|
25 ~ Why don’t I want a Lawyer?
"The
right of a person under the 5th Amendment to refuse to incriminate
himself is purely a personal privilege of the witness. It was never
intended to permit him to plead the fact that some third person might
be incriminated by his testimony, even though he were the agent of
such person." -- Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43.
Not
only that, but if you allow anyone to "represent you",
instead of being "the belligerent claimant in person" (Hale
v Henkel, i.s.c.), you become a "ward of the court".
Why? Because obviously, if someone else has to defend your rights for
you, you must be incompetent! Clients are called "wards" of
the court in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. See a
copy of "Regarding Lawyer Discipline & Other Rules",
as well as Canons 1 through 9.
Also,
see Corpus Juris Secundum (CJS), Volume 7, Section 4, Attorney &
client:
"The
attorney's first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the
client and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those
he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice,
the former must yield to the latter." (emphasis mine)
Lord
Yeshua the Christ said in Luke 11:52
"Woe
unto you lawyers for ye have taken away the key of knowledge; ye
entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye
hindered."
And
also in Matt 23:13,33 (NIV)
"You
shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not
enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to ... How
will you escape being condemned to hell?"
“A
lawyer cannot claim that you have rights.”
U.S.
v. Johnson, 76 F. Supp. 538
Lawyers
cannot defend your rights because they are franchisees of the
English bar association, a corporation that licenses its
franchisees and regulates their activities. All a lawyer can do is
get the master of the ship to go easy on you if you confess to
the fiction claim against you. A lawyer will not help you prove your
sovereignty for fear of being disbarred. The united States Supreme
Court has ruled that the only person who can claim his rights is the
belligerent claimant in person. To effectively accomplish
this you must be able to establish the record with certifiable
knowledge of the law.
“The
privilege against self-incrimination is neither accorded to the
passive resistant[Jesus style], nor the person who
is ignorant of his rights, nor to one indifferent thereto. it is
a fighting clause. its benefits can be retained only by sustained
combat. it can not be retained by attorney or solicitor. it is
valid only when insisted upon by a belligerent claimant in
person...once he testifies to part, he has waived his...he must
refuse to answer or produce, and test the matter in contempt
proceedings, or by habeas corpus.”
US
v Johnson, 76 F. Supp 538, 540 (1947).
Includes 3 new chapters:
- Right of Travel vs. Privelege to Drive
- Law of the Land vs. Law of the Sea
- A real life case of Kidnapping
|
