consent or to refuse to consent. Paul Chamberlain is a traitor to the state of Michigan and to this country as his acts are treasonous!

Why then… would I ask the Michigan Supreme Court to adjudicate this when they are the monopolistic organization responsible for giving Paul the tools to be a traitor to the state and to this nation?

Second Example:                                                                                                                            This particular “rule” pulled out of an entirely different section of the Michigan Court Rules (updated, modified and maintained by the Michigan Supreme Court) is from Chapter 3.  MCR3.920(H) and reads as follows in the picture below.

Notice Defects_001

Cases that are not properly served on the parties do not exist and are COMPLETELY VOID but check out this “Michigan Court Rule”! It makes any VOID case legitimate by creating this “failure to object = waiver to object” clause!

In the actual case documents that I am about to show you, mother of three, Danielle Austin, was called to court via a telephone call two hours prior to a court hearing related to her already abducted three children.

Imagine, if you can, the state of mind you would be in if this were to happen to you… Imagine getting a phone call at 1:00 pm today from a CPS worker telling you that she has taken your children and that you need to be in court in two hours. Would you be prepared to offer an objection to any notice defects? If you said YES, you either are a lawyer or are married to a lawyer. For most of us however, this is entirely too difficult to imagine. Now lets compile a little more reality… Additionally, your are two months behind on your rent and are facing eviction and your spouse had just left you and your three children for greener pastures and took all of the money the family had.

Now you find yourself standing in front of a man wearing a black dress. You have this other man standing next to you that had, just 3 min prior, announced himself to you as your court appointed attorney and he is telling you that you are in a world of hurt and to just let him handle everything for you or you may never see your children again…

During the most bizarre 15 minutes of your entire life, had it crossed your mind that your objection had to have been raised in this time or your ability to object would be forever lost? The immediate assignment of counsel is a vital component of this trap because YOU are not allowed to speak in court yourself if you are “represented” by a lawyer. Even if you knew about the fatal flaws in the case against you, you would have only had 3 minutes to discuss this with your lawyer… but your lawyer already knows about the trap and refuses to defend you. Why would he object to the notice deficiencies and piss off all of his associates in the courtroom (including the judge) whom are all fully aware of the snare you are in.

The Michigan Supreme Court, through the creation of this BULLSHIT rule has provided the means for inferior courts to trap respondent parents and keep them trapped in their web of deceit to generate revenue through the unlawful abduction of our children.

What motivation would the judge, referee, prosecutor, defense attorney for the mother, defense attorney for the father and defense attorney for the three children, CPS workers and DHS workers have to ensure you your right to Due Process when the Michigan Supreme Court has provided them a means to ignore your Due Process rights completely?

Below are the court document excerpts (images) that will demonstrate how this state operated CHILD TRAFFICKING SCHEME works.

In the first image below is the picture of the “PROOF OF SERVICE” which is intended to show that the parties were noticed of the proceedings taking place against them. All you need from this picture of the actual document is the top line. These are the “directions” for the “PROCESS SERVER” and read as follows:

TO PROCESS SERVER:  You are to serve the summons and petition in accordance with MCR 3.920(B)(5) and… 

00001-PROOF OF SERVICE

(Edit: adding the notarized signature of Wendy Yost)

yost_POS_signed

The picture below is of the Michigan Court Rule referenced above.

00002-MCRaaa

As you can clearly see, the process server selected, in this case Wendy Yost, was directed to serve the Summons and Petition to Danielle Austin SEVEN DAYS prior to the hearing. Below is a picture of the actual summons that directed and commanded, under threat of warrant and arrest, Danielle Austin to appear in court on 7-23-2014 at 3:00 pm.

00003-SUMMONS

As you can clearly see from the image above, Danielle Austin was summoned to appear in court at 3:00 pm on July 23, 2014. Now go back up to the proof of service and take a look at the date and time Danielle Austin was allegedly served and notice that she Proof Of Service claims that Wendy Yost personally served Danielle Austin on July 23, 2014 at 2:57 pm.

Wendy Yost is claiming to have personally served Danielle Austin 3 minutes before the scheduled hearing when she was directed by the Proof Of Service itself to serve Danielle Austin seven days prior the hearing.

How in the hell can this be happening? A summons can only be authorized by a judge. Now lets flip over to page two of the summons and see what judge authorized the summons and when. In the picture below is page two of the summons.

00004-ORDER

Alleged Judge, William T. Ervin (P30654) signed this summons and order for Danielle Austin to appear in court on the very same day that he signed it. When the summons and petition was given to Wendy Yost she should have said… “Hey William, what in the hell are you doing? The Proof Of Service, and the Michigan Court Rules direct me to serve the Summons and Petition 7 days before the hearing!” To which “The Judge” must have said… “Hey Wendy, have you forgotten who I am? I am a judge and no one can question me. Even if they do darling, we are protected by all the immunity in the world and no one can touch us.” Regardless of the conversation between Wendy Yost  and William Ervin, (if their even was one), Wendy Yost took the Summons and Petition and gave it to another man named Tony Moses, most likely at the time indicated on the Proof Of Service itself which was 2:57 pm on July 23, 2014.

In either  event,  Danielle Austin was never served the Summons and Petition by Wendy Yost at any time ever. Danielle Austin came to possess the Summons and Petition after the hearing was over.

Danielle Austin was “assigned” an attorney before she even knew that she needed an attorney and before she knew that proceedings had commended against her regarding the disposition of her three children.

In the period of time between 2:57 pm and 3:10 pm, on July 23, 2014, Danielle’s life was forever changed in this 13 minutes of injustice.

What part did the Michigan Supreme Court play in all of this you ask? Everything above was allowed to play out exactly like it did because of Michigan Court Rule MCR 3.920(H) pictured below.

law_001aaa

This “RULE”, created and maintained by the Michigan Supreme Court, is specifically intended to cure issues related to “Defects in Service”. Additionally, and by no coincidence, this rule also completely strips “Respondent Parents” involved in “Child Protective Proceedings” of their natural right to Due Process at the same time.

With only a causal observation, it is very easy to see in this particular case how the court has become reliant on the ability to unlawfully take jurisdiction through this exigent fraud upon the people created and maintained by the Michigan Supreme Court.

This “Court Rule” is a shortcut, intended to deprive Michigan parents of their rights and ultimately, their children.

The failure to properly notice all parties with regard to legal proceedings is completely fatal to the proceedings themselves. The proceedings are NULL AND VOID entirely.

But the FRAUD does not stop here… In the picture below, additional FRAUD is conducted to conceal the exigent fraud.

00005_ORDER_AFTER_HEARING

The image above is the alleged “COURT ORDER” after the hearing.

THE COURT FINDS:                                                                                                                        7. [X] Notice of hearing was given as required by law.

This claim, is a flat out lie. The reason this check box exists on this form is due to the fact that had the parties not been noticed as required by law, everything they are doing is VOID and the proceedings MUST STOP IMMEDIATELY.

This is a very conclusive statement that is attested to by the alleged Referee in the case as well as the alleged judge that signed this order.  In this particular case the referee was Matthew Hagen and the judge Mark Duthie.

What Matthew Hagen and Mark Duthie want you to believe is that in their professional, personal and occupational review, the proof of service indicates to them that the summons and petition was served personally upon Danielle Austin, seven days before the hearing, as is the requirement of the law. They would also like for We the People to believe that it could even be possible to serve a summons created today, and have it served seven days into the past.

All of these public servants in Mount Pleasant Michigan will ultimately want you to believe that they are just incredibly incompetent (ignorant in fact) but this is not the case either. Each of the participants listed in this article are actively and willingly participating in these FRAUDS against the people of Michigan because these frauds against the people are what generate their paychecks.

If you are reading this article and do not understand how the Michigan Supreme Court has usurped the power of the Michigan Legislature to create this unconstitutional provision in the Michigan Court Rules that specifically deprives respondent parents of their unalienable right to Due Process, you  are obviously not alone. I guess, that as a custom home builder, I am accustomed to reading complex blueprints where one set of instructions are reliant on the understanding and implementation of other instructions while all the time, seeing the big picture.

This big picture in this case is how these despicable county courts, and the public servants that man them, across the country are allowed to rob the people of due process and steal the children of our nation’s poorest people without even the slightest bit of resistance from our alleged “superior courts”.

So  what… What are the implications of this?

Well if the Michigan Supreme Court can set out to create rules to trap you and I in a jurisdiction unlawfully obtained and criminally maintained, what else are they doing?

If the Michigan Supreme Court can create these “rules” and impose them upon the people, as they do on the fly, and the rules are not scrutinized for their constitutionality, we are just totally screwed.

Here again is the original MCR 8.115

8.115_Prior_to_Sept_2009

Changed to what is in the image below by the Michigan Supreme Court and made effective September 1, 2009

8.115_Change

And finally, here are the comments of the Michigan Supreme Court members with regard to the changes they just made to
MCR 8.115.

 

0000ccc

I had to pay someone to get a copy of this. This is directly out of the Michigan Court Rules Annotated.

The comments by the Chief Justice make we want to PROJECTILE  PUKE  all over him/her.

CR8.115EDIT

The phrase “portable electronic communication devices”  is used four different times in this bastardized rule originally intended to ensure our courtrooms had a flag and that the judge wore a robe…

“portable electronic communication devices”

NOT

“portable electronics and communication devices”

NOT

“portable, electronic, communication, devices”

I originally thought that Paul Chamberlain was making this huge leap all by himself and he kinda is because people, in general, do not have access to the annotated court rules.

But read again the comments of the all powerful Michigan Supreme Court Justice Kelly below…

0000ccc001

It is no coincidence that everyone on the Supreme Court failed and refuse to consider the constitutionality of this rule but… are they required to do so?

Since the Court Rules are only for the administration of the court and were never intended to govern the actions of the people, I would have to conclude that the Michigan Supreme Court had no obligation to ensure the rule, meant only for court staff, had to be constitutional with regard to the public servants it was intended to govern much as the employee handbook for Wal-Mart does not need to to be Constitutional with regard to Wal-Mart employees.

CR8.115EDIT_002

 

MCL 600.901 State bar; membership; public body corporate. 
Sec. 901.
The state bar…

Constitutionality: The State of Michigan, through the combined actions of the Supreme Court, the Legislature, and the State Bar, may compulsorily exact dues, and require association of attorneys, to support only those duties and functions of the State Bar which serve a compelling state interest and which cannot be accomplished by means less intrusive upon the First Amendment rights of objecting attorneys. Falk v State Bar, 418 Mich 270; 342 NW2d 504 (1983). The regulation of the practice of law, the maintenance of high standards in the legal profession, and the discharge of the profession’s duty to protect and inform the public are purposes in which the State of Michigan has a compelling interest justifying unavoidable intrusions on the First Amendment rights of attorneys; on the other hand, political and legislative activities are impermissible intrusions, as are activities designed to further commercial and economic interests of the members of the bar. Falk v State Bar, 418 Mich 270; 342 NW2d 504 (1983). 

 

 

 

GOTTA RUN! CHECK BACK FOR THE REST OF THE STORY

 

The Michigan Supreme Court (our judicial branch of government) has taken over the duties (through usurpation) of the Michigan Legislative branch of government, effectively merging these two separate branches of government into a single entity in violation of the separation of powers provisions of the state and federal constitutions. Treason. Additionally, both the legislative branch and the executive branch of our Michigan government is aware of the takeover by the judiciary and is complicate.

michigan supreme court_002

Although this can be seen and proven in many different ways, I will show you just a couple here in this article that are very obvious and easy to demonstrate.

FIRST
The Michigan Supreme Court is basically in charge of the “Michigan Court Rules”. These “rules” were initially established to create uniformity in all Michigan courts and were originally called “Administrative Court Procedures”. The Administrative Court Procedures were to establish a level playing field for the court officers (not people) that were participating in courtroom proceedings. These Administrative Court Procedures were initially for the court staff, judges and lawyers only. This is why lawyers are “Officers of the Court” and is that which makes them subject to the jurisdiction of the original “Administrative Court Procedures” now known as the “Michigan Court Rules”. to which we are all being unlawfully subjugated.

These Administrative Court Procedures were never intended to govern the people and the title of these Administrative Court Procedures could never remain “as-is” if the judiciary wanted people to come to believe that they were to govern the people themselves so the name was changed to the “Administrative Court Rules” and then to “Michigan Court Rules”. Over time, these rules have been continuously imposed upon the We the People as if we were under the same jurisdiction as court officers.

I recently read an article that talked about the courts giving precedence to Michigan Court Rules over established Michigan Law if ever the two were in conflict. I have to find that article again and verify it’s legitimacy and it’s authority & authenticity but found it very compelling on it’s first read an had seen it in practice myself personally. The article also discussed that whenever an issue were to arise not covered by Michigan law that the Michigan Court Rules would prevail. This is extremely disturbing and very dangerous.

Since the Michigan Supreme Court makes up the Administrative Court Procedure, I mean the Michigan Court Rules, isn’t the Michigan Supreme Court now a legislative body through usurpation and deceit??? TREASON!

This may fail to mean anything to you unless you understand the importance of the separation of powers provisions in the state and federal Constitutions.

This will also lack importance in your life if you place no value on freedom and liberty.

This may also lack luster if you are among the few that benefit from this scheme, or their spouses or other close family.

The Michigan legislation is aware and complicate. The Michigan executive branch is also obviously aware and complicate for each has the DUTY to prevent the encroachment of the others.

Example One:
MCR 8.115
In its original state, this Administrative Procedure/Court Rule was very much like it is today with the exception of the rule title and the entire section of (C) having been added. The original “title” was “Courtroom Decorum”. Shown below.

8.115_Prior_to_Sept_2009

In August 2009, the Michigan Supreme Court, in and of it’s own volition, changed the hell out of it while we were all distracted with the New Great Depression. Shown below. Take special note that everything underlined was added by the Michigan Supreme Court and became effective on September 1, 2009.

8.115_Change

Since the Michigan Supreme Court is NOT the Michigan Legislature, what mechanism is in place to test and to insure the constitutionality of it rules written on the whims of men who incorporate these changes without notice to the people? You see… rules written for the administration of the court can be done without our knowledge and without our approval because these rules DO NOT GOVERN the people.  This would be like asking the people of Michigan to authorize the employee handbook for Wal-Mart before it’s implementation on Wal-Mart staff and employees.

Did you see this shit on the ballot? And why not?

The answer to those questions are very simple. Employee handbooks do not need to be constitutional and the Michigan Court Rules were intended to be the employee handbook for court staff (public servants) and do not govern We the People. They were established to govern the public servants that work in the judiciary. See below.

8.112_Scope_002

Paul Chamberlain didn’t make a “local court rule”, he created an “Administrative Policy” intended to govern ONLY court management. This is further proved by the title of Paul’s announcement as it conforms to the rule MCR 8.115(B)(2) above which dictates how Administrative Orders are to be numbered. Paul’s is numbered “2015-2” clearly identifying it as an Administrative Order rather than a Local Court Rule which would have been titled much differently. Like LCR 8.115(C)(3) Paul’s Law.

Below, I will show how the Dishonorable Chief Judicial Terrorist in Isabella County announced a new policy which is actually an administrative order. Alleged judge Paul Chamberlain announced his policy on February 27, 2015 and made it effective on all of the people in Michigan, not just the county court staff, on March 9, 2015. See below.

cmlife_001

Not sure why CM-Life edited my name out of the article but is you search CM-Life with “visner” or click on this link, you will see how the article was originally written. At least the top part.  http://www.cm-life.com/search/?a=1&o=date&s=visner The full artile link is here. http://www.cm-life.com/article/2015/02/isabella-county-trial-court-to-adopt-new-policy-prohibiting-cell-phones

Judicial terrorist, Paul Chamberlain, slammed the door on the Constitution with this administrative order that he plans to enforce on We the People through the contempt of court penalty provisions! Using fines and incarceration provisions from something else entirely, to enforce policy, converts policy into law.

Paul Chamberlain knows that the court rules and the penalty provisions of contempt of court are NOT enforceable on the people but he doesn’t need to convince the people, he needs only convince the county paid security staff acting as court bailiffs whom have reported to me that they have not sworn an oath to the Constitution, therefore no obligation to defend it and no obligation to serve the people. Basically the court bailiffs in Isabella county are a contracted private security force working for an employer.

Below is Chief Terrorist Paul Chamberlain’s personally created policy/law.

0001s

Good thing the Michigan Supreme Court changed these rules back in 2009! The trouble with subtle changes is that they sometimes are not subtle nor fast enough to meet future objectives. Paul Chamberlain has to take the changes made in 2009 and change them further, all by himself. The court rule, created in 2009 talks only about “Portable Electronic Communication Devices” which is a classification of devices used for communication and covers everything pagers to walki-talkies to cell phones and even to laptops equipped or presumed to be equipped with communication software such as email and skype etc.  As a single classification regarding communications, it does not speak of anything other yet terrorist Paul Chamberlain has expanded the definition by inserting commas into the classification “Portable Electronic Communication Devices” and effectively changing the meaning of court rule completely. From the single classification described in the Court Rule that covers every communication device that is both portable and electronic, Paul’s deviation through the addition of punctuation now converts the court rule to include digital audio recorders. Paul’s intentionally distorted view of the court rule below also excludes everything “electronic” from the courthouse. Things like electric wheelchairs, insulin pumps, pace makers etc are no longer allowed in the courthouse according to Paul Chamberlain. If that weren’t enough, Paul add this… “communication devices of any kind”. This would be to cover not only cell phones and pagers but also 2 cups and a string.

10526122_10204634137145818_5536776231706557451_n

So why did the Dishonorable Chief Judicial Terrorist Paul Chamberlain do this? Why did this alleged chief judge levy direct allegations against me personally and as a lone actor and as if I had already been convicted of doing something wrong?

Quote: “Prompted by several recordings of courtroom actions uploaded to YouTube by Mount Pleasant resident Ted Visner…” “Unfortunately the irresponsible act of one person is causing us to respond at this juncture.” said Chief Judge Paul Chamberlain.

Chief Terrorist Paul Chamberlain is calling me irresponsible? To this I say, ummm, what the hell am I supposed to say to this! It’s laughable really!

Paul doesn’t know that I made the recording and he doesn’t know that I uploaded those recordings to my YouTube Channel but in this article he is claiming that I did…  Awfully presumptuous of any “judge” wouldn’t you think?  But I don’t even care about any of that crap because it is nothing more than a distraction. Let us get to the meat and potatoes shall we!

Paul Chamberlain’s official response to uploaded “court actions” on YouTube was to bastardize the meaning of Michigan Court Rule MCR 8.115(C) and make it mean what he needed to prevent me from recording public servants performing their public function.

Lets face it folks… Tape Recorders have been around almost 80 years longer than cell phones without the need for additional court rules to be shoved into a “courtroom decorum” rule…

The question Paul Chamberlain is and continues to refuse to address are the allegations stated in the uploads to YouTube themselves. These allegation, using the accused own audio tracks, points out specific violation of the public trust. These audio recordings capture alleged judge Mark Duthie lying on the record to try and make it seem to the appellate court on appeal (prepping the court transcript for appeal… for preservation of self) that the recorded hearing on February 10, 2015 was the first time he had participated in that particular case when he had signed the original order on the same day the case was initiated more than 200 days before the hearing! What say you Chief Paul???

Why do you have the trust of the people when you fail and refuse to address judicial misconduct in the court and county where you are “chief” and “circuit court judge”? Gotta maintain the illusion right Paul? You are pathetic Paul and you make me want to vomit!

Directly below are links to the YouTube posts that Chief Judicial Terrorist Paul Chamberlain refused to address. The first link is the entire <10 min> hearing. Each of the videos are of the different aspects of the same 10 mion hearing with different notes on the different aspects.

___

Below: This 10 minute clip is packed full of jewels that are broken down further in the following clips.

___

Below: Mark Duthie makes a statement to be picked up on the court transcript at the beginning of this hearing in an effort to deceive the Michigan Appellate Court when he states that this hearing was the first time he was involved in this case knowing that he had signed the original order some 200+ days prior at the start of this case.

___

Below: Grand Rapids attorney Kelly Lambert had been fired more than two weeks before this hearing. Instead of filing a stipulated withdrawl, the county made him come to and participate in this hearing and do what he does here.

___

Below: Prosecutor Risa Scully talks about everything except the motion in front of the court.

___

Below: Prosecutor Risa Scully Lies to delay Kidnapping Charges against herself.

___

What is critical for We the People to recognize here is that the Michigan Supreme Court is actively working to unlawfully create Unconstitutional Michigan Court Rules that are to be intentionally forced upon the people through the inferior county courts and the courts at every level and as if these rules were law when they clearly are not.

Paul Chamberlain calls his new Administrative Policy, a “cell phone ban” when it is actually a “Ban on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights”. Private courthouse security has been tasked with enforcing Paul’s Policy upon the people, removing the people’s ability to freely offer consent or to refuse to consent. Paul Chamberlain is a trader to the state of Michigan and to this country as his acts are treasonous!

Why then… would I ask the Michigan Supreme Court to adjudicate this when they are the monopolistic organization responsible for giving Paul the tools to be a traitor to the state and to this nation?

Second:                                                                                                                                                   This particular “rule” pulled out of an entirely different section of the Michigan Court Rules (updated, modified and maintained by the Michigan Supreme Court) is from Chapter 3.  MCR3.920(H) and reads as follows in the picture below.

Notice Defects_001

Cases that are not properly served on the parties do not exist and are COMPLETELY VOID but check out this “Michigan Court Rule”! It makes any VOID case legitimate by creating this “failure to object = waiver to object” clause!

In the actual case documents that I am about to show you, mother of three, Danielle Austin, was called to court via a telephone call two hours prior to a court hearing related to her already abducted three children.

Imagine, if you can, the state of mind you would be in if this were to happen to you… Imagine getting a phone call at 1:00 pm today from a CPS worker telling you that she has taken your children and that you need to be in court in two hours. Would you be prepared to offer an objection to the notice defect? If you said YES, you either are a lawyer or are married to a lawyer. For most of us, it is entirely too difficult to imagine. Now lets compile a little more reality… Additionally, your are two months behind on your rent and are facing eviction and your spouse had just left you and your three children for greener pastures and took all of the money the family had.

Now you find yourself standing in front of a man wearing a black dress. You have this other man standing next to you that had just (3 min prior) announced himself to you as your court appointed attorney and he is telling you that you are in a world of hurt and to just let him handle everything for you or you may never see your children again…

During the most bizarre 15 minutes of your entire life, had it crossed your mind that your objection had to have been raised in this time or your ability to object would be forever lost? The immediate assignment of counsel is a vital component of this trap because YOU are not allowed to speak in court if you have a lawyer. Even if you knew about the fatal flaws in the case against you, you would have only had 3 minutes to discuss this with your lawyer… but your lawyer already knows about the trap and refuses to defend you. Why would he object to the notice deficiencies and piss off all of his associates in the courtroom whom are also fully aware of the snare you are in.

The Michigan Supreme Court, through the creation of this BULLSHIT rule has provided the means for the inferior courts to trap respondent parents and keep them trapped in their web of deceit.

What motivation would the judge, referee, prosecutor, defense attorney, defense attorney and defense attorney, CPS workers and DHS workers have to ensure you your right to Due Process when the Michigan Supreme Court has provided them a means to ignore your Due Process rights completely?

GOTTA RUN! CHECK BACK FOR THE REST OF THE STORY

World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum.

Link to Downloadable PowerPoint Files Here

We’re grateful that the materials at Weightier Matter have been well-received by so many families and children who have been harmed by Family Court professionals.  Among the hundreds of emails and phone calls we receive each month, the most common question is “how can I file a RICO action in my jurisdiction?”  It’s a great question, and we’re eager to help, but unfortunately the answer is complex and depends greatly on factors unique to each jurisdiction.  Therefore, our ability to give firm guidance is usually limited.

However, there are some common suggestions we can pass along to you based on our experience to date.  What can you do to bring a RICO action in your jurisdiction? Here are a few tips.

Get Organized

While any individual can bring a RICO lawsuit, we suggest that potential RICO litigants consider finding other like-minded families within your jurisdiction (i.e., state or county) who can help…

View original post 137 more words

County Judges, Referee, Prosecutor, Process Servers & Court Appointed Attorneys and other BAR Members Violate Court Rules to Assist CPS & DHS in the Kidnapping of our Children for Profit which is all sanctioned by the Michigan Supreme Court, Under Color Of Law!

Here is how they are doing it in Michigan… and here are the Michigan Court Rules they are violating. Regardless of your state, they seem to all be conducting this extrinsic fraud upon the people in much the same way. This FRAUD is intended to deprive you of your right to Due Process while kidnapping our children and our future.

Your court case file should contain all of these same documents and you should have a copy of them as you read through this so that you can follow along.

Document List

1.  SUMMONS: ORDER TO APPEAR (CHILD PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS)                       2.  PETITION (CHILD PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS)                                                                 3.   PROOF OF SERVICE (FOR SUMMONS AND PETITION)                                                     4.   ORDER AFTER PRELIMINARY HEARING (CHILD PROTECTIVE PROCEEDINGS)     5.   A copy of the court rule referenced at the top of the PROOF OF SERVICE. In this case, MCR 3.920(B)(5)

The documents pictured below are from a real case in Isabella County Michigan and from my preliminary investigation, all Michigan cases have been found to contain the same fatal flaws and extrinsic fraud elements.

PICTURE 1:   PROOF OF SERVICE

00001-PROOF OF SERVICE

The Proof of Service has a statement at the top that directs the process server to proceed in accordance with Michigan Court Rule 3.920(B)(5). Generally, and as a rule, process servers are not required to attest to the information in the documents they are to serve. In this case however, the process server is provided instructions at the top of the Proof of Service form that will be filed with the court.  In this case, and in every other case I have seen, the process server does not look at the documents they are serving, nor are they reading the instructions at the top of this PROOF OF SERVICE as the court rule in the instructions, directs the process server to serve the SUMMONS AND PETITION seven days before the hearing as pictured below.

PICTURE 2:   MCR 3.920(b)(5)

00002-MCR

As you can see from the two images above, all of the burden for proper service has been placed upon the process server, (Wendy Yost in this case), to serve the SUMMONS AND PETITION seven days before the Preliminary Hearing. The image below is of the first page of the SUMMONS: ORDER TO APPEAR which specifies the date and time that the person served is to appear in court for the Preliminary Hearing.

PICTURE 3:   SUMMONS 

00003-SUMMONS

As you can see from the actual SUMMONS, it has the “Date”, “Time” and “Location” of the hearing that Danielle Austin is being summoned to attend by ALLEGED order of the court.

The process server is being directed to perform a task that she is completely unable to accomplish yet she serves the SUMMONS regardless and then files her fraudulent “Proof of Service”.

The image below is the second page of the SUMMONS. This page indicates the name of the judge that authorized the Summons. In this case the alleged judge is William Ervin (P30654). Alleged judge Ervin signed a court order for Danielle Austin to appear in court knowing that the summons had to be served upon Danielle Austin personally and seven days before the hearing but his “order” was for Danielle Austin to appear on the same day that he signed the order.

PICTURE 4:   SIGNATURE OF JUDGE CREATING AN ORDER TO APPEAR ON THE SAME DAY THE ORDER IS DRAFTED UNDER THREAT OF ARREST!

00004-ORDER

It might be argued at this point that the process server, (Wendy Yost), couldn’t comprehend that she was REQUIRED AND DIRECTED to serve the SUMMONS AND PETITION seven days prior to the hearing but what would be extremely difficult to argue would be how this alleged judge WILLIAM T. ERVIN believed himself able, capable and empowered to draft a summons to court on the same day it is drafted and signed.

Alleged judge WILLIAM T. ERVIN drafted an order that directed, demanded and commanded Danielle Austin, under threat of arrest, to come to court immediately (and on the same day) with all her three children.

In Dani’s case she was never served, personally or otherwise. Although Wendy Yost claimed to have personally served Danielle Austin on 7/23/14 @ 2:57 pm for a hearing scheduled at 7/23/14 @ 3:00 pm, (3 MINUTES NOTICE), it is believed that Wendy Yost gave the summons and petition to the court appointed lawyer that she herself had or was assigning to the Danielle Austin case three minutes before the start of the hearing.

The image below is of the court order that followed the 3:00 pm hearing on July 23, 2014.

PICTURE 5:   ORDER AFTER HEARING

00005_ORDER_AFTER_HEARING

Notice in the picture above that item number 7 is checked off. This might seem to wrap everything up in a neat package. Basically this box confirms that the fraud against the parent was successfully accomplished. After all… This order was “recommended” by a referee and signed by a judge!

Matthew Hagen (P73???) was the referee that signed “recommending” the order in Danielle Austin’s case, making us all believe that he verified the facts and details of the order itself and then the alleged order was officially signed by alleged judge Mark Duthie (P33313).

Both Mark Duthie, as judge and Matthew Hagen, as referee are attesting to the accuracy of the alleged “COURT ORDER” including item seven in the image above while both knowing full well how service of process was achieved because the proof of service filed by Wendy Yost was in the same file.

Here is the F-ING KICKER! The Michigan Supreme Court knows about this extrinsic fraud and has created a specific court rule to patch everything over!

This rule basically states that if the person that was fraudulently brought into court without notice and without knowledge of the allegations they are to face on a fraudulent summons does not immediately object to the notice defects, they forever wave the right to object and their very own participation in the proceedings keeps them trapped in those very same proceedings FOREVER! FOREVER! FOREVER!

PICTURE 6:   MCR 3.920(H) – FRAUD COVER-UP MECHANISM

law_001

Getting respondent parents into court via Conspired, Mechanized, Extrinsic Fraud would seem to be completely resolved by the alleged court rule above. This alleged court rule itself, having been created by the Michigan Supreme Court, is the Michigan Supreme Court’s acknowledgment of the fraudulent methods being used by the inferior county courts to unlawfully seize jurisdiction while at the same time, mending the defects which is the same exact thing as stripping all of the people of Michigan, of our Due Process Rights!

In other words… the Michigan Supreme Court is and has been completely complicit in the intentional conspired deprivation of rights, under color of law where the kidnapping of Michigan children intentionally result.

Below is a screen shot of an email that I got from the Michigan State Police who, along with the alleged FBI and alleged county prosecutor and the alleged county sheriff monitor all of my sites daily but never act.

GG

As you can see, the Michigan State Police are completely unwilling to investigate the allegations of felony kidnapping because they are fully aware of all the parties involved and to the lofty extent they are being perpetrated.