The act being debated the Cestui Qui act was to subrogate the rights of men and women, meaning all men and women were declared dead, lost at sea/beyond the sea. (back then operating in admiralty law, the law of the sea, so lost at sea). Read more…
A Cestui Que Vie Trust, also known by several other pseudonyms such as “Term of Life or Years” or “Pur Autre Vie” or “Fide Commissary Trust” or “Foreign Situs Trust” or “Secret Trust” is a pseudo form of trust first formed in the 16th Century under Henry VIII of England on one or more presumptions including (but not limited to) one or more Persons presumed wards, infants, idiots, lost or abandoned at “sea” and therefore assumed/presumed “dead” after seven (7) years. Additional presumptions by which such a Trust may be “legally” formed were added in later statutes to include bankruptcy, incapacity, mortgages and private companies.
Power of the Grand Jury – In a stunning 6 to 3 decision Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government “governed” and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights, see United States -v- Williams.
In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992), Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people.
I recollect as the Lawyers for Ron Paul case started representing the Ron Paul delegates decided to take the complaints of potentially disenfranchised, active Ron Paul supporters. Finally, some brave attorneys are willing to stand up for your average American citizens who need representation! It was disappointing to hear that the Ron Paul campaign decided to distance themselves in this effort.
I am continuing to find that many aspects of this whole “Lawyer’s For Ron Paul” fiasco do not add up.
Attorney Richard Gilbert praised Judge Carter as the ideal judge to hear this case as an unflappable, reliable judge who could not be compromised. I should have done more research to test Richard Gilbert’s characterization of Judge Carter. The characterization as an untrustworthy source of jurisprudence is shown in his performance from the Obama eligibility case.
When the plaintiffs and their attorneys learned that the district court judge assigned to the case was Judge David O. Carter, they were elated and greatly encouraged. Judge Carter is a graduate of both UCLA and the UCLA School of Law, and a highly experienced and respected jurist. Judge Carter has a background as a criminal prosecutor and as a professor at several institutions, including the University of California at Irvine, where he has received the school’s Distinguished Professor Award three times. He also lectures frequently at judicial conferences worldwide, and at the California Judges College, the Judicial Criminal Law Institute, and the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference.
To the plaintiffs in Barnett v. Obama, Judge David O. Carter seemed like an answer to their prayers. How could they ask for a more perfect judge? In a case which required a combination of an extraordinary judicial temperament, demonstrated courage, and unquestioned loyalty to the United States Constitution, Judge Carter seemed to have all of these qualities in abundance. Moreover, since there were strong indications of serious criminal acts of election fraud in the events leading up to the conclusion of the 2008 presidential election, it was felt that Judge Carter (given his prosecutorial background) was likely to share the plaintiffs’ desire to see the case heard on its merits, and that he would insure that an appropriate judicial environment was maintained to insure that would happen. Source: WHAT TURNED THIS DECORATED WAR HERO INTO A PUPPET FOR THE OBAMA REGIME? by David F. LaRocque
I eventually found out that Judge Carter is indeed a war hero, but he is no defender of the Constitution! Anyone who follows my posts knows that I am a “Birther”. I have admired Dr. Orly Taitz for her brave attempts to have Obama impeached! Dr. Orly Taitz indeed had a chance to test Judge Carter’s character and judicial prudence without success…
Judge David O. Carter was appointed to the federal bench by President Clinton in 1998 (Aug. 22, 2010) — On August 11, 2010, an Appellants’ Opening Brief was filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by Dr. Orly Taitz, in the case Pamela Barnett, Alan Keyes, et al v. Barack Obama et al. This appeal is seeking to overturn the decision of Judge David O. Carter of the United States District Court for the Central District of California in an order of dismissal issued on October 29, 2009. The grounds for the appeal are based on an assertion that the “District Court acted with bias, lack of impartiality, and under improper and undue influence from (the) Obama administration.”
At this point I pointed out to Attorney Richard Gilbert that Dr. Orly Taitz Esq. had the same experience with Judge Carter. For some reason I have a difficult time accepting that such an intelligent individual like Richard Gilbert would not be aware that Judge David O. Carter ordered the of dismissal of Dr. Orly Taitz case against Obama.
The original case was filed on January 20, 2009 on behalf of over 40 plaintiffs, including many retired officers and enlisted members of the U.S. military, Ambassador Alan Keyes (2008 presidential candidate of the American Independent Party), and Gail Lightfoot (a Libertarian Party member and write-in candidate for vice president). The plaintiffs were seeking “a judicial review and declaratory relief on the issue of legitimacy for the U.S. presidency and (the) position of Commander-in-Chief by Barack Hussein Obama.” Ref: http://www.scribd.com/doc/10562711/Lightfoot-v-Bowen-No-08A524
The article on Dr. Orly Taitz Esq. website is titled THE STRANGE CASE OF JUDGE DAVID O. CARTER. In this article their are some incredibly damning insights into how deep the corruption is in our Judicial System. How deep can the rabbit hole go?
Then, in early October, word came out that something very strange had happened. Judge Carter had hired a new law clerk, but not just any law clerk.
Judge Carter could have hired a law clerk from among the recent graduates of any one of a number of fine law schools (including his alma mater, the UCLA School of Law) or from any one of hundreds of elite law firms in California and across the country. Instead he hired Siddharth Velamoor, from the Seattle law firm of Perkins Coie, the firm which represented the presidential campaign of Barack Obama and the firm where Obama’s White House Counsel Robert Bauer was formerly a partner. Bauer is married to Anita Dunn, former White House Director of Communications, who is infamous for her publicly-expressed deep admiration for the political philosophy of Mao Zedong, the greatest mass murderer in the history of mankind according to author and former Red Guard Jung Chang in her masterpiece biography of Mao entitled Mao: The Unknown Story.
Here is Attorney Taitz on the Velamoor engagement: While originally the presiding judge, David O. Carter seemed to be willing to show some impartiality, it quickly dissipated from the beginning of October 2009, when Judge Carter hired as his law clerk an attorney, Sidharth Velamoor, (a former) employee of Perkins Coie, that represented Obama in most of the litigation where Obama’s eligibility was challenged. Moreover, White House Counsel Robert Bauer is a senior partner in Perkins Coie, and personally opposed (both) Taitz and Kreep in a prior similar action.
Velamoor not only came from Obama’s defense firm, he also had a peculiar similarity to Obama in his education and background. Velamoor is listed in some of his curricula vitae as graduating from Columbia Law School, while others show him graduating from an obscure Commenis Law School in Slovakia. Obama is known as a person who has sealed most of his vital records, among them his Columbia University records. It is not clear how much time Obama spent actually studying at Columbia University, how much did he spend abroad, specifically in Pakistan, and got equivalency credits from Columbia, just as Velamoor. To say that the Barnett plaintiffs were stunned on hearing this news is putting it mildly. This astonishing new development was not only unbelievable; it was incomprehensible. How could this happen in America? On the face of it, this surprising action by Judge Carter was so far outside the norm of appropriate judicial conduct that it seemed unimaginable. It even gave off an odor of corruption and manipulation of the judiciary that was so out of character with what we knew of Judge Carter that one had to wonder – what was the nature of the pressure that was brought to bear on Judge Carter that he would even entertain such a course of action?
To the Barnett plaintiffs and their attorneys, it seemed that Barack Obama had literally stepped into Judge Carter’s court room and sneered at us, telling us literally that “I have so much power that you cannot touch me! I am untouchable and I will do as I please.”