Hello readers,

I finished up with the court today on Dec 5th,

My legal argument was rock solid, I proved using court transcripts, point in law precedents and case law, that we do actually have a right to use the public roads without mandatory licensing and insurance, I proved the Province of British Columbia and Canada is nothing more then a private corporation who is subject to private corporation rules, where they have to have a contract or consenting agreement in place in order for you to fall into their jurisdiction.

I also proved that there is more then just Statute law in Canada and the Provinces.

There is a difference between jurisdictions of residents of the corporate private government and inhabitants of the land and how we are initially inhabitants and that they need to coerce us into a fraudulent agreement in order for us to give up our rights and exchange them for privileges.

A path was illuminated during this 2 year long court battle, which of course requires the immediate use of the higher courts rather then the inferior state courts.

Now that the case is over I can share the bombshells that were discovered in the court transcripts about what the police can and cannot do and the defenses to use to nullify their aggressive and unlawful actions.

So lets start, I will be making a video about this shortly.

In the court transcripts as seen in the picture

Alot of information bombshells were exposed here is some of them.

In regards to police powers,

They do not know their oath of duty, and that the oath is subject to the monarchy.

They are NOT ALLOWED or qualified to make a legal opinion of any kind.

They are NOT ALLOWED or qualified to determine the validity of a legal notice or disclaimer.

they DO NOT know the difference between common law and statute

They DO NOT know the difference between legal and lawful,

If they use the term "freeman ideology" against you it DOES NOT change your status nor make anything you say invalid.

If they use any of those things against you, then you cannot be held liable for resisting, non-cooperation or obstruction of justice, due to the 1964 case law WATERFIELD 1 Q.B. 164 Canadian court of Appeals.

In waterfield it states that even though they may be within the execution of their duties, they cannot use excessive powers or non-existent powers, if they do then you cannot be liable for resistance, non-cooperation or obstruction.

They key to that defense is you have to immediately push the case into the higher courts supreme court at least. The judge explicitly explained that as a provincial court judge he does what he is told by his superiors and if you want to discuss anything to do with "freeman ideology" or advanced defenses like waterfield you have to "take it upstairs", He does not have the authority to render decisions on that case law it has to go upstairs.

Also now this ties into the events happening at Ottawa and the trucker rally is a point in law that everyone is over looking and this should be used at the current inquiry regarding the emergencies act.

(ontario , known as upper canada at the time)

First Act of provincial Parliament 32 GEO III c1 october 15th 1972, LT governor John Graves Simcoe chapter 1 "an act to repeal certain parts of an act passed... to introduce English law as the rule of the decision in all matters of controversy relative to property rights and civil rights" " The authority of the said laws in Canada and every part thereof, as forming a rule of decision in all matters of controversy related to property and civil rights, shall be annulled and made void and abolished throughout this province and that the said laws nor any part thereof as such shall be of any force or authority within said province, nor binding on any of the inhabitants thereof."

This is still in effect today.

So there it is, its all about a conversion game, if you claim to be a resident of their private corporation your are re designated from an inhabitant where acts of parliament are not binding into their property employee or dependent which makes them binding.

Now that statement is enforced by 1663 First act of British Parliament, House of lords where King George made the imperial order that acts of parliament are not binding on inhabitants of the land or British subjects.

Its also the reason why Section 15 of the Criminal Code exists, which proves the fact the imperial order still stands today.

Section 15 Criminal code of Canada : No person shall be convicted of an offense in respect to an act or omission in obedience to the laws for the time being made and enforced by persons in de facto possession of the sovereign power in and over the place where the act or omission occurs. R.S, c. C-34 s.15

This point in law and precedence can be used to prove we are dealing with private corporations.

Clearfield Trust co. V United States 318 U.S. 363-371 (1942)

The clearfield doctrine states "that when private commercial paper is used by corporate government the government loses sovereignty status and becomes no different that a private corporation. Government is bound by the rule and laws that govern private corporations so if they intend to compel a living man or woman to some specific performance based upon its corporate statutes or corporation rules, then government like any private corporation, must be the holder in-due-course of a contract or consenting agreement made with full disclosure between it and the one upon whom demands for specific performance are made.

The government is required to enter the contract or commercial agreement into evidence by due process before trying to get the court to enforce its statutory demands.

Real governments are not traded on the stock market they are to provide public services"

the Bank of Canada Act proves that Canadian Currency is private commercial paper, as well as the SEC filings of Canada and the Provinces proves that they are using Federal Reserve private commercial paper as well, which proves they are private corporations and foreign to boot because Canada and the provinces are listed and traded on Dun and Bradstreet in the UK.

It proves that these are private corporations we are dealing with and a consenting agreement or contract must be in place in order to put you into their jurisdiction.

Also Since the transcripts prove that the provinces and Canada and the courts are subject to the monarchy authority they are also subject to those imperial orders, which they violate regularly and amounts to treason and sedition

People have been getting conned into the private laws of private corporations under the color of law, ignorance and constructive fraud that is taking place.

the US supreme Court has even warned in United States v. Minker, 350 Us 179, 187, 76 S.ct 281, 100 L.Ed 185 (1956)"because of what appears to be lawful commands (statutory rules, Regulations, codes ordinances and restrictions) on the surface, many citizens, because of their respect for what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights, due to ignorance, deceptive practices, constructive fraud, barratry, legal plunder, unlawful conversion and malicious prosecution by inferior state courts."

and in these transcripts there is a load of proven malicious prosecution.

Word of advice if you are going to fight for your rights, you HAVE TO take it immediately to a higher court. If I had the finances available I would take this matter and precedence to the Supreme court and easily end it once and for all, I have all the evidence to back that claim, I could easily destroy Mead V Mead (the origin of freeman ideology) as well as prove that these provinces and Canada are mere private corporations, also that they use legal maxims behind the scenes to enact their will against you plus much much more.

Give me 10 minutes to speak at the emergency powers inquiry and the Canadian government would be decimated.

The trucker rally actually did not promote freedom they perpetrated more fraud on the people by not informing them of these facts and point of law, they even convinced people to stand under the Charter of rights, which is a fraud all on its own.

The trucker rally duped a lot and I mean a lot of people, if these groups would give me even 10 minutes of their time I could teach everyone how to defend themselves from all of this and the behind the scene actions these private corporations are using to get you into their jurisdiction including the legal maxims they use to do so, and teach you how to recognize them using them, which they use multiple times a day.

How bout at the inquiry someone ask the "government of Canada" if they use legal maxims. Should be a interesting answer everyone receives because it can be easily proven that they use them every day.

ITs TIME for the military to make their move and dismantle these private corporations once and for all, and get everyone under actual constitutional law.

When they do there is no more need for the average individual to need a drivers license or or mandatory insurance because this goes into effect,

Thompson V Smith 154 SE 579, 11 American jurisprudence, constitutional law, section 329, page 135

" The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use tee ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business."

supreme court of California backs that up with " The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, by horse drawn carriage, wagon or automobile, is not a mere privilege which may be permitted and not permitted at will, but a common right which he has under his right to life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this constitutional guaranty one my, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly and decent manner, neither interfering with nor disturbing another's rights, he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct."

Lets GO MILITARY, I am ready to take an active role, please let me know what I can do to help.

many blessings,

Will serving Creation
empyyrean