Same with me. I got a head start on the migraine just trying to imagine how I might speak, without ever using the fake word "You". I noticed that even the fearless writer of the Shire Herald continues using it in the explanations, .... so I know it is going to be really difficult.
Does this merely show that we all have been thoroughly trained in the fraud by having willingly adopted such words in speech? I fully understood how the word "Person(s)" are used in the grift, ... but discovering the fake nature of the word "You" really takes it up a few notches.
I know that those I send the Shire Herald posts to, likely end up cross-eyed and in the grips of cranial hernia, ... but I send them anyway. lol
If being used as a collective "you", it is relatively safe. Being addressed with the word "you" in court presumes any one of the possible titles or 'personalities' are in fact the same as the man. It is the trick of attempting to get the man to BE the 'person'. That is actually impossible in a practical and logical sense since all 'persons' are fictitious entities. The question back is "what 'you' are 'you' ["the man on the bench and his title"] addressing?" A man is never 'you'.
In their crazy courts, a man is always on special visitation ["otherwise they presume you are trespassing on their docked vessel and hence, on foreign territory subject to their jurisdiction"] to present facts, evidence, and conclusions of law and to explain. A man never complains or argues.
Interesting. In Romanian, person (persoană) = Individual of the human species, man considered by the totality of his physical and mental attributes; human being. When we use the simple word "person" is only about humans.
From a legal point of view, the expressions "natural person" and "legal person" are used, which are civil law institutions.
natural person = man considered individually, as a member of society, having the capacity of subject of law. The quality of subject of law is recognized and guaranteed to all natural persons without any discrimination based on race, nationality, sex, religion or level of culture.
Natural persons are people, members of society, who appear in legal relations as their own and distinct entities, regardless of whether they are citizens or foreigners (persons with another citizenship or without citizenship).
The natural person has, under the conditions of the law, capacity to use and capacity to exercise.
Registration as an independent natural person (doctors, achitects etc, one man bussines) allows you to legally collect money from the practice of liberal professions and subsequently pay taxes and duties owed to the state.
Legal person, definition - is a collective subject of civil law that independently participates in legal relations, having its own civil liability; a human collective formed directly from natural persons or from the association of other legal persons as a subject of law, having an independent organization and a distinct heritage, affected by the achievement of a purpose determined in accordance with the public interest.
The law distinguish between legal entities under private law and legal entities under public law.
Among private law legal entities, profit-making legal entities (companies, companies) and non-profit-making legal entities (associations, foundations, political parties) are distinguished.
"person" in few languages other than those mentioned:
Albanian - personi
danish - persoon
german - person
Italian - persona
norwegian - person
swedish - person
latvian - persona
afrikaans - persoon
welsh - person
However, "person" in the everyday use of the word, it is a social role or a character played by an actor. The word derives from latin, where it originally referred to a theatrical mask. The latin word is older, probably derives from the etruscan word "phersu", with the same meaning. The meaning in the late roman period changed to indicate a "character" of a theatrical performance or a court of law, when it became apparent that a different number of persons could assume the same role, and the legal attributes such as rights, powers and duties followed the role. The same individuals as actors could play different roles, each with its own legal attributes.
Interesting to read the Roman law regarding persons.
It is exactly that - a character or role - a face or mask - a title. It is something taken on. Most of the legal words originate in the theater. Even attorneys are actors and the BAR is an acting troop in origin.
i, request the more nuanced look at some of the word pairings... natural person, legal person, human being, etc... These are all adjective/pronoun combinations. When written in a sentence, without a preposition, they become adverb/verb combinations. Opinion is not allowed in law. An adjective colors the word that follows. Coloring a word makes it opinion.
Now look at the individual ["individual used properly here denoting a thing"] words and their meaning. "Human" - shade of man. a “human being” is “sea monster” and subject to the jurisdiction thereof: per Ballentine’s Law Dictionary; and, a monster is a “human being” by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal; and, “human” is belonging or relative to a man as distinguished from the Creator or superhuman beings;
that which a man or woman may establish by way of notice
law is what you define it to be in private (running around naked in your home is lawful and legal)
law is expressed
Fiction:
Legal:
for titles and those who claim titles
that which those of mankind are bound to follow when using a title
statues and codes and rules
their definition
running around naked in public will get you arrested (lawful but illegal)
legal is implied
As noted, 'natural person' and 'legal person' are 'civil', as in civilian - again a title. Are you ["collective 'you'"] of the civilian/civilization or one of mankind?
Legal registrations and licenses are from the rules, codes, acts, statutes, and procedures to make something legal that would otherwise be unlawful.
• "The acceptance of a license, in whatever form, will not impose upon the licensee an obligation to respect or to comply with any provision of the statute or with the regulations prescribed that are repugnant to the Constitution of the United States." W. W. CARGILL CO. v. STATE OF MINNESOTA, 180 U.S. 452 (1901) 180 U.S. 452
• “Speeding, running stop signs, traveling without license plates, or registration are not threats to the public safety, and thus are not arrestable offenses.” Christy v. Elliot, 216 I 131, 74 HE 1035, LRA NS 1905-1910
• Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 US 105: “No state shall convert a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore.”
• Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 US 262: “If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.”
The word 'subject' is another trick as it intends servitude to another. Notice how that word is used in many of the definitions. It 'citizen' is subject to duties and responsibilities. This is particularly tricky through the Canon/Roman law and the 12 presumptions of said diminished citizen. If you ["collective you"] were to accept a submissive title, you ["and all your persons"] are then subject to the lawful and legal actions associated with that title.
Man or woman – real and alive flesh and blood with a soul and has rights under the creator and defines law (asserted)
Citizen – diminished man or woman by title and subject to legal fictions with duties and responsibilities (assumed – or in Canon/Roman law, 12 presumptions)
• “All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not Human/Creators in accordance with God’s laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process…” Rodriques v. Ray Donovan (U.S. Department of Labor) 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348, (1985).
• “Positive Law. Law actually and specifically adopted by proper authority for the government or an organized jural society.” Black’s Law Dictionary 5th Edition
• “A sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal Right as against the authority that makes the law on which the Right depends.” –Kawananakoa v Polyblank. 205 U.S. 349. 353. 27 S. Ct. 526. 527. 51 L. Ed. 834 (1907).
• “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, Sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.” —supreme Court Decision, Woo Lee vs. Hopkins 118 U.S. 356
And everything has evolved over time... from natural rights specified by Aristotle who said that only by law does one become free or a slave, because by nature men differ in nothing", to the "person" of roman laws who, if enslaved, was not a person, but a good from the master's patrimony, then to "human rights" which are translated more into obligations than rights, in terms of the provisions of national and international legal acts. I believe that the serial number, the numerical code given to each person at birth as the only element of identification, It classifies us as slaves, goods of the "state," whatever or whoever that may be. And we are treated as such. Great, great trick.
But the Greeks and Romans were in each other’s pockets as I said below. So as the Romans follow the Greeks the Latin also follows the Greek. Best to look at it as the Latin is a variation of to “Waste, ravage, sack”.
If the word is referred as an action or verb, then it makes complete sense. It is the act of taking advantage of the fictitious entity or less than man thing. All comes back to paper things through titles that we make up. And by so diminishing, to a title, we believe we have elevated our earthly position. How inverted and bizarre the world has become due to greed and power.
Maybe two ways of getting the same result. The first is Greek and figures on the necessity of war. The second is Roman Empire and figures on the necessity of bribes. The Romans mostly spoke Greek at home btw. Their tombstones were also often in Greek. Earlier the likes of Corinth and others had made colonies in Italy. The Persians always considered them the one and the same. Maybe a little like how the British Empire morphed into the American Empire but London City to some degree maintained primacy.
It all plots on the bell curve. 62.5% will not say the truth to the de facto. Yes sir; no sir ! 3 bags full Sir. On the left, 12 to 15% are too stupid to qualify to join the military. But they can vote. 16.25% on the right are smart enough to figure it out but will not take action until it is their ox being gored.; 3 to 5% on the left control the stupid et al. evil and those that acquiesce to evil ; On the right 3 to 5% of us will return all of us to a Constitutional republican form of government this year 2024. A solution that works is published at www.orsja.org. Very few will go Athens, Tennessee 1946. The de facto yields to the de jure when the fraud of deception is clear. The occupant of the office will take a proper oath to the de jure Constitutions with God included. No exceptions. See www.orsja.org
An explanation. A small percentage, of the population were involved in the unanimous Declaration of the united States of America 1776 and for most of the 1770’s, wanted to revolt. Wars are controlled by Banks and BAR attorneys and the militaries they control.?! It was about 3 to 5 %, actually, that succeeded in the revolt on the land and brought forth a Confederation and perpetual Union, with articles that stiled themselves The United States of America. 1777. They worked their original jurisdiction sovereign man on the several states system and were unable to govern. To govern they needed to obtain a consensus, it required 100%. So, they wrote a Constitution for the several states which formed the United States a government service company for the several states and reduced themselves to 12 for the 1789 inauguration of George Washington. Vermont was a separate nation seeking statehood. Rhode Island and Providence Plantation did not ratify the Constitution. New York ran them out of the city.
However, the 12 coerced Rhode Island and Providence Plantation to return to the Confederation and perpetual Union. Vermont, a sovereign nation, joined the Union. Washington District of Columbia a 10 mile square between Maryland and Virginia was dedicated. It remained the de jure original jurisdiction; The United States of America from 1789 to 1859 in a proper Congress Assembled. A de jure government, of the United States of Washington District of Columbia the 10 mile square with forts, ports, and needful buildings, according to our Constitution(s). The First law of the land was the Constitution created by the several states. A Confederation and perpetual Union stiled The United States of America 1777. Each a separate nation state (33) with individual Constitutions, that will not conflict with The United States of America’s Constitution circa 1859; the last lawful de jure iteration of original jurisdiction. Constitutions now totaling 35. Oregon was / is the last de jure state added to the Union. Kansas was the first de facto state and Nevada and West Virginia are both Lieber Code Federal states, de facto martial law.
Fraud vitiates all contracts either partially or completely. This is decided by ARTICLE I Section 1 Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper. —aka Oregon Statewide Jural Assembly the de jure provisional government on Oregon.
To be determined by each of the other 32 states and 17 territories as they may think proper when they form their social compact and do the work. See www.orsja.org for directions.
There was no preamble ratified. It is an affectation for persons in Washington D.C. without value in law. It is not part of the First law of the land. To which, that land is defined, “what is left of their 10 mile square on the Potomac River.” Virginia took their portion back, now named, Arlington. Our government service company the United States is one proper oath away. Just as Oregon’s de jure government is one oath away.
A proper oath, is to the proper de jure Constitution(s) with Laws of Nature and of Nature's God included, without exception this year 2024.
Explain special visitation in circumstances when one is brought there against his will, also considering things are said orally as opposed to presented in writing. Considering a room full strangers; i.e. no lot or part with any one present in the room, or not party or privy to any existing affairs with any one in the room, strangers in consanguinity.
if a man or woman is at the court house of the district where a docket number ["foreign vessel court docked on our shores proceeding with sea jurisdiction barratry and personage"] eludes to a case ["which is actually a security bond"], special visitation is simply that... visiting with no intention of "appearing"; appearing is what ghosts / fictitious entities do; in the case of pressing claims at court, you are "present" to press claims and explain facts, evidence and conclusions of law; you should never be represented ["past tense incapacitated or incompetent and requiring representation by others - diminishment to that of a defendant, respondent, plaintiff, claimant, etc..."].
Very good, thank you for me. I shall have to read it another 10 times to get it into my head properly.
Same with me. I got a head start on the migraine just trying to imagine how I might speak, without ever using the fake word "You". I noticed that even the fearless writer of the Shire Herald continues using it in the explanations, .... so I know it is going to be really difficult.
Does this merely show that we all have been thoroughly trained in the fraud by having willingly adopted such words in speech? I fully understood how the word "Person(s)" are used in the grift, ... but discovering the fake nature of the word "You" really takes it up a few notches.
I know that those I send the Shire Herald posts to, likely end up cross-eyed and in the grips of cranial hernia, ... but I send them anyway. lol
If being used as a collective "you", it is relatively safe. Being addressed with the word "you" in court presumes any one of the possible titles or 'personalities' are in fact the same as the man. It is the trick of attempting to get the man to BE the 'person'. That is actually impossible in a practical and logical sense since all 'persons' are fictitious entities. The question back is "what 'you' are 'you' ["the man on the bench and his title"] addressing?" A man is never 'you'.
In their crazy courts, a man is always on special visitation ["otherwise they presume you are trespassing on their docked vessel and hence, on foreign territory subject to their jurisdiction"] to present facts, evidence, and conclusions of law and to explain. A man never complains or argues.
How is the headache?
Starting to feel a bit light headed. Whoa., I think I should sit a spell. lol
Excellent post.
Thanks very much.
I shall be sharing this
Interesting. In Romanian, person (persoană) = Individual of the human species, man considered by the totality of his physical and mental attributes; human being. When we use the simple word "person" is only about humans.
From a legal point of view, the expressions "natural person" and "legal person" are used, which are civil law institutions.
natural person = man considered individually, as a member of society, having the capacity of subject of law. The quality of subject of law is recognized and guaranteed to all natural persons without any discrimination based on race, nationality, sex, religion or level of culture.
Natural persons are people, members of society, who appear in legal relations as their own and distinct entities, regardless of whether they are citizens or foreigners (persons with another citizenship or without citizenship).
The natural person has, under the conditions of the law, capacity to use and capacity to exercise.
Registration as an independent natural person (doctors, achitects etc, one man bussines) allows you to legally collect money from the practice of liberal professions and subsequently pay taxes and duties owed to the state.
Legal person, definition - is a collective subject of civil law that independently participates in legal relations, having its own civil liability; a human collective formed directly from natural persons or from the association of other legal persons as a subject of law, having an independent organization and a distinct heritage, affected by the achievement of a purpose determined in accordance with the public interest.
The law distinguish between legal entities under private law and legal entities under public law.
Among private law legal entities, profit-making legal entities (companies, companies) and non-profit-making legal entities (associations, foundations, political parties) are distinguished.
"person" in few languages other than those mentioned:
Albanian - personi
danish - persoon
german - person
Italian - persona
norwegian - person
swedish - person
latvian - persona
afrikaans - persoon
welsh - person
However, "person" in the everyday use of the word, it is a social role or a character played by an actor. The word derives from latin, where it originally referred to a theatrical mask. The latin word is older, probably derives from the etruscan word "phersu", with the same meaning. The meaning in the late roman period changed to indicate a "character" of a theatrical performance or a court of law, when it became apparent that a different number of persons could assume the same role, and the legal attributes such as rights, powers and duties followed the role. The same individuals as actors could play different roles, each with its own legal attributes.
Interesting to read the Roman law regarding persons.
It is exactly that - a character or role - a face or mask - a title. It is something taken on. Most of the legal words originate in the theater. Even attorneys are actors and the BAR is an acting troop in origin.
i, request the more nuanced look at some of the word pairings... natural person, legal person, human being, etc... These are all adjective/pronoun combinations. When written in a sentence, without a preposition, they become adverb/verb combinations. Opinion is not allowed in law. An adjective colors the word that follows. Coloring a word makes it opinion.
Now look at the individual ["individual used properly here denoting a thing"] words and their meaning. "Human" - shade of man. a “human being” is “sea monster” and subject to the jurisdiction thereof: per Ballentine’s Law Dictionary; and, a monster is a “human being” by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal; and, “human” is belonging or relative to a man as distinguished from the Creator or superhuman beings;
How about 'law' versus 'legal'?
lawful – claims – man and woman operate here
legal – complaints – fictions/government/titles/duties/obligations
Law:
that which a man or woman is bound to follow
that which a man or woman may establish by way of notice
law is what you define it to be in private (running around naked in your home is lawful and legal)
law is expressed
Fiction:
Legal:
for titles and those who claim titles
that which those of mankind are bound to follow when using a title
statues and codes and rules
their definition
running around naked in public will get you arrested (lawful but illegal)
legal is implied
As noted, 'natural person' and 'legal person' are 'civil', as in civilian - again a title. Are you ["collective 'you'"] of the civilian/civilization or one of mankind?
Legal registrations and licenses are from the rules, codes, acts, statutes, and procedures to make something legal that would otherwise be unlawful.
• "The acceptance of a license, in whatever form, will not impose upon the licensee an obligation to respect or to comply with any provision of the statute or with the regulations prescribed that are repugnant to the Constitution of the United States." W. W. CARGILL CO. v. STATE OF MINNESOTA, 180 U.S. 452 (1901) 180 U.S. 452
• “Speeding, running stop signs, traveling without license plates, or registration are not threats to the public safety, and thus are not arrestable offenses.” Christy v. Elliot, 216 I 131, 74 HE 1035, LRA NS 1905-1910
• Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 US 105: “No state shall convert a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore.”
• Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 US 262: “If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.”
The word 'subject' is another trick as it intends servitude to another. Notice how that word is used in many of the definitions. It 'citizen' is subject to duties and responsibilities. This is particularly tricky through the Canon/Roman law and the 12 presumptions of said diminished citizen. If you ["collective you"] were to accept a submissive title, you ["and all your persons"] are then subject to the lawful and legal actions associated with that title.
Man or woman – real and alive flesh and blood with a soul and has rights under the creator and defines law (asserted)
Citizen – diminished man or woman by title and subject to legal fictions with duties and responsibilities (assumed – or in Canon/Roman law, 12 presumptions)
• “All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not Human/Creators in accordance with God’s laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process…” Rodriques v. Ray Donovan (U.S. Department of Labor) 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348, (1985).
• “Positive Law. Law actually and specifically adopted by proper authority for the government or an organized jural society.” Black’s Law Dictionary 5th Edition
• “A sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal Right as against the authority that makes the law on which the Right depends.” –Kawananakoa v Polyblank. 205 U.S. 349. 353. 27 S. Ct. 526. 527. 51 L. Ed. 834 (1907).
• “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, Sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.” —supreme Court Decision, Woo Lee vs. Hopkins 118 U.S. 356
Thank you, is very interesting.
And everything has evolved over time... from natural rights specified by Aristotle who said that only by law does one become free or a slave, because by nature men differ in nothing", to the "person" of roman laws who, if enslaved, was not a person, but a good from the master's patrimony, then to "human rights" which are translated more into obligations than rights, in terms of the provisions of national and international legal acts. I believe that the serial number, the numerical code given to each person at birth as the only element of identification, It classifies us as slaves, goods of the "state," whatever or whoever that may be. And we are treated as such. Great, great trick.
In Greek (‘περσον’ in the Greek alphabet is exactly the same as ‘person’ in Roman alphabet)
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=person&la=greek
"Waste, ravage, sack"
Yet, not a man. And not the same definition as English.
In Latin (Greek though is earlier) apparently it means "to rub gently, stroke"
https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=person&la=la
Sounds a little like gentle persuasion
But the Greeks and Romans were in each other’s pockets as I said below. So as the Romans follow the Greeks the Latin also follows the Greek. Best to look at it as the Latin is a variation of to “Waste, ravage, sack”.
Do you agree?
If the word is referred as an action or verb, then it makes complete sense. It is the act of taking advantage of the fictitious entity or less than man thing. All comes back to paper things through titles that we make up. And by so diminishing, to a title, we believe we have elevated our earthly position. How inverted and bizarre the world has become due to greed and power.
Maybe two ways of getting the same result. The first is Greek and figures on the necessity of war. The second is Roman Empire and figures on the necessity of bribes. The Romans mostly spoke Greek at home btw. Their tombstones were also often in Greek. Earlier the likes of Corinth and others had made colonies in Italy. The Persians always considered them the one and the same. Maybe a little like how the British Empire morphed into the American Empire but London City to some degree maintained primacy.
It all plots on the bell curve. 62.5% will not say the truth to the de facto. Yes sir; no sir ! 3 bags full Sir. On the left, 12 to 15% are too stupid to qualify to join the military. But they can vote. 16.25% on the right are smart enough to figure it out but will not take action until it is their ox being gored.; 3 to 5% on the left control the stupid et al. evil and those that acquiesce to evil ; On the right 3 to 5% of us will return all of us to a Constitutional republican form of government this year 2024. A solution that works is published at www.orsja.org. Very few will go Athens, Tennessee 1946. The de facto yields to the de jure when the fraud of deception is clear. The occupant of the office will take a proper oath to the de jure Constitutions with God included. No exceptions. See www.orsja.org
An explanation. A small percentage, of the population were involved in the unanimous Declaration of the united States of America 1776 and for most of the 1770’s, wanted to revolt. Wars are controlled by Banks and BAR attorneys and the militaries they control.?! It was about 3 to 5 %, actually, that succeeded in the revolt on the land and brought forth a Confederation and perpetual Union, with articles that stiled themselves The United States of America. 1777. They worked their original jurisdiction sovereign man on the several states system and were unable to govern. To govern they needed to obtain a consensus, it required 100%. So, they wrote a Constitution for the several states which formed the United States a government service company for the several states and reduced themselves to 12 for the 1789 inauguration of George Washington. Vermont was a separate nation seeking statehood. Rhode Island and Providence Plantation did not ratify the Constitution. New York ran them out of the city.
However, the 12 coerced Rhode Island and Providence Plantation to return to the Confederation and perpetual Union. Vermont, a sovereign nation, joined the Union. Washington District of Columbia a 10 mile square between Maryland and Virginia was dedicated. It remained the de jure original jurisdiction; The United States of America from 1789 to 1859 in a proper Congress Assembled. A de jure government, of the United States of Washington District of Columbia the 10 mile square with forts, ports, and needful buildings, according to our Constitution(s). The First law of the land was the Constitution created by the several states. A Confederation and perpetual Union stiled The United States of America 1777. Each a separate nation state (33) with individual Constitutions, that will not conflict with The United States of America’s Constitution circa 1859; the last lawful de jure iteration of original jurisdiction. Constitutions now totaling 35. Oregon was / is the last de jure state added to the Union. Kansas was the first de facto state and Nevada and West Virginia are both Lieber Code Federal states, de facto martial law.
Fraud vitiates all contracts either partially or completely. This is decided by ARTICLE I Section 1 Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper. —aka Oregon Statewide Jural Assembly the de jure provisional government on Oregon.
To be determined by each of the other 32 states and 17 territories as they may think proper when they form their social compact and do the work. See www.orsja.org for directions.
There was no preamble ratified. It is an affectation for persons in Washington D.C. without value in law. It is not part of the First law of the land. To which, that land is defined, “what is left of their 10 mile square on the Potomac River.” Virginia took their portion back, now named, Arlington. Our government service company the United States is one proper oath away. Just as Oregon’s de jure government is one oath away.
A proper oath, is to the proper de jure Constitution(s) with Laws of Nature and of Nature's God included, without exception this year 2024.
It is amazing what is being done in Oregon, hopefully full success is forthcoming.
Explain special visitation in circumstances when one is brought there against his will, also considering things are said orally as opposed to presented in writing. Considering a room full strangers; i.e. no lot or part with any one present in the room, or not party or privy to any existing affairs with any one in the room, strangers in consanguinity.
if a man or woman is at the court house of the district where a docket number ["foreign vessel court docked on our shores proceeding with sea jurisdiction barratry and personage"] eludes to a case ["which is actually a security bond"], special visitation is simply that... visiting with no intention of "appearing"; appearing is what ghosts / fictitious entities do; in the case of pressing claims at court, you are "present" to press claims and explain facts, evidence and conclusions of law; you should never be represented ["past tense incapacitated or incompetent and requiring representation by others - diminishment to that of a defendant, respondent, plaintiff, claimant, etc..."].
Brilliant. Been reading up on legalese etc. Easy to "understand" or should I say comprehend!