(Reader: Doug Duff) Request for Admissions

Reader Post | By Doug Duff

[OpDis Editor Note: Scroll down download the highlighted version.]

REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS (Part of “Discovery” in Due Process)

POINT #1 This “Request For Admissions” is part of a Cross-Claim by an Injured Party, namely _____ ___________, who is now Claimant and Libellant (n. Law, the plaintiff in a case of ecclesiastical or admiralty libel) to this issue of Discovery. Offending officer(s), administrator(s), clerk(s), and legal attendants (attorneys) are now referred to as Libellee(s) (n. Law, the defendant in a case of ecclesiastical or admiralty libel) and shall be held to the strictest rules of Estoppel (n. Law, a bar preventing one from making an allegation or a denial that contradicts what one has previously stated as the truth).

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) and fully comprehend the meaning of the introductory paragraph above.

POINT #2 Service of process ensures that all parties in a legal case are properly informed. It’s part of the due process rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Without proper service, a court cannot proceed with legal actions, making this a foundational legal requirement.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that this is proper service and part of the due process rights guaranteed by the Constitution for the United States of America.

POINT #3 Libellant needs to be informed whether this case is Criminal- – –

ANSWER: (YES / NO) (Strike out one)

POINT #4 or Civil- – –

ANSWER: (YES / NO) (Strike out one).

POINT #5 If Criminal, is the Jurisdiction under Admiralty Law- – –

ANSWER: (YES / NO) (Strike out one)

POINT #6 or is the Jurisdiction under Common Law- – – 

ANSWER: (YES / NO) (Strike out one).

POINT #7 Libellant needs to whether the Injured Party will present a Verified Complaint- – – 

ANSWER: (YES / NO) (Strike out one).

POINT #8 Libellant recalls clearly making the statement that the presentment (ticket) was accepted UNDER DURESS.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that the above statement is true.

POINT #9 AMENDMENT V of the Bill Of Rights states: No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that the above statement is true.

POINT #10 The term “Preemption” stratifies and separates into a sequence of graded status levels the order of ranking as per dominance of procedure or rights in relation to other procedure or rights of similar categories. Therefore, “Preemption” is a seizure of, appropriation of, or claim to something, such as property or an order of dominance.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that the above statement is true.

Preemption by Federal Legislation

POINT #11 7A Am. Jur. 2d Automobiles § 65 Preemption by federal legislation depicts a superior position of authority and jurisdiction in the governing of all movements on public ways. 49 C.F.R. § 390.3 (f)(3) General applicability. Exempts: The occasional transportation of personal property by individuals not for compensation and not in the furtherance of a commercial enterprise. So must the state Exempt: The occasional transportation of personal property by individuals not for compensation and not in the furtherance of a commercial enterprise.

Through this same Preemption by federal legislation in 7A Am. Jur. 2d Automobiles § 65 the states are bound by the Federal definition of what a motor vehicle is.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) the states are bound by the Federal definition of what a motor vehicle is.

POINT #12 The Motor Vehicle Safety Act does not generally preempt the field of regulation of motor vehicle safety, but it does preempt state standards relating to the same subject that are either more or less stringent than the federal standards.

7A Am. Jur. 2d Automobiles § 18 Federal regulation—Preemption of state and local regulation.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that the states are bound by the Federal Regulations in relation to other federal standards.

POINT #13 The Federal definition found at 18 U.S.C.A. § 31 (6) . Definitions § (6) Motor vehicle. –The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo. This pre-empts the states standard of what a “motor vehicle” is.

18 U.S.C.A. § 31 (10) Used for commercial purposes.–The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that he/she fully comprehends the meaning of “used for commercial purposes” and “the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration” as stated above.                  

POINT #14 Libellant clearly stated to the arresting officer(s) that he does NOT have a Driver’s License, nor has he registered his carriage, nor has he obtained any “required” insurance and that any insurance he has obtained is on the private side of his own volition.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that Libellant clearly stated that he is not licensed and that his carriage is not registered with any state.

POINT #15 According to Pipe Line v. Marathon. 102 S. Ct. 3858 quoting Crowell v Benson 883 US 22., “It is impossible to prove jurisdiction exists absent a substantial nexus with the state, such as voluntary subscription to license.  All jurisdictional facts supporting claim that supposed jurisdiction exists must appear on the record of the court.” 

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that Jurisdiction is the Key Factor that will allow, or disallow, police actions against Libellant.

POINT #16 And, without a license, one is not a “Licensee”, as per; 0’Nei1 v Dept Prof. & Vocations7 CA 2d 398; Eiseman v Daugherty 6 CA 783, “Where a person is not at the time a licensee, neither the agency, nor any official has any jurisdiction of said person to consider or make any order.   One ground as to want of jurisdiction was, accused was not a licensee and it was not claimed that he was.” 

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that neither he/she, nor the many interlocking directorates of agents/agencies, had Jurisdiction over Libellant.

POINT #17 According to Lo Bue v. Porazzo, 48 Cal.App.2d 82, 119, p.2d 346, 348., failure to reveal material facts is grounds for estoppel. “Failure to reveal the material facts of a license or any agreement is immediate grounds for estoppel.”

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that his/her actions, or lack of proper actions, give immediate grounds for estoppel.

PONT #18 “It is not the duty of the police to protect you… Their job is to protect the corporation and arrest code breakers.” SAPP v. Tallahassee, 348 So.2^nd.363 Reiff vs. City of Phila. 477 F. 1262, Lynch vs. NC Dept. of Justice 376 S.E. 2^nd. 247

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that his/her actions against Libellant was clearly under color of law and without any form of Jurisdiction.

POINT #19 Libellant clearly stated at the time of arrest that Libellant refuses any form of counsel and Libellee was instructed to never present counsel to Libellant as counsel would be immediately fired.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that he/she read Libellant what is termed as his Miranda Rights.

POINT #20 Chief Justice Marshall held that ‘information’ had no exclusive application to common law because a ‘libel, on a seizure’ was ‘in its terms and in its essence * * * an information’. The Samuel, 1 Wheat.9, 13, 14 U.S. 9, 13, 4L.Ed. 23(1816). The pleading initiating a proceeding in admiralty for a forfeiture came frequently to be called ‘a libel of information’ as by Justice Story in The Palmyra, 12 Wheat. 1, 7, 25 U.S. 1, 7, 6 L.Ed. 531 (1827).        

Information: In law, Information means; “A formal accusation of a crime made by a public officer rather than by Grand Jury Indictment”. [This could get exciting.] A “Libel of Review” may be appropriate and a “Libel of Information” may cause panic among the compulsive lying gubm’t agents.

Libellant charges that “wrongful information”, which is the entering, editing, registering, recording, or charging of any living man/woman with a crime, when there is NO INJURED PARTY, is a Tort (damage, injury, or wrongful act done willfully, negligently, or in circumstances involving strict liability, but not involving breach of contract, for which a civil suit can be brought), and establishes liability upon the “Actor” bringing forward the Accusation; And,

Libellant, in all cases, at all times, reserves the right to administer “Waiver of Tort”, if Libellant, at his discretion, determines justice would be better served by a charge of Wrongful Information than with remedy of Tort.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that he/she has not had formal education concerning “information” as being charges placed upon a charging instrument known as a “ticket”.

POINT #21 The Supreme Court in a 1972 case Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 US 25, ruled: “Absent a knowing and intelligent waiver, no person may be imprisoned for any offense, whether classified as petty, misdemeanor, or felony, unless he was represented by counsel at his trial.”

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that his/her actions of arrest is nothing short of k--------g and/or forced peonage.

POINT #22 According to: Barr v Day, 124 Wn. 2d 318, at 328 (1994) “Attorney when fired, is fired without question.” (Barr v. Day, 124 Wn.2d 318, 979. F.2d 912 (1994)).

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) above statement is true.

POINT #23 Article III, Section 2, Clause 2:

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the Supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

It seems that in any case where “a State shall be a Party” includes THIS CASE. The “State” is a corporation, a fiction, a make-believe entity that can NOT state a claim or succumb to an injury of blood. Libellant cannot place the “State” on the Stand to make a claim or state damage with first hand knowledge so “it” can be cross examined.

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that as an employee of a corporation (fiction) he/she must conform to rules and instructions or be fired.

POINT #24 Man (includes both sexes of man, male and female) is the Principal of the Realm (that which is Real, not personified, not corporate), which has suffered Corruption of Blood, Defamation of Commercial Character, and Slander of Credit with a monetary value placed upon infractions against Intangible Properties, creating Bond and/or Slave relationship to a factitious/fictitious Master. The signature on the charging instrument, through Identity Theft, became the gateway, or entry point, to access Libellant’s Trust Fund under government custodian relationship.

The asset bonded (surety) is the labor of the people which is payable at some future, yet undetermined, date. Thus, the people become the “utility” for the “transmission” of energy. The result, a very sophisticated form of peonage (slavery) and the Constitution does not apply because the government, on all levels, is thrown into international commerce, the law merchant, now known as the Uniform Commercial Code. [See Public Law 88-244 in which the U.S. Subscribed to private international law. See definition of “goods” under the Uniform Commercial Code; Section 2-105(1) and 9-105(1) in which animals, i.e., humans and their unborn offspring, become “goods” sellable in commerce!] “The entire taxing and monetary systems are, hereby, placed under the U.C.C.” The Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966, also see: Public Law 89-719, Legis. Hist., pg 3722, C.R.S. 5-1-106.     [“TheFederal    Tax Lien    Act of 1966, Pub. Law 89-719, Section 101, 80 Stat. 1125 (1966) was adopted in order to conform thelien provisions of the internal revenue laws to the conceptsdeveloped in the Uniform Commercial Code.“]

ANSWER: Libellee AGREES / DENIES (Strike out one) that the Prison Industry, owned, managed, and leased out to Private Industry is nothing short of Slave Trade and Peonage Captivity.

______________________________________________________

Contact Author

If you wish to contact the author of this article. Please email us at [voyagesoflight@gmail.com]. Availability of author’s contact information depends on if said article was user submitted or reposted.
______________________________________________________

Guest Posting

If you wish to write and/or publish an article on Operation Disclosure all you need to do is send your entry to [voyagesoflight@gmail.com] applying these following rules.

The subject of your email entry should be: “Entry Post | (Title of your post) | Operation Disclosure”

– Must be in text format
– Proper Grammar
– No foul language
– Your signature/name/username at the top
______________________________________________________

Newsletter

If you wish to receive the daily Operation Disclosure Newsletter, you can subscribe via the PayPal “Subscribe” button located at the bottom.
______________________________________________________

Operation Disclosure is an independent media platform dedicated to exploring global geopolitics and alternative perspectives. Our mission is to provide a central hub for diverse viewpoints on world events, including independent research into exopolitics, aerial phenomena (UAP), and the historical origins of humanity. We believe in providing a platform for information that encourages deeper inquiry into the world around us.

Disclaimer: The content on Operation Disclosure—including articles, videos, and images—is contributed by our readers or curated for informational and educational interest. Views, opinions, and claims expressed in these posts belong solely to the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Operation Disclosure. We do not guarantee the absolute accuracy or completeness of this content; therefore, we encourage all readers to engage with the material with a spirit of personal inquiry and discernment.

Copyright © Operation Disclosure Official