14a – Your Birth Certificate and Capitalised Name
1 – Short into – this is in every country since 1933
2 – What is it worth ?
For those of you who believe that it does not matter how your name is spelled, and that a court will not dismiss a case in which the name of the accused is spelled in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS, read this clipping from the front page of The Wall Street Journal, which is read world wide:
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT? A man said government court filings referred to him in bold, capital letters, instead of upper and lower case letters. Thus, he said, those filings were aimed at someone who is “either a dead person or a corporate fiction,” not him. The court disagreed and dismissed his case.” The Wall Street Journal, Wednesday, June 21, 2000, page 1. Some people may ask you, “What’s the difference if your name is spelled in both upper and lower case letters or in all caps?” You may simply reply, “One is my name, the other is not.”
THE ENGMA of a capitalized name Canadian Rights researcher Russell Porisky has conducted extensive studies into common law. VerSuS Admiralty law, and its attendant natural persons versus legal fictions. Porisky provides us with the answer. In book one of his five part study Series On, Canadian Rights and Freedoms, Mr. Porisky – who describes himself as a “natural person” brings forth definitions from two Credible Sources…
Gage Canadian Dictionary, 1983, Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as… “To take advantage of To use to ones own advantage.
”Blacks Law Dictionary – Revised Fourth Edition, 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows …Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization) – In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man’s status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications.
Capitis Diminutio Maxima (meaning a maximum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. JOHN DOE or DOE JOHN) – The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.
Capitis Diminutio Media (meaning a medium loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John DOE) – A lessor or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man loses his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights.
Capitis Diminutio Minima (meaning a minimum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John Doe) – The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man’s family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation pride of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) of his own right, not under any legal disability) or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. Parental authority). It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr. 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11, Mackeld. Rom. Law, 144.
Capite. — Lat. By the head
Diminutio. – Lat. In civil law. Diminution; a taking away; loss or depravation.
As Black’s Law Dictionary explains, the full capitalization of the letters of one’s natural name, results in a diminishing or complete loss of legal or citizenship status, wherein one actually becomes a slave or an item of inventory. The method by which the State causes a natural person to “volunteer” himself into slavery, is through forming legal joinder, implied or stated, with the entity or legal fiction (name all CAPS). Of course, most natural persons wouldn’t willingly form such an unlawful but legally reductionist joinder, so trickery and obfuscation are used. The initial joinder is formed when a legal Birth Certificate is issued by the State, name in all CAPS. In fact, both the Certificate of Birth AND Social Security number, are for “inventory” control purposes, similar to the Amistad Schooner’s manifest or those numbers or records used by legal entities or Corporations to track, account for, use and dispose of inventory. It is under the Admiralty jurisdiction Terri Schiavo’s fate was determined, and under this alien fictional jurisdiction many of today’s legal or other fictional entities such as “gay marriages” are fabricated. Commensurate with color of law, they appear to “be,” but they are not. Indeed, under common law and the American Constitution, “gay marriage” is unlawful and an oxymoron (contradiction). This, no legal maneuver can change.
Whereas one may have legal recourse in a Corporate or Admiralty Court, no lawful or moral remedy will be found. Administrative directives of the legal tribunal or Admiralty jurisdiction, while having the color or appearance of law, may be legal but are in fact unlawful due to the nature or status of the Court’s origin, which is predicated upon fiction. Admiralty Courts are in effect vastly inferior to the intentions and authority of those who founded the American Constitutional Republic. When Searching America today, one would be hard pressed to locate an authentic Constitutional or Common law Court. This unlawful condition prevails in both Canada and the United States. A serious breech of Constitutional fidelity surfaced recently, when it was discovered Judges in Oregon were not properly sworn to uphold the Oregon Constitution and therefore were acting without Constitutional authority. The Courts and Judges in question, therefore, represent an alien power or entity.
It is Worth noting the causes for the Colonist revolt against England (it wasn’t the Boston tea party)… On July 6 1775, a declaration by the representatives of the united colonies of North America, met in Congress at Philadelphia setting forth the Causes and necessity of their taking up arms.
“…They (England) have undertaken to give and grant our money without our consent (seizing from the colonies the right to issue their own colonial script which destroyed the colonial economy). Though we have ever exercised an exclusive right to dispose of our own property, statutes have been passed for extending the jurisdiction of courts of admiralty and vice admiralty beyond their ancient limits, for depriving us of the accustomed and inestimable privilege of trial by jury, in cases affecting both life and property, for suspending the legislature of one of the colonies; for interdicting all commerce to the capital of another; and for altering fundamentally the form of government established by charter…”
Through obfuscation and trickery America has been attacked and occupied by Corporate or pirate ships of War, which are the privately OWned Federal Reserve and the IRS. Under Admiralty jurisdiction, commercial pirates have kidnapped and commandeered the American people into servitude. In fact, American’s today enjoy a legal status no different from that of the Amistad Africans had they been found by the United States Supreme Court to be slaves or items of cargo owned by Spain and/or Spain’s representatives. Under terms used to facilitate slavery i.e., cargo, inventory etc., both Americans and Canadians now fall under these definitions i.e., as articles of commerce under Admiralty law and the UCC (Universal Commercial Code). America and Canada have been surreptitiously hijacked by pirates under “color of law.” It should be emphasized; piracy and kidnapping are Crimes under most lawful jurisdictions. In law, today’s Admiralty courts are accessories to piracy.
In all human endeavors, it is the responsibility of each person to guard first his own dignity and freedom, then the dignity and freedom of his family, community and fellow man. Those who do not uplift and guard the freedom and dignity of their fellow human beings little deserve it for themselves. John Quincy Adams was successful in securing the freedom of his African defendants. Would it be he were here with us today and that all Americans could be the black Africans he so eloquently represented. His words are an inspiration for all time.
“Not slaves and therefore cannot be considered merchandise, but are free individuals with certain ethical and moral rights, including the right to engage in insurrection against those who would deny them their freedom – When there appears no hope at all, one must invoke one’s ancestors – who we are, is who we were and Who We must become.”
Anthony Hopkins as J.Q. Adams in the movie Amistad
Kevin E. Abrams is not a product of Academia. Rather he is a lay “psycho-historian,” who studies the “who,” and “why” of history. Over the past 25 years, he has written on the hidden history of the “gay” movement and other pertinent issues dealing with human rights and freedoms. In 1995 Mr. Abrams co-authored The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in the Nazi Party with Mr. Scott Lively. The Pink Swastika can be read On-line at, The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality in The Nazi Party – Fourth Edition.
The preceding was copied from: La Amistad & Slave Ship AMERICA
(C) 2005 Kevin E. Abrams – All Rights Reserved
The following is the balance of the article:
“By the blessing of God, I will argue the case before the Supreme Court – I implore the mercy of God to control my temper, to enlighten my soul, and to give me utterance, that I may prove myself in every respect equal to the task.”
John Quincy Adams)At the age of 74, elder member of Congress John Quincy Adams received a visitor at his home in Massachusetts – slavery abolitionist leader Lewis Tappan.
Tappan’s purpose was to persuade “Old Man Eloquent” to argue his defendant’s case in Washington in what today is remembered as the Amistad Trial. In Steven Speilberg’s film Amistad, the essential ingredients of the trial are brought forth, however, La Amistad also serves up a living template for jurisdictional issues which today directly impact the freedoms, liberties and human rights of both Americans AND Canadians. On Monday, February 22, 1841 Legal arguments commenced before the United States Supreme Court in Hartford Connecticut. John Quincy Adams began his argument on February 24th. The question to be decided by the nine Supreme Court Justices, was one of legal jurisdiction. Their decision would mean slavery and death, or life and freedom for the 36 black African defendants. Specifically, were these Africans items of commerce or inventory as Spain and the Spanish slave traders maintained, or, had these Africans been illegally kidnapped from their homes along the Ivory Coast where slavery had been outlawed? Was their rebellion against enslavement, in which the Africans killed all but two of their Spanish captors lawful, or not? The trial became a Contentious national issue, and as we shall see, La Amistad is not only an important event which sailed into American history, but ominously, an accurate and significant portrayal of America and her people today – of Slave Ship America. We will explore and identify how we were “volunteered,” and how we “volunteer” ourselves into servitude. We will also uncover the primary covert machinations employed by self-appointed scientific and banking elite’s to maneuver and seduce freeborn human beings into slavery. Ironically, all Americans have been reduced to the same legal or commercial status the Spanish Crown sought to impose upon Amistad’s African “inventory”just 164 years ago. Whereas we appear to have Come a long Way in our Cultural and legal battles for human rights, we in fact have landed far from our intended shore. In today’s fictional courts, all Americans are equally black. “Any law that originates from the Constitution is lawful. Any purported law that does not originate from it is a fictional law without validity. The true test of any American law is whether it was created according to lawful process or outside of lawful process.” July 2003 Idaho Observer
Sir William Blackstone of Blackstone’s Law Dictionary, with his many teachings on common law lays the lawful foundation of the Constitutional Republic and American justice. Both America and the Dominion of Canada were founded under Common law jurisdiction and the unalienable rights and freedoms enjoyed by our forefathers. The right to life, liberty and property, for instance, are lawful claims not legal privileges – the right to justice not sympathy. Legal privileges and Sympathy Sway with the Wind and times, whereas unalienable rights supersede convention and legality. Lawful Government must uphold and protect the unalienable rights of its born or naturalized citizens. However, there is a second status of “person” or “individual” with which many people are unfamiliar. This legal or fictional “person” can also be described as similar to the straw man, as in the “persona” born without a brain in the movie Wizard of Oz. This also describes the persona of a Corporation – a legal fiction without a brain, except that is, for “its” articles of incorporation that define “its” character and legal capacity. Due to the fact, a Corporate entity has no life of “its” own, and that “it” serves only itself, “it” must derive “its” life from sources external to “itself” which is why Corporate entities often become such liabilities to both the individual and community within which they function. Unlike a natural person with autonomous volition, an entity or legal fiction not only doesn’t have a brain, but also lacks the ability to act morally. Indeed, Corporations often violate human rights codes outlawing slavery by classifying natural persons as resources whom they include in the sale of the Corporation or entity as “intellectual property” or “good will.” A straw man, legal fiction or entity Could be likened to the image of yourself when you look into a mirror. The image looks like or has the “color” of you as in the “color of law,” and even moves like you – but “it” is not the real, flesh and blood, you. However, within the legal scheme of things, you “volunteer” to become this image, fiction or entity through an involuntary or voluntary act of legal joinder every time you file a domestic income tax return or apply for a driver license (invisible contracts). This license is issued not to you, but to the entity. “It is to the property of the citizen, not to the demand of the creditor of the State, that the original faith of society is pledged. The claim of the citizen is prior in time, paramount in title, and superior in quality.”
Edmund Burke, Quoted in. The Coming Battle Pubby, Paul & Loraine Walter In his arguments before the United States Supreme Court on behalf of the Amistad Africans, John Quincy Adams states, “I derive consolation from the thought that this Court is a Court of JUSTICE.” Adams quotes from the 2,000 year old, “Institutes of Justinian,” meaning, “the constant and perpetual will to secure to every one HIS OWN right.” Adams also alludes to this mirror image, fiction or “color of law” as, “that it said the thing which is not-too unfortunately it was so, as he said.” Meaning, the claims of the Spanish Crown and slave traders, while having the Color or appearance of law, were in effect neither lawful nor predicated upon law at all. It must be noted, John Q. Adams was acting as an advocate FOR the Africans, rather than as an interpreter of the UCC or Universal Commercial Code which deals specifically with such matters as commercial damage or loss claims as in the Amistad slave “inventories” etc. In the strange world of legal fiction it is doubtful Adams’ lawful arguments Could even be heard today in any American Court, including the Supreme Court, due to the fact the Supreme Court of the United States is today no longer capable of even “hearing” a natural or lawful person. In a future article, we will also explore how fraudulent science promoted by tax exempt Foundations has co-opted and undermined the American Constitution as the basis for American law and how this has extended into all areas of American life.
For purposes of understanding one’s legal or Commercial status under the Admiralty system, it is necessary to examine the Curious use of all CAPS in legal and domestic income tax forms. While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has deep significance. In 2003 the laaho Observer conducted an inquiry into the meaning, or basis of capitalizing a natural person’s name in official Government and legal documents. A proper answer was never found. However, Canadian Rights researcher Russell Porisky has conducted extensive studies into common law versus Admiralty law, and its attendant natural persons versus legal fictions. Porisky provides us with the answer. In book One of his five part study series On, Canadian Rights and Freedoms, Mr. Porisky – who describes himself as a “natural person” brings forth definitions from two Credible Sources… FICTIO; in Roman law, a fiction; an assumption or supposition of the law. “Fictio” in the old Roman law was properly a term of pleading, and signified a false averment on the part of the plaintiff which the defendant was not allowed to traverse, as that the plaintiff was a Roman citizen, when in truth he was a foreigner. The object of the fiction was to give the court jurisdiction. Maine, Anc. Law, 25. Black’s Law dictionary, p. 751.
NOTICE: Information served herein is for educational purposes only, no liability assumed for use. The information you obtain in this presentation is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. Author does not Consent to unlawful action. Author advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and defend all law which is particularly applicable. If anything in this presentation is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification. VOID where prohibited by law.