„There was a guy who was brought to court before me and tried to deny the authority of the court and his identity as a straw man, but it didn`t go very well for him. The main application of the straw man theory is to escape and deny debts, responsibilities and legal responsibility. Tax protesters, „trade repayment” and „debt outflow” scams claim that debt and taxes are the responsibility of the straw man and not the real person. They support this assertion by misinterpreting the legal definition of a person[8] and misinterpreting the distinction between a legal person[9] and a natural person. [10] In accepted legal theory, there is a difference between what is called a natural person and that of a legal person. A corporate personality applies to businesses, charities, governments and other recognized organizations. The courts recognize people as „persons,” not as a legal fiction associated with a person of flesh and blood, but as one and the same person. [11] They never recognized the right to distance oneself from one`s person or the possibility of withdrawing from one`s personality. [12] The straw man theory dates back to the ancient Roman legal practice of capitis deminutio („lowering of the head”), a term used in Roman trials to extinguish a person`s former legal capacity. Capitis deminutio minima meant that a person ceased to belong to a particular family without losing his freedom or citizenship. Capitis deminutio media implied the loss of citizenship and family, but not freedom. Capitis deminutio maxima involved the loss of family, citizenship, and freedom (i.e.
a slave or prisoner of war). [5] The straw man theory usually takes the term capitis deminutio, the spell „capitis diminutio” and claims that capitis diminutio maxima was represented by a person`s name in capital letters. This led to the idea that individuals had their own legal personality, which is now called the „straw man.” [6] www.theaustralian.com.au/news/criminal-convictions-but-cops-keep-jobs/story-e6frg6n6-1111117612185 Registration Data and certain other information about you is subject to our Privacy Policy and you acknowledge and agree that Strawman will use and disclose your personal information in accordance with the Privacy Policy. For more information, please see our full privacy statement at strawman.com/member/landing/privacy. Free men believe that separating from their front man or refusing to be identified as such allows them to escape their legal obligations and responsibilities. This is usually attempted by denying that they are a „person” in the same way as their front man, or spelling out their name in a non-standard way, using red ink and putting fingerprints on court documents. [14] Sam says that applying the straw man theory to the court means first asking the judge to clarify what identity the court is talking to. Proponents of the theory believe that the evidence will be on the birth certificate. Since many certificates all use capital letters to spell a baby`s name, JOHN DOE (according to the straw man theory) is the name of the „straw man” and John Doe is the baby`s „real” name. As the child grows, most legal documents contain capital letters, meaning that their state-issued driver`s license, marriage certificate, car registration, court records, cable TV bill, IRS correspondence, etc.
relate to their front man rather than their sovereign identity. [1] In reality, the use of all capitalization is usually done to make certain statements clear and visible, although this is not always the case. [7] The straw man theory (also known as the straw man illusion) is a pseudo-legal theory that prevails in various movements such as the sovereign citizen, tax protesters, the free man in the countryside, and the redemption movement. The theory is that an individual has two personalities, one of flesh and the other a separate legal entity (i.e. „the straw man”). The idea is that an individual`s debts, obligations, taxes, and legal responsibilities belong to the straw man rather than the physical individual. [1] The straw man theory is recognized by law as a fraud: the FBI considers anyone who promotes it a likely fraud[2]; The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) considers this a frivolous argument and supports people who use the theory in their federal tax returns. [3] [4] This is called the straw man theory, and a local recently experimented with it. So how did he do it? Proponents of the theory also extend it to the law and legal responsibilities, claiming that only their front man is obliged to abide by legal laws. They also claim that lawsuits are brought against straw men and not against people, and when someone appears in court, he appears as a representative of his straw man. The justification is the misconception that governments cannot force anyone to do anything.
Thus, a straw man was created, which the disciple believes to command freely. Proponents cite a misinterpretation of a passage in Chapter 39 of King John`s Magna Carta, which states in part that „no free man shall be seized, deprived of his property, or wounded except by the law of the land.” [13] The Service or third parties may provide links to other websites or resources on the World Wide Web. Because Strawman has no control over such websites and resources, you acknowledge and agree that Strawman is not responsible for the availability of such external websites or resources and does not endorse, and is not responsible for, any content, advertising, products or other materials available on or through such websites or resources. You further acknowledge and agree that Strawman shall not be responsible or liable, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any such content, goods or services available on or through any such website or resource. The prior art document D1 revealed in Example 7 an orange-flavoured sparkling drink made from Reb X with a purity of 97.3%.16 The Commissioner noted that Reb X (D1) was the same compound as Reb M in the challenged application by comparing chemical structures. I`ve been watching activists try this kind of thing for years. Judges cannot and do not want to hear this chatter. And you can`t force them to do it. I`ve seen a few people go to jail when they don`t need it because they insist on this. Thank you for shedding light on David. Certainly, there is no „absolute freedom/freedom” – only arrogant and aggressive extremism, as you say.
Attached is the RPP letter I sent to the Ministry of Social Services and Child Support, which achieved the desired results and demonstrated the value of the information provided at your advanced seminars. 7 Spicer Spicer Pty Ltd. v. The Coca-Cola Company & PureCircle Sdn Bhd [2021] APO 31 (August 11, 2021). „With my birth certificate in hand, I asked twice what identity the court wanted to recognize. Since I didn`t have a contract with them with my NOM birth certificate, I was told to leave. Save my name, email address, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. People I`ve researched extensively and the facts are simple… Since governments have all become entities within the meaning of the UCC by the UNIDROIT CONTRACT, no legal rules or codes are valid in the field of law. True Law, that is, the police are all private contractors of these commercial companies, which means that they swear an oath to the laws, the codes of the commercial world and then start creating „laws” that contradict the real laws because they make massive revenues for the „for-profit” company that pays them. A crime is an act that inflicts injury or loss on another human being.
This is a violation of the law. Driving without paying tax on your vehicle registration is not a crime. Traveling without a for-profit driver`s license is only liable to UCC if you make a profit while using your car as a vehicle for business purposes. Nothing to do with the law.
