The Fed Funny Farm Take 2, Part IV - Slicing Through the Tension

NOTE:  If you get bored reading through the first portion of this article, please make your way down towards the bottom of it, where you will find a much more interesting resistance motion I wrote in defiance of a motion by one of the defending parties for summary judgement and their release as a defendant right in the middle of an appeal case we recently made to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, concerning this case and the District Court's inaction in dealing with it, or anything that concerns the claimants.

You, know, America, I do realize that, as they charge horrendous fees from their clients; and as the defendants expect much action in return; whether that action be sensible or not; matters not; only that they're doing SOMETHING to earn these fees; that this evil construct of the judiciary...attorneys, I mean, who are fighting for their clients tooth and nail (they had better, considering what they take down every year in legal fees to do so) to better a.  win and get their clients off the hook without a scratch, or b. get the whatever current legal matter dismissed or settled before it gets to a courtroom; but when these actions begin to cross the widely understood and evident lines labeled "Utter Insanity" and "Utter Stupidity" in their active defenses or prosecutions; but then, for added affect, repeat the same incomprehensible actions of both insanity and stupidity to ensure that they look like they're doing their job, stupidly and insanely; for effect; you have to shake your head, and do it a lot; when you are actively watching these morons in action.

For a damned good and current example;  how many times would a lie have to be repeated by all of these defending attorneys, all in chorus; at the same time in the same case; and in almost the exact same words; do they think is a magic number of times that will someday, somehow, cause the judge/judges ruling over this action to just go way off their rocker and lose their minds; then all of a sudden, stop believing everything the plaintiffs themselves related to the court, concerning their action and its actual purpose, allegations and intentions; and just automatically just up and start listening to and believing all the opposing side says about the same is actually the truth instead, going against everything they've ever learned or experienced as judges with people who bring charge against people in this manner, and just flip the whole thing over to the exact opposite of that instead, for no apparent logical or intelligent reason that makes any kind of sense.

OK, OK, you're lost, and I can truly understand that, as you haven't got a clear idea about what I'm attempting to put forth on this.  I suppose, a much better way to explain what I believe is happening (as well as I can describe insane behavior and lunatic actions, that is; and please, don't expect me to know what these stupid people are ACTUALLY up to while engaging in this lunacy on the public record of the court, what purpose they have in participating in said behavior, or expect to gain from it.  Moreover, do not expect me to sum this up up for you; since it's so far out there in left field that I'm sure their own mothers couldn't even harbor a rational guess or opinion; and these are their own mothers!  If they don't know, who would?) is to describe this madness in a more logical manner and from another viewpoint; in order to give you a little clearer idea/picture of what this looks like; at least to us plaintiffs, anyway; as to have something concrete that you can finally hold this up to and go "AHHHH....I get it now!" with confidence; and thereby give you an example from where the majority of us actually come from...everyday life, a place that the minds of attorneys and the majority of judges in our system obviously no longer occupy; so you can come to finally understand and "get" what I'm putting down, concerning my best interpretation of this conspiratorial and psychotic encrypted strategy or plot they're trying to pull over, initially, just the plaintiff's eyes (and more than likely, the eyes of the world on the record, as this case is looked at, later).

The statement they continue to make is simple; but the weight of the statement to an onlooker is clear, should they attempt to analyze reasons used to dismiss or rid the courts of this action in a legitimate manner - "This claim arises out of a juvenile case, and is presenting as an appeal to overturn the States's decision concerning these matters"

Of course, as you all know, this statement couldn't be further from the truth.  Sure, the claimants would love to see that happen.  The unfortunate reality, however, is that it won't ever happen.  But see, there are more problems with this statement.  The most obvious problem is that, on its face, this fact, as stated by the defending attorneys, is simply not true.  To start with, there are 8 cases involving these claimants, and 5 of them don't concern anything relating to the juvenile cases...at all.  2nd, half of the defendants listed know nothing about, let alone a single fact as it pertains to those cases.  Next, there is absolutely no mention of this desire of the federal court, and the claim alleges three all-new claims of damage - Violation of our civil rights using color of law, conspiracy to violate the same, and RICO charges.  So where and why is this statement being made at all, and to whom is it directed?

As you read on, you'll find that it's very hard to imagine that any sane, intelligent, rational or lawful judge would fall for this sort of behavior, especially coming from an attorney of their same cloth; unless they were in on the plan, anyway.  This is more than 200% likely, so don't misread my opinion, where crooks as judges is not believable at all.  I've shaken my head at plenty of these miscreant judges that I still believe are still, to date, solid candidates, hands down for, say, the lead role in any possible remake of "The Omen" series, or a great replacement for the demon-possessed Linda Blair, from the 'Exorcist"series; you know, the movie that everyone has seen at least 1000 times; if for no better reason; just for the part where she turns her head 360 degrees; a feat that would, under any believable circumstances, debilitate the now un-possessed person for life; or leave them with some permanent and irreparable malady of the spine or neck, causing  them to be unable to ever turn their head again, (or something such like); once the demon leaves.

But, I digress.  Yes, to this author, Evil = Judge; and don't you dare even doubt the truth or the comparable nature inherent in these terms when they are seen occupying the same space; or in the very level of that equality; even for a minute.  Do I believe that this ridiculously re-occurring statement, repeated endlessly in nearly every single thing these defending attorney's file in their defense; and repeat it, word for word, over and over like a broken record; to be a possible set up to some elaborate and underhanded conspiratorial legal trick down the road; one that's likely to have been agreed upon as a best end-strategy; possibly hatched in some backroom ex-parte criminal house party or emergency session between the attorneys for the defense, who all represent these criminal elected officials in power in Iowa, and the judge in charge this case, who has to consider and endure this headache for the entire duration; then be forced to have to actually think and use her own logical judgement in order to make a legitimate and believable ruling on it; as they will have to, more than likely, find for the claim bringers (because it is glaringly obvious that they should, of course); then as a later result, this judge may thereby earn the label of traitor, or 'the one that turned on their own'; a strategy that would get all their state court buddies off the hook without a scratch, and gets the judge out of ruling on the plaintiff's claim from Hell, altogether?

You can bet your sweet bippy I do.  I thought I saw the corrupt  head of Judge William A. Price (our former favorite criminal juvenile district court judge) almost spin completely around on his spine in a couple of his famous circus hearings more than a couple of times...so yeah...I believe it's very very possible.

So in the process of alleged justice, just how long would it be before a judge finally raises her gavel and just beat these attorney's brains down to his ankles for being a moron?  I would think it would have happened the first time they stated this opinion, but hey...when you come from garbage, you think, smell and act the same way, no matter how high up the ladder you decide to go.  Since these triers of fact were former attorneys before they threw on a robe and deemed themselves able to judge any and everything under the sun, they were idiot attorneys themselves; so I guess that carries weight in trying to determine why the judge in charge of this case hasn't opened fire on the whole lot as yet; just for being annoying.  in repeating their opinion...and of course, this is all it is, added to really stupid opinion, based wholly on absolutely no fact or statement made in our claim and by defining point alone, presents this as nothing short of Kangaroo and Circus-style justice tactics...not entirely unlike those candidates who run for the Presidency every four years, who spend their entire time and most of their support dollars slandering and bashing the characters and moral fiber of the other candidates incessantly.

And as if this statement, as it's repeated over and over again to the point of ripping your own hair out in utter surrender to its maniacal intent in presenting this absolute untruth to those of the court in hopes that they will someday repeat it and deem it to be the real truth; or believe it as possibly able to present an inkling of common sense; or of any possible LEGAL sense, wasn't enough for you; they are, essentially, in repeating this sentence; and while staring right into the heart and eyes of TRUTH and the claimants; attempting to show that they absolutely know the reasons for this claim as opposite what they stated, and know that truth better than the claimants who drew it up; in complete denial of anything that presents in this claim.  Obviously  then, according to this logic, anything added after the juvenile matters are simply claimant provided window-dressing then, just for show...Claimant Grandstanding, maybe?  Is there such a thing, I wonder?

I can only compare this absolutely absurd, fact-less, baseless, unfounded, unproven, half-witted conclusion engaged in by the entirety of these defending attorneys best; in this way:  To present something so stupidly guessed or concluded in any fashion onto the public record of any court anywhere; that claims as fact to know the minds and the purpose (and they've attempted to present to this judge the idea that they're assured that they know the TRUE purpose of these claimants; in filing this suit; though they probably couldn't even state the claimant's full names for anyone, if they were asked to do so on demand, without having to consult their notes or their legal paperwork first; let alone could they claim to manage to eek out even a minute percentage of accuracy while engaging in any sure-failing attempt to psycho-analyze anything concerning even these claimants' most basic, blatant or overt personality traits; or in any equally failure-based attempt to assess what they might be really thinking or wanting as a result of the claim) more than these claimants who, by themselves, worked to create and author this claim, and more so, drew it up without the help of anyone with any sort of legal background..

This sort of conclusion, come to and presented by this gaggle of inane attorneys, compares in utter stupidity to; say, someone thinking that, if you tell someone you know, with absolute certainty, that the sky is purple and the sun is white; and that you know the true purpose and meaning behind this sun being in our sky, and you know what it's real purpose is, as well as what it wants; and tell them that enough times; repeating it in every other paragraph, for example; though you know absolutely nothing about it, couldn't rest a single fact of knowledge to back up your alleged "truth" concerning its true origin or it's purpose, not even if you were to be able to blindly poke a stick in its direction long enough; in a blind attempt to just light on or hit a modicum of reason or logic that would back up your lie; that they will undoubtedly and stupidly discount the true identity and description that they've seen and experienced as what the sun ready is, against all they've been taught it is; and just start believing your version without good reason to.

Do you feel me America?  This, this, is what our system of justice has to resort to...utter insanity, to get others to believe that they aren't, in fact, bullshitting all American citizens at all times in each and every legal process that crosses our paths...which they are, and have been.

So now it's time to move on from this bullshit, and present MY theory of the intent of this behavior; since attorneys don't just go gaga, let alone go gaga all at the same time, when you're talking about 2 firms or more:  Their wish, ultimately, is to rid the court of this case, because of who it involves, and because it exposes, in a very harsh light no less, the severity of their criminal behavior against these claimants; and possibly, others.  I've already told you that, to allow this case into an open court in front of a jury would not only be a headache, it would be a total disaster to the defendants named.  Jobs would be lost, corruption would be exposed, evil shown, intents guessed...in other words, pieces of the puzzle involved in something like this would point to the placement of other pieces, and next thing you know, mysteries hidden purposely from the public's eyes in the past would slowly be put together with other actions, and on parade in front of those of the public eye; and next thing you know, trouble in the form of moral outrage would be sure to swell and be engaged in by millions of offended Americans...and there goes the entirety of a lot of judicial fraud and the wielders thereof; and all the money it made for the judiciary, OUT THE WINDOW.

Of course, the courts; i.e. elected officials and those of Government et.al; cannot afford to hear or allow jury trials of cases like this; nor can they afford to lose out on this sweet thing and the rewards it has reaped for in their favors for decades.  Therefore, in order to accomplish ridding themselves of it, they have to lay down, repeatedly, and in concerted fashion, some concrete foundation-type reasoning, simple, but effective, and based in some kind of law, something that they all agree to repeat and restate over and over again...not  in order to get the judge or an appellate court to believe or consider this case in the light of such a statement of untruth; since it's likely any judicial officers could see this sort of folly immediately, by utilizing logic, MUST be fully aware that they are going to use this (as they couldn't possibly be stupid enough to believe this nonsense, based on my argument, stated above) and probably suggested they employ this to begin with; so they can, in the future, make an opinion or ruling using this repeated statement to back up their theory - but to convince whoever might be scouring the record for some case that they can make a spectacle of, news-wise or find errors or mistakes; made in a self-appointed oversight of federal cases or their officials, from those that present on the record.

There are folks, even attorneys; who more than likely scour the public record for cases like these; in their personal zeal of either finding a story they can run with; or by lawyers who look out for clients that have real cases; but who can't find good representation to save their butts; and then offer their services for a price to them as an alternative...who knows?  I would have to maybe also put forth that there might be those who choose to voluntarily scour the record for for any obvious signs of wrongdoing in the federal courts; with the noble intent of keeping them honest.  So, I suppose, some camouflage is to be expected, should this court enjoy any kind of success in getting this very damning claim thrown out of the District Court, eh?  Oh well...on we go...

****************************************************************************************************

Here's where this article intends to take a quick turn to the right.  See, I just recently submitted an appeal to the 8th circuit court of appeals for federal cases in the district appellate courts over our smaller one, because, as you may or may not know, they refuse to budge on the current case, nor begin my 2nd case..  Not long after I did so, a defendant's attorney, the crook defending Tony Reed, a Juvenile Court Officer from Eldora Iowa, who runs a ton of crooked drug testing centers across Iowa for victim parents of CPS, and who is also responsible for ruining the lives of 2100 parents in Iowa annually, decided to submit a motion that asked for his criminal client's release from the current case's list of defendants, utilizing the strategy of a motion asking for the court's summary judgement, in his favor.  This one, you have to see, since the composure; while attempting to hide their stress due to every additional minute they must spend in this case is starting to fray and fall apart.  To remain in it is absolute death, in many different ways; so of course, they are going to try to escape from it, utilizing any theory or means to do so.

So without further ado, people...and, after boring you to death with all the hullabaloo above...I present something a lot more fun; the text of the claimants' resistance to the motion from criminal defendant Anthony Reed and his attorney, who asked to be dismissed with a summary judgement in their favor, right in the middle of an appeal to the 8th Circuit court of Appeals, that court just one step below the U.S. Supreme Court...which is just where I intend to take this matter anyway....so keep pushing on, you crooks, because you may just acquire a lot more that what you bargain for.  I am currently in the process of scanning in their motion and their supportive reasons for this;  for the purposes of acquitting the defendant, and the utterly ridiculous memo in support of it, so be patient and bear with me  Check back in just 24 hours, and I'll be sure to have it put in for you.  In the meantime, read this rebutt of these claimants, and I guarantee that what they wrote up will magically appear before your eyes, long before you see what they put in.  If nothing else, be sure to note my feelings towards not only this defendant, but towards his moron of an attorney.  Enjoy!

Note:  There is, after this resistance text, an additional affidavit, submitted by yours truly; for the purposes of telling the federal courts and any appellate courts, our feelings concerning their mandate of "Follow the rules of the court, or ELSE!" and other statements they make, such like, constantly being utilized as excuses that "this court should dismiss this claim".  Make sure to look for this just below another set of asterisks.

First, as usual, let's post their side of things.  Note, that included with this paperwork is an additional statement made by both the attorney and his criminal client that states, in no unclear terms, that our case against them holds no water.  I then submitted another such totally useless legal waste of paper in rebuttal that simply said - For as little as this man was involved in the statement of this claim, he protesteth wayyyyyyyyy too much to believe his innocence in the damage of the claimants.

So, as usual, the docs submitted by them, with limited rebuttal, as most of the rebuttal is extremely evident in every sentence of our motion of resistance, later down the pike.

Let's kick things off with this proven liar's perjury-filled affidavit:

Then, we present his papers of incorporation:

          "Christopher (Bruce), the living man, does hereby submit his motion to resist motion for summary judgement in relation to Defendant Tony Reed, for the record of the alleged Article III Court of the Southern District of Iowa:

          Because of the pending action for a writ of mandamus in motion in the appellate courts, the claimants believe that to dismiss any defendants (all of the defendants) currently named and still involved at this time would be in error, if the court were to decide to grant it.  The court was given ample opportunity to act on the claimant’s submitted motion to dismiss those defendants that they chose to excuse in it; and believe to approve Mr. Reeds request for summary judgement utilizing his irrelevant reasons for doing so, under NORMAL circumstances, would equally be in just as much error; also due to the fact of the appellate action in place.

          Defendant Tony Reed has not been released by the claimants in their motion to dismiss as a defendant in this action, due to the simple fact that he is already named and being claimed against in his individual capacity.  To bring in a corporate entity and claim Mr. Reed to be associated with it for protection against suit at this point and ask the court to consider awarding his client summary judgement is fool-hearty at best.  The court should not give any kind of legal consideration to anything stated regarding either of Mr. Reed’s stated corporate entities as neither of them govern over the citizens of the State of Iowa in any way, thereby are not key in protecting Mr. Reed’s unlawful activities against the claimants.  This new information is neither lawfully relevant or in legitimate support of this attorney’s motion for summary judgment.  Mr. Reeds attorney intends to defy any claim made by the plaintiffs (this is, of course, expected of him as it is his job), who have clearly (since no corporation is mentioned as affiliated to defendant Reed, only ‘Central Iowa Family Services’, a corporation that only had contract to supply drug testing for a Governmental Services Corporation, and is not, in and of itself, a Governmental services corporation; which I believe strips the defendant of all available and possible immunity using just that point) clearly only claim against defendant Reed’s individual designation, since he is not sub-titled in the claim as operating for any corporate entity, Government related or not.  Added to that, Mr. Reed’s attorney was allotted plenty of time to answer with this information quite some time ago; so that he could then connect it somehow to Mr. Reed’s alleged privileges of immunity in acting in his official duties; which presents that this can only be a move of desperation or to ensure avoidance to the claim of the plaintiffs.  Instead, his attorney chose, at the time for his answer, to briefly whip something up in reply to it; utilizing short and extremely vague statements in support of that answer; and chose, at that time, to not unveil this rather important information to the court; but chose instead to just whip up the vague and empty answer that he filed with the court then; then chose the present, while asking for his client to be released with summary judgement, to tell us these things.  The claimants find it rather disrespectful and believes Mr. Reed’s attorney is privately pushing the issue of the intelligence of this court by engaging in filing this motion, considering the small amount of defense that had been filed in defense of Mr. Reed until this motion appeared; and further, expects the court to overlook the omission of this evidence prior, then accept it at this point, and grant him the motion.  The claimants hope this court sees the judicial disrespect shining brightly through this filing of Mr. Reed’s attorney at this time. 

          Disregarding that just stated, there is the more important consideration that Mr. Reed is not being sued as this corporation, or as acting in the interests or to the benefit of this corporation.  If he actually was acting in an official capacity or acting in this corporate entities interests; it was not apparent or known to these claimants; and if he was, that alone should not be relevant to the claim or to the motion he has submitted for summary judgement; nor should that ‘capacity’ if true, grant any protection for Mr. Reed automatically, since this corporate entity has never been clearly associated to him or his actions until this point in time.  Furthermore, this corporate entity is not mentioned whatsoever anywhere in the plaintiff’s claim, nor is Mr. Reed described as working in or for this corporate entity in any of the actions related to this court by the claimants, nor is this corporate entity named separately as a defendant in this action.  The claimants restate that Mr. Reed is being sued in this claim individually and unofficially, which is the reason this court was asked to keep Mr. Reed in this action; since the reason a new claim was filed is the same; as its most important function is to disassociate the defendants from their alleged official positions and claim against them as individuals.  Defendant Reed was not dismissed by the claimants in this action against his personal actions aside from whatever job or position he might have held; and should not be granted summary judgement, essentially dismissing him from being accountable for damage to the claimants; based only on anything claimed to be related to his official position, if it is, or was, in fact, ever ‘official’ at all.

          These claimants state that, in their opinion, defendant Tony Reed is easily and by far, the most dishonest person the claimants have ever met in their lifetimes, to date.  Mr. Reed is, also in the opinion of these claimants, an unparalleled, proven, self-interested, habitual, self-serving and undaunted liar, both in court and out of it; a con-man, and a major player and conspiratorial cog in the well-funded, and little known effort, in place in the State of Iowa and others; an effort that will be sure to cause the eventual and total extinction of the family unit in America (what used to be and is no longer its greatest strength; thanks to those of these RICO for profit operations existent in each of the 50 states) utilizing illegally gained federally funded moneys, taxpayer dollars and other available resources that might facilitate this intent (or that can be bought or paid for.)  The claimants have no intention of pointing fingers at those they believe are wholly responsible and in charge of this criminal intention; but do rest almost their entire claim of conspiracy and RICO damages based on it.

         Whether this court knows or agrees to recognize this obvious attempt to separate and destroy American families or not, or recognize these actions as being actions of destruction, not reunification; (torturous and traumatizing as they are to both the parents and their children) or notes that actions such as these are cruel and inhumane or not, matters not.

          What matters is this:  There are two plaintiffs, both are deemed and alleging to be self-represented and claimed damaged individuals in common law, who, after lawfully submitting this claim have been told of their errors numerous times in all of the defending answers, have corrected those errors and refiled it into another case; and are now awaiting a decision to be made in this action, in order to proceed with the 2^nd, and wrap up the first, which, according to the list of defendants the claimants have asked to dismiss, leaves around 6 defendants that remain.  Should the court choose to grant these defendants summary judgement, or dismiss the action entirely, doesn’t matter; since they are also named in the new action.  The claimants would, however, direct the court to grant Mr. Reed and others their dismissal based on proper and logical defenses; or after being presented reasonable or valid reasons, not for the inane reasons that this attorney expects you to grant it for, on Mr. Reed’s behalf.

          Mr. Reed is a criminal of a higher order; and the claimants insist on his affidavit to be on the record as it stands; for no other purpose than to help in showing and proving to the people of Iowa the absolute audacity and dishonesty of this defendant’s unethical actions, in defiance of both Iowa’s parents and their children; and so others can note the faults and holes in his story as compared to the claimants’; as he rattles off his perjurious and unbelievable statements unerringly in nearly every paragraph.  The current version in the submitted affidavit doesn’t even match up to the ‘facts’ he related to the DHS after he falsified Claimant Christopher’s 2^nd drug screen; so it serves to relate to the claimants that he would like to be dismissed so that he won’t be forced to remember which lies he told to whom and when.  I sincerely hope that his affidavit will also serve to further destroy what little credibility he may have had remaining; cause the eventual dismantling of his crooked enterprise by the citizens of the State of Iowa; and help put him behind bars for all the disservice and cruelty he has heaped and inflicted upon (21,000 annually) not only parents all over Iowa, but on all of Iowa’s youth as well, in conjunction with DHS on the one hand, and also in his providing of Juvenile probation and detention services with the other.  I am equally assured, in an as-yet proven truth, that not a single one of these 21,000 (annual) parents or children have ever returned to thank Mr. Reed for his honest, professional and most helpful services (described by most, I’m sure, as “unnecessarily sticking his big fat nose into their private affairs in the name of profit”) that he allegedly engages in “for” the State of Iowa.

          In further support of the denial for the court to grant the motion of summary judgement in favor of Defendant Reed, the claimants, once again, have no need to cite law or previous opinions of cases decided by other judges in totally irrelevant cases for this court’s determination, but merely encourage the court to use its good common sense, instincts and logic.

1.       Mr. Reed is entitled to NO immunity whatsoever, per this attorney’s own submission for exhibit (see page 4, Reed Exhibit A, Article VI – Powers and duties) where it states, and I quote, from item 1.b.

              “That the commission (whoever that is) shall have the power:  to sue AND BE SUED.”

2

.      Aside from only this fact, the claimants have not listed or described actions of Mr. Reed’s as associated in his alleged official duties, or while acting or occupying the position of any sort of ‘authority” while employed at CIDJC; a far too late mentioned associate of Mr. Reeds and equally late entry in the case for the defense of Mr. Reed, neither is this fictional entity being mentioned or listed to be a defendant of the claimants in this action.  By naming this up to presently un-named entity; the claimants present that this is nothing short of a last-ditch effort by Mr. Reed and his inept attorney to claim imagined rights of immunity against any action brought by the claimants, while alleging to be acting on the behalf of this previously unmentioned corporate fiction.  Because Mr. Reed’s attorney chooses NOW, almost at the apex of this case, to name and involve this 28E corporate fiction, then placing it in a defensive position for Mr. Reed, in the hope that it serves to additionally legally alleviate any need for his defendant to have to admit to, testify to, or accept responsibility for his damage of the claimants; this should be enough to consider the motion for summary judgement for Defendant Reed to at the very least be considered a legally weak legal attempt at his dismissal, and all he presents falls short of recognized or valid legal argument for the defense. And again, Mr. Reed is named under no separate corporate entity; nor is this corporate entity stated as related to any actions of the defendant; or listed separately as someone Mr. Reed acted on the behalf of, in his alleged “officially performed acts.”  It was and is the clear intent of the claimants to bring suit against Mr. Reed personally, and in his individual capacity, and thereby, in consideration of how he is identified in this claim, individually named, claimed against and non-corporately associated by anything stated in the claimants’ claim, Mr. Reed, therefore is entitled to NO available immunities or protections - semi, quasi, qualified, absolute or “other.”

3.      Even if the first testing done on these claimants, stated by Defendant Reed as occurring during the month of July in 2014, should fall under the heading of ‘Judicially ordered”; any order demanding judicial compliance, “or else” essentially forcing anyone to engage in a drug test, covertly contains and conveys an underlying, yet very real, easily identifiable and continual threat, a threat that actively violates a parent’s 4^th Amendment Constitutional right, a right related in the 4^th Amendment to that document; that which protects American citizens against Illegal, unwarranted and unlawful searches and seizures.  In these situations involving the separation of the parents and their children, this ‘order’ would commonly be interpreted or presumed to mean “compliance is mandatory”  -  ‘or else’ in any reasonable parent or person’s mind; since the court is ordering it – and is, as an order in this form, nothing short of a clear violation of the parents’ (including these named claimants’) 4^th amendment right, in that there is an omni-present threat that will result in some punishment if that order is not followed; that conveys to the receiver that, to not follow this order will, more than likely interpret to the court that you are not compliant; and therefore unwilling to do what it takes to have your children returned, and should this behavior continue; will cause the eventual and guaranteed result of the termination of your rights to them.  Remember, this is said continuously to these parents by everyone involved; by those both employed by the removing entity (the DHS) and by the courts, during almost the entirety of their cases over and over, and is legally mandatory to say to the same parents at every hearing, and; when said in this context, also conveys the same threat; except this time, it’s backed by a member of the Judiciary and the alleged ‘authority of the court’, and thus increases the level of the threat in the hearer’s mind.  The termination of parent’s rights, however, is preceded by another less prevalent but equally destructive and coercive punishment and is usually enacted immediately at the first sign of resistance in most of these cases:  the threat; and usually, implementation, of the discontinuation of one or both parents’ ability to see and visit with their children.  Moreover, orders of expected compliance to engage in this testing, backed up and coercive using judicially insinuated threats such as the aforementioned to ensure that compliant consent, may also result in a person or parent’s self-incrimination in providing their sample, which serves to also violate, in effect, a parent’s 5^th amendment right, since it’s assumed they must possibly incriminate themselves by giving their sample or suffer the previously related consequences.  Should any or even some of these results be falsified, show positive due to errors or mistakes on the part of the collector of the samples or the lab, or produce false positives (which happens a lot in these kinds of tests), the damage, by this time, is usually already done; and the path to termination already far traveled.  Orders such as those forcing a parent to engage in Mr. Reed’s testing, therefore, are quite simply, unconstitutional; and violate every aspect of a parent’s (as well as the claimants’) 4^th and 5^th amendment rights; as well as assist the courts and the DHS in further damaging the targeted family and keeping their removed children apart, even permanently.  It forces the parents to waive these rights, and also removes their choice to NOT consent, by forcing them into giving up their personal bodily fluids via court order (and to take these fluids by force is legally considered to be an unlawful search and seizure) as evidence; also violating their 5^th amendment rights, considering they are being forced to possibly incriminate themselves because of this ‘mandatory order’ given by the juvenile court.  Even if the result of the test is a true positive, and the testee guilty of doing the stated drug, the path to the test itself, i.e. the mandatory order and the implication that there is no choice of consent without some punishment very possible when you do not agree to do it; clearly makes this situation a violation of the victim’s rights, without argument.   So as to the claim made by both defendant Reed and his attorney alleging that the claimants agreed or consented ‘willingly’ to do these tests, and say also that, because they consented, it relieves the defendant, Mr. Reed of all responsibility for anything that occurs after that consent is given.  This is not legally arguable and is not a reasonable or believable fact or statement; it only lends credence to the fact that these mandatorily ordered drug tests by judges are clear violations of not just one, but two Constitutional rights of these claimants, and on at least two occasions; as well as violates the Constitutional rights of 21,000 other of Reed’s clients, annually.  Regardless of any alleged consent, or its ability to alleviate any responsibility of anything that happened after that consent was gained, Mr. Reed was caught red-handed falsifying the both of the claimant’s test results following claimant Christopher’s alleged ‘consent’, in the surprise testing of both of the claimants the 2^nd time, and the claimants can easily prove that, even without the original testing cups.  The testing cups, as stated in the claim, were destroyed just after claimant Christopher was ousted from the CINA case, and though filed, they were never admitted as evidence, so that they wouldn’t have to be addressed in the case; since Mr. Reeds actions, should they be questioned as well as deemed questionable on the matter of his tampering with evidence in favor and in collusion with the DHS, would have destroyed the entire case for the State; and would have produced further actions against them.

4.      We the claimants have more than established, with provided exhibits of documents and evidence, that the removal, as initially executed by Ms. Nieman, was unlawful on it’s face, and at it’s very core; as were any and all collective claims of “lawful jurisdiction” over these matters involving these claimants and T.B., their biological property, made by both the DHS and the Courts of Polk County, Iowa.  Documents were falsified that assisted the DHS and the Polk County Courts in staying unjustly involved in the lives of the claimants; did not execute or list any mandated by law ‘reasonable efforts’ that were never made in order to prevent or eliminate the need to remove T.B. and had no viable or founded reasons to do it at all; and no medical exam even presented the possibility of neglect or abuse; so instead, they invented allegations scraped together out of hearsay and lies made by a crazy woman that they only talked to once, who was on at least 10 different psychotic medications.  These allegations were at no time during both of our cases, provable, and no charges of abuse or neglect were ever alleged or charged against the innocent claimants at any time.  Based ONLY on the fact that DHS themselves ruled this removal as “UNFOUNDED” should have been enough reason to find that all statements and orders made to keep T.B. under the rule of the courts and the state were at the very least, illogical, if not just plain WRONG.  We call this continued possession of our property without our consent KIDNAPPING, which is charged, usually as a federal felony crime; should we the people be at all involved.  Oh, and kidnapping by someone who had no experience with newborns, per her testimony; and who had never removed a child from a home at that time, let’s not forget that.

5.      This 28E agreement was entered into on 11-21-14, per this attorney’s submitted exhibit (long after the claimants first tested at Mr. Reed’s facility).  So how is it that the claimants were tested per request of DHS, which the submitted evidence by the defendant’s attorney points to the contract with DHS beginning on 6/04/13, yet also, according to the submitted evidence, Mr. Reed’s alleged corporate 28E entity wasn’t even designated to be this until the date stated above; meaning that the claimants tested at Mr. Reed’s Des Moines based branch on a date when he was not yet designated to be a 28E corporation.  That puts the first round of tests done by these claimants at Mr. Reed’s Des Moines facility PRIOR to his becoming a 28E corporation.  I’d say that even if all of the items argued above do not totally abolish any immunity Mr. Reed might have had, Quasi, qualified or any other way these criminals can imagine protects their fraudulent and criminal practices; this one does.

6.      As for the 1983 allegation made against Mr. Reed and other defendants in this claim being barred by Iowa’s 2 year Statute of Limitations, Mr. Reed may skate out of that one (be sure to thank your buddies at the Iowa Supreme Court, The State of Iowa, DHS and Polk County Attorney’s offices for brutally pushing the claimants well behind that line for you; via the avenues of sitting on appeals for over a year; and incessantly jailing claimant Christopher 4 times in 2 years, once for a whole year;) but to grant summary judgement for that allegation, totally ignoring or letting Mr. Reed off scot-free for the other two allegations charged by the plaintiffs without argument available to the claimants would not only be injustice at its finest; it would be criminally unjust.  Mr. Reed’s facilities do over 2100 drug tests EVERY YEAR (per his own admission); putting down a very real possibility that this is a conspiracy engaged in by those of Iowa’s courts, Tony Reed, and the DHS of Iowa; and, in relation, a for-profit RICO operation like no other, and presents that, collectively, Mr. Reed’s centers, at the touted numbers he’s provided us; bring in profits in the cool millions, EASILY; at the expense of families, parents and children all over Iowa.  Is it the imagined fantasy of this defendant and his crooked attorney, that, every year, 2100 parents are possibly bad, drug addicted parents (in Iowa, don’t forget) who are in desperate need of drug testing at only Mr. Reed’s crooked facilities?  Should Mr. Reed’s attorney have a good answer for that, I’d love to hear it.  I believe that story about as much as I believe that, in just Polk County, Iowa; every month, 11,000 criminals are arrested for crimes they committed, and are tried for those crimes by the offices of Defendant John Sarcone at the County Attorney (per his own numbers and testimony.)  I also believe that the sun is red, and my hair is blonde.

7.      Just because this attorney has the consent to do one of Mr. Reed’s falsified tests, admitted to by the plaintiffs in their claim and in writing, doesn’t mean crimes and violations of their rights didn’t occur or happen before, during or following that consent, and neither should a court let the perpetrator get away with that crime or violation, just because he got a client’s consent to test at his center.  Is it the intent of Mr. Reed’s idiot attorney to convince the claimants and the court that, because the claimants willingly consented to do what they believe is going to be a professionally done and honestly reported drug test, done in compliance with what almost anyone would believe to be a mandatory judicial order; something, as a parent deprived of your children by the system, you feel you have to do in order to get your child/children returned to you (even though that doesn’t happen often in Iowa - should DHS have their sights set on that child for adoption purposes) and because you consented, this means that you, the tester, are now free to tamper with and falsify those test’s results; and are now free to, say, set your client on fire, murder them; or commit any number of other crimes?  I mean, as long as you have their consent to do their testing, the sky’s the limit?  Or how about that you, the tester, will also be lawfully exonerated in a court of law for any law-breaking misdemeanors or felonies that you can possibly inflict on your client for as long as he is in your facility; as long as you have that consent in writing or by signature or consenting to test at Mr. Reed’s facility, it’s all good? And one more jab at this attorney’s logic in this statement, when do any crimes Mr. Reed might commit on his clients finally become criminal again, after gaining that client’s consent to test at your facility; and when does your accountability for what you might do to them ever start; after you get their consent to test them?  According to the logic of Mr. Reed and his attorney, couldn’t Mr. Reed feasibly break into the home of a former client 20 years down the line, and steal everything they have, then justify it simply by filing an affidavit with the court stating that you once got that claimant to consent to one of your tests 20 or so years ago?  If so, we need new law, and we certainly need new courts, new law schools, new judges and new attorneys.

8.      Also noted in this attorney’s logic is, as long as you check the little box that indicates your agreement that you provided to Mr. Reed’s testing center an unadulterated sample, that this statement guarantees that the sample you gave some crooked unprofessional center of Mr. Reed’s will remain unadulterated throughout the testing and results process, and thereby lawfully relieves Mr. Reed of any responsibility against lawsuit, should he, say, choose to reverse the state of your unadulterated sample from negative to positive in either process by simply adulterating it himself.  What’s more, only 1 of 2 Americans is probably able to define the meaning of the word “unadulterated,’ or use it in a sentence.

9.      Emphasis on this point is OFF the charts - any and all decisions Mr. Reed’s attorney cites (as well as the same decision of the appellate court as it was submitted by the State as evidence to this court) and claims to be ‘Authoritative’; the decision made in absolute and total error by the Iowa Supreme Court in 2015, concerning the termination of these claimants unalienable and protected parental rights; where they upheld the unlawful rulings and actions of the district court in their conspiracy to cover up the whole unpleasantness of these damning cases and actions taken by its criminal participating officials; just based on the fact that it’s there on the public record (so it must be good law, right?); choosing to absolutely discount the gaping holes in any of the judicial logic this opinion employed concerning the absolute criminality of both the removal and the cases themselves; let alone their total and persistent denial of the two most important and damning pieces of evidence submitted to that appeal; (no differently than those on the district level); the recording of the absolutely illegal and unwarranted removal of T.B. (as this was proof that would prove that, since the removal itself was unlawful, so was everything that would follow it) and showed initially all done wrong here more than likely continued against the claimants and reveals especially the cruel and malicious actions employed by the removing worker, defendant Nieman; and this would, by and through the upholding of this removal by defendant Price and all that followed; implicate and give rise to the guilt of others that were involved; would give rise to subsequent lawsuit after lawsuit by these claimants; and open up the State of Iowa to more parents following the claimant’s example; affect the losses of jobs and any and all profits from this criminal fraud scheme; and more.  Of course, when this termination was appealed, the appellate courts had no choice (since the Attorney General’s whine about the defendants not showing up to the termination hearing, thereby didn’t have legal standing trick didn’t work) but to rule in favor of the district court, in order to protect itself, all the DHS and the courts did to the claimants; or risk everything for years to come; so naturally, they had to invent a decision based on only the district courts word; and would not consider or accept any of the appellants facts or evidence to the contrary, since no evidence of the claimants was recognized or was denied admittance as an exhibit or was considered to be good cause to stay termination (3 times they denied admitting the existence of or recognizing the rulings of the ALJ and Charles Palmer of DHS)   And for good reason too, since using the claimants undisputable and damning evidence would have shattered every single legal ruling in all 3 cases; cost a lot of people their jobs and pensions, and ruin several decades worth of the most tried and true money making scam for the State of Iowa; the unlawful trafficking of Iowa’s children.  To cite the decision of the appellate court and call it the Gospel of Law is to ignore the obvious flaws, crimes and faults in all of these cases, and to jump right onto the list of conspiring attorneys, judges and officials the claimants continue to compile, year after year, as justice for the claimants meets denial for relief in court case after court case; every one sporting an absolutely illogical and ridiculous ruling decision or opinion, just like the Iowa Supreme Court’s appellate decision.  The Iowa appellate courts had an awful lot of official asses to cover in our appeal (which explains why it was not addressed for almost a year and 3 months…until they could find a good way out of it that didn’t affect the RICO or implicate error in their decision), and in gross error, they made the only decision they could make; using the only loophole and exit they could find that would get the entirety of the District AND Supreme Courts off the proverbial legal hook.  They wrongfully ordered the claimants to come up with $1000 cash in a 2 week period (even though they had been deemed to be indigent, just a year before, and the court had waived the $150 filing fee) to pay for transcripts for the claimants entire CINA and termination cases at their own expense; or they would address none of the criminal actions, those that were claimed  by the appellants in the petition, that occurred before the termination of their rights; and would, therefore, should this payment not be made in 2 weeks, ‘have no other  choice’ but to affirm the decision come to in the fabricated termination hearing and everything that preceded it - and bonus, effectively covered up the entire messy business in both courts while doing so.   To cite this case’s horrific and unjust decision as ‘authoritative’, or to claim it to be Gospel, because they upheld their criminal district’s criminal cohort’s decisions and actions, is not unlike trying to convince someone that any lawful decision made by the cookie monster from Sesame Street is good legal opinion and worthy of the court’s consideration.

10.  The claimants will once again state for the record of this alleged Article III court and for the criminals defending the criminal defendants, since they evidently don’t understand English; and as this exact statement was stated for them clearly in each and every opposing reply filed by the claimants to the defendant’s attorneys answers to the plaintiff’s claim - But please, allow the claimants to reiterate, since this shows the corruption of both the defendants and their criminal attorneys quite well, in that every attorney just blows over any logical or reasonable oppositional statements made by the claimants like they weren’t said at all; over and over, to the extent of utter stupidity - This matter does not arise out the claimants desire to enlist this court’s help in overturning the illegal and error-filled orders produced at the County Court’s level in their juvenile matters; although it should.  It is also not claiming to attempt enlisting this court’s assistance in overturning the wrongful decision concerning the claimants’ appeal to their termination; where they criminally affirmed all the illegal actions of the lower district court, against all evidence to the contrary…although it should; nor does this claim even come close to insinuating that this is its only purpose, as it clearly addresses 30 more pages chock full of facts that do not address those matters at all, and mentions 5 other cases as well.  This claim quite simply ask this court to consider, recognize and grant the claimants relief for the obvious, continual and malicious violations of the claimants’ civil, due process, and Constitutionally protected rights, violations that were executed in conspiratorial concert by this mafia-like organization consisting of corrupt criminals acting and dealing fraudulently in actions that continuously violate Iowa’s citizens’ and the claimants’ most basic and fundamental civil rights; while acting in their misappropriated alleged roles as “leaders” and in “authority” of the citizens of Iowa; and the crimes committed against the claimants with no conscience, with malice and forethought; with no guilt, vindictively and maliciously, and devoid of all remorse and accountability; for a CONTINUOUS period of over 4 years now.  How can the defendants or the court put their finger on any date on any calendar, and claim that day to be the date these violations began or ended, when the crimes by and through all of these defendants still occur and still affect our lives up to this very day; as there is, all throughout the worldwide web, libelous stories and paperwork that name these claimants in error; and are refused to be removed from the sight of the whole world from where they’re located, let alone the continuing and ongoing effects of the libel and defamation of the characters of the claimants, which affect plaintiff Christopher’s ability to be a functioning citizen and good little debt slave massively; since these libelous words and criminal proceedings against him can still be found on the tampered with and falsified record of the Polk County courts; as well as in record checks and all over the internet to this very day.

11.  These attorneys continually insinuate that the entire basis and purpose of this claim is to have 3 juvenile cases overturned, when clearly, a minimum of 5 more cases are referenced after any items referring to those cases; and most of the defendants listed weren’t even involved in that portion of the claim.  We the claimants say, nobody knows what the claimants are trying to accomplish or ask for in relief better than we do.  We the claimants brought this case, we the claimants made the allegations in it, and we the claimants stated our desired relief.  The attorneys for the defense are not mind-readers, nor do they claim any personal knowledge of these defendants; so, therefore, need to stop 2^nd guessing and making assumptions on the true purpose of our claim and shut the Hell up.  Until they have reliable witnesses and recordings of the claimants stating that their only purpose behind this case is to overturn 3 state juvenile decisions; then the attorneys for the defense need to find new jobs; because they do theirs very poorly; and are intelligently and legally inept.  The claimants also suggest the attorneys for the defense learn a new song, since they don’t even know how to sing the first one.

          In conclusion, the claimants ask the court to deny this request for summary judgement; based only on the court’s good sense.  The claimants would also like to thank Mr. Reed’s attorney for sending us a copy of his motion in the mail.  It made a wonderful toilet paper replacement for a few days and was a nice change from our usual cheap store-bought brand.

Respectfully submitted,

Christopher The Living Man "

*****************************************************************************************************

And now, the affidavit's affidavit!!!

         I, Christopher (Bruce), the Living Man, being first duly sworn upon oath, depose and state that I am a victim of a RICO, conspiring and operating state-wide; that utilizes color of law; in its alleged “Governmental” and “official” capacities; on ‘State’, ‘County’ and ‘City’ levels; against myself and thousands of other victims across the State.  I am no longer to be considered to be a United States citizen, but instead claim status as a state resident of the Republic of the Continental united States of America, thereby a freeman, not a slave or property; and therein, am not subject to the jurisdiction of The “State of Iowa”, Inc., “The United States”, Inc., “Polk County”, Inc.; or the “City of Des Moines”, Inc, nor am I, my wife, or any other individual affiliated with me, under God, a ‘Corporate entity”, nor am I or any affiliated with me, the unlawfully claimed property of any corporate entity named in this action, at present or in the future, or subjected to the rules or laws enacted by anyone named and acting against my person, named as ‘Defendants’ in this action.

          To make this PERFECTLY clear, I hereby; once again, under oath, rescind again, on and for the record of this court, all agreements, alleged consents or signatures put into words, affected by ignorance or as a result of unlawful duress or in writing, heretofore, NUNC PRO TUNC, whether this consent was real or implied, and claim as void any and all contracts and agreements entered into by the means of deceit or covert action, against the interests of myself or against those affiliated with me, either by marriage or by blood; unknowingly and without full disclosure to me or any ‘agents;’ before my comprehensive abilities were available or present, or without the understanding of the same; that I was not informed of, or did not yet understand any terms and conditions stated in these contracts, as entered into by my uninformed parents, who were, allegedly ‘acting in my interests’ and were apparently legally allowed to ‘consent’ for me on my behalf.  This happened long before I was able to even comprehend the terms or conditions (or the consequences of the same) of any such considerations, agreements or contracts, real or implied; so utilizing only what is stated here to justify my arrived at logical conclusions; brought on by my equally logical theory; I state that all contracts, real or implied that may have been entered into FOR ME, or on my implied behalf without full disclosure and, more than likely, even before I had cognitive abilities as yet; therefore are, so-described, to un-mistakenly and obviously be null and void on their very face and basis, unarguably.

          I also declare, in addition, that any signatures on any “City”, “County”, or “State” documents during my residency in Iowa; (specifically involving any event that occurred during the entire period beginning in July, 2014 to the present day, inclusive); somehow representing my ‘consent’ to un-described and non-disclosed consideration and responsibility; as well as allegedly put in place in order for corporate fictional entities to be able to label and identify me as a “person,” or, in other words, “a Corporation”, (a term defined by a false Constitutional replacement (a document not at all ratified, the intent of which was to deceive those actual persons of the Continental united States of America into thinking it was our former suspended one) a monetized legal fiction named “Christopher William Bruce,” or stating, per Iowa records; that this same corporate fiction married another such corporate fiction; and at the same time, unwittingly, allegedly consented and agreed to contract with an equal partner doing business in favor of the State corporate fiction; and in so doing allegedly agreed to and commenced in locking me into a undescribed and undisclosed “business venture” with “Elizabeth Marie Morgan;” and vice versa; that subversively and quietly placed the State of Iowa as being the primary interest in said “Contract;” are also now rescinded as well and in kind; NUNC PRO TUNC; and all authority and alleged “consent” to this “marriage license” and its unstated and undisclosed terms and conditions; based solely on the fact that it is no contract at all due to its very nature, to be null and void in every legal sense.

          I, Christopher, a living man, herein state as fact that no individual born in full possession of all of their protected and unalienable rights, or who have a fundamental right to possess property as I am; that property cannot be mistakenly or lawfully deprived or claimed by someone in alleged authority to be the claimed property of the State of Iowa; and this fiction unlawfully considered T.B., our daughter, to be ‘fruit’ born of the corporate fiction’s contract, which was fraudulent, as defined above.  T.B., Christopher’s legal daughter; does not in any way belong to any corporate entity, nor is any other individual named herein, deemed or is such to be deemed to be property in possession of this same named corporate fiction, nor is any other possession, inherently in the possession of Christopher the living men, able to be deemed or claimed.  I, Christopher the living man do also state, as fact, that T.B., is the possession of Elizabeth the living woman, and is not by any pretense or consideration, under the control of, nor is she the property of the “State of Iowa, Inc.”  Furthermore, due to the aforementioned, since this corporate and absolutely fraud-based fictional corporate entity has NEVER had, or proven any lawful or proper jurisdiction was had by them over any member of our family; I hereby state for the record that T.B. is the undeniably rightful and lawful biological property of Elizabeth the living woman, and heretofore, she…and I, demand the return of this property to her, immediately, based on only THIS statement of fact.

          This said, I do not, in any fashion, fall under, nor should I to be expected to “obey” any rule of any court, federal rule, State or local rule or statute, since I deny fully, by and through my stated rescindments, the “privilege” of being ruled by, or having to abide by “Statute” on any corporate level.  Any actions or inactions I should choose to engage or not engage in in my self-representation; concerning this or any other state or federal court action; should not be held against me in such a fashion as a to lawfully deprive me of any of my filed actions; nor should these rules serve to somehow block or bar me from acquiring my requested due process, justice or relief for damages; nor deprive me redress of grievance right on any matter.  I am not a licensed attorney and am ignorant in the ways of the “Law”, and what these courts now claim to be “LAW”; and, contrary to judicial belief, I may excuse myself with this ignorance, unarguably.  Unless this court can provide me the extra time I would need to pore over thousands of pages of this “Law”, passed by members of a false and unauthorized group of self-serving congressmen, whose only purpose it is to make money for themselves and their own, and find ways to relieve me of my freedoms and happiness; and to be as unrepresentative of the will of their people as is possible; laws which are as unbelievably riddled with extraneous language (and a dead and no longer used language, no less) and terms not understandable by me or others of my peers.  Unless those of the judiciary would choose to grant me the travel money I would need to scour the country for each and every dusty tome containing these “laws”, send me weekly updates on the thousands of laws passed every week all over the country from here in; and pay to send me to law school for the duration of my life; ignorance of the ‘law’ is most certainly an excuse I am entitled to.  I am not a member of the ‘BAR’; I am a pro-per self-represented freeman, an injured party of common law; and will always act as I am; and am to be given proper lawful standing as I am; as I am an individual; not chattel or dead property as you might claim; and as such, I should also be excused from being unduly and unnecessarily forced to read, learn, understand and finally, be forced  to then comply with or follow any set of instructions or rules that I did not have any hand in creating or agree to follow.

           I’m constantly being warned, no matter if clearly or by insinuation; by both the court and the attorneys for their clients, the defendant’s defense, that, unless I follow these ‘rules’ to the letter, I am in danger of having my action dismissed; based on ONLY this point, and not concerning the merit of the claim at all.  In this context, it is most apparent these rules appear to only be in place; not only to discourage We the People from bringing suit against those in office; but also in order to better help protect those of these Corporate Fictions of “Government;” from being held accountable for their criminal actions, by and through providing them enough legal loopholes with which to escape their due justice in any manner as it might be decided by We the People, should these criminal allegations be proven to be factual.

          I swear, that the claim, as stated by the plaintiffs, will, against any legal standard that this court should impose, prove damage by these defendants; and that I will do so in a timely manner, in accordance with this court’s rules of procedure – and with ease.  This court, however, needs to stop protecting these official criminals, by dismissing actions (or, not act at all) against those in positions of Government; as well as stop allowing them to shirk justice through the routes of whining about proper form or format of claims; or other inane technicalities and childish reasons, such as ‘He didn’t follow all the court’s stated Rules of Federal Procedure; and now I can’t make up things to have him arrested anymore, since he moved out of our state; and worse still, the FBI won’t believe me when I call them and tell them he’s a terrorist…waaaaaah!” – More than likely a direct quote of Defendant John P. Sarcone, Alleged Polk County attorney

          I also state that I recognize no supposed, stated or alleged jurisdiction exercised against me or over me without proof of that jurisdiction, and that just because some person wearing a black robe, sitting on the 3^rd tier banging a gavel SAYS he has it, doesn’t mean he has it…and probably doesn’t.  I hereby also do not choose to recognize anyone who manages to maneuver themselves somehow into a ‘position of authority’ over me, who is usually someone that I neither voted for, nor is it likely that I was involved in either creating this unnecessary position or in granting anyone in this position power and control over any portion of my life.  This is usually someone who then demands my subservience and respect immediately because of this position.  The position does not make the occupier, the occupier defines the position.  I also do not believe in nor obey any who assume such a position who is able to deem themselves immune to any and all charges of wrongdoing, and also who appears to have the power to grant themselves the right to commit heinous crimes against others that most people would spend their entire lives paying the price for, should we engage in and be caught engaging in the same activity; nor do I respect any position demanding my total compliance and acceptance of all they claim to be as LAW, even when the same law goes against every moral value I’ve been taught and have come to accept as right; nor do I follow their written and unconsented to laws, since the same obviously do not apply to them, in kind. In my limited knowledge, it is fundamentally known that any law that is not known, not disclosed fully, not consented to or not approved or ratified as just by the PEOPLE, it is no law at all.

          I will, at this juncture, pose a single question to this court:  If we, as self-represented litigants choose not to ‘follow the rules’ of this court, you tend to dismiss only the actions brought against others in Government.  I wonder, how many times has the reverse happened using and citing the same, and how many actions have the People won against “the System” in, say, just the last 5 years, using this strategy? 

          The question is, by the way, rhetorical.  No answer is required, because the question answers itself, via the court’s generally administered silence, particularly in dealing with affiants they consider to be nothing more than un-represented children or dead property, when they choose to represent themselves.  The answer, of course, is very few to none; because laws, rules, codes, statutes and ordinances are made, applied and enforced against only We the People.  When rules are not followed by We the People; our action is dismissed, on time, without fail.  When the same rules are used against those who state ‘follow the rules or be dismissed;” the same rules no longer apply.  I ask you this instead – How can the federal district court expect pro-se litigants to abide by and adhere to the court’s rules, when the court itself doesn’t even follow them, and when it also extends this privilege to those litigants or defendants it favors, those that are on their level? 

         Furthermore, I have given claim of damage in fact against 30 plus defendants who work for these Governmental services corporations according to your court’s instructions to the best of my ability.  I have stated the facts (granted, there are an awful lot of them, as the crimes these officials have inflicted on the claimants are numerous; and require much to describe them;) in as simple a matter as I am able to do so, considering the damage inflicted and the time period these crimes cover.  The ability of the claimants to condense their claim into a form that’s ‘by the rules’ and acceptable to the defendant’s defense attorneys is continually suggested as needing to be stated simply and clearly (something they hardly ever do themselves) or the affiant is considered to be breaking the rules; and produces the determination of this fair and just court to say “Sorry!  Your claim is hereby dismissed!  Oh, and here’s that court opinion in our support (the one that that has no bearing on THIS case; but where it was ruled that, if you didn’t follow the rules, then you lose.)  Will the officials of the court please give the People a break?

           It’s amazing to this affiant that the courts of this nation always stick by the rules and laws that help those of the judiciary and those who officiate what’s left of our original form of Government; if there is, in fact, any of that form of Government remaining.  Rules and opinions that in any way help the people, on the other hand, are few and far between.  More and more, the People are being deprived of their power, which, in case this court has forgotten (or, rather, would like to forget) once included the ability of the People to bring charges all by themselves; and without the need to go through the County, State or U.S. Attorneys.  If those charges had no merit or were malicious; they were punished for falsely charging them.  Now one person per district, either County or Federal chooses which cases are charged, or not charged.  Should crimes of officials drop by, they are now quickly dismissed or destroyed.  This shall not continue, not as long as there are people such as myself; who remember how it used to be, how we were taught that justice actually works and who continually remind those who have forgotten or who have not yet been informed; or who remind those I’m speaking of what their jobs are, and who pays that job’s salary, ultimately.

          When you remove power from the people to the point where the people begin realizing that this has happened, you create for yourselves even more problems than you had when they were able to utilize that power.  By and through County and U.S. Attorneys, you have bastardized, twisted and perverted Justice to a point you yourselves don’t even recognize or remember what it resembles anymore.  Ask the People when they were last the option of charging another, even one of themselves, with a crime, and most can’t even remember that time.  That power no longer exists.  That power now lies solely in the hands of Government, County and U.S. Attorneys to wield, and the result is a total mockery and total destruction of fairness and justice in this country.  Now, whoever comes against those in any judicial or executive position of power is targeted and charged incessantly; and those criminals who have caused this to happen are now able to commit their crimes using the excuse of ‘Doing what they have to do’ as their justification; and absolutely without any fear of reprisal or notice of those crimes; as they now carry the heavily adorned shields of immunity and confidentiality.  Those who are victims of the system now become even larger targets.  Already massively damaged by initial actions taken against them by those in power, these victims, should they try to expose these crimes (and their respective perpetrators), can now look forward to a newly discovered tactic of inhumane reprisal:  gangstalking (I’m sure you all know what that is; but, you know, for the record of the court;) a new form of psychological domestic terror committed by those that fear discovery in committing their crimes against their respective victims.  This option, when utilized, has been known to produce some of our more famous mass killers of late, after they are, first, slowly driven insane and then programmed to do things they would never think of doing themselves; harm or kill others.  Worse; others on the prosecuting end of some lawsuits against the system have, of late, been found dead in neighborhoods where no one has ever known them to go; with their blood stinking of drugs they’ve never done before.  Others have had their whole families killed, and the deaths of that family were then blamed on the victim.

          If this is the now the definition of modern-day justice, as well as what we can look forward to in our public officials and Government in the future; simply stated, the Dead End for “of and for the People?”  Then Communism or death even starts to look like a more favorable option.  With freedom obviously being instilled into us as a now outdated and impossible concept of dreamers, and justice non-attainable; when criminals take their own power over the people without and against the will or vote of the people; when laws are made without consulting the people or without their consent, agreement, involvement, ratification or opinion?  When those in office get away with whatever they wish to do, even when those crimes are committed against another of themselves; and refuse to enforce their own laws against one of their own and are, essentially, completely devoid of any possibility of accountability or punishment for those crimes?  Then this is no longer my country, no longer my world and no longer my species.  If this is where human nature and human-kind are headed, and this is our future, then I beg you, take me out now, for now is humanity lost; and morality, conscience, justice, fairness, good and right terms I no longer remember or understand the definitions of.  Just do it quickly, will you?  I’m not into the whole mental torture thing. 

          I, Christopher the living man, do swear, on all that I am, and all that I have, that this will not be our future, as long as even the smallest possibility exists that I can do something about it.  I do also swear that, as long as I draw breath, I will assist in fighting injustice, and assist in bringing humanity to a evolved and better level of life; and, do swear to pass on, to the uninformed, oppressed and repressed majority of the race of humanity, my memories and knowledge of all that was, all that is now, and all that could be, should we choose the right and moral path; as well as show them that we have no need for criminals in positions of power who only want the people’s power, wealth, real property and servitude; who deny us our due justice, who fleece and charge us at the cost of nearly all we have worked hard our entire lives to possess and bear; who only wish to deprive us of all things that relate to life, liberty and the pursuit of everything that makes us happy to exist; and who protect others who, like them, commit atrocities and piracy against the people at the cost of all things just and right.  I, Christopher the living man swear that I will live life to the fullest in the remaining time I have left to do so, and swear that I will, under no circumstances, no longer be known as this country’s designated property or debt slave; and swear to attempt to teach others, and bestow this knowledge and the values this country was initially founded on to them.  I swear to also assist those who think as I do in restoring to those who lack, have not been taught or do not realize it as yet, that they themselves have their own power, knowledge, ability and common sense that they can use to govern their own affairs and solve their own problems; and are able to and should help others, as well as help those who cannot help themselves…themselves.  I also swear and plan to help others who are engaged in restoring the will and the power of the People back into the hands of where that power belongs; in the hands of the People.

          I Christopher, do swear these things stated here to be true to the best of my knowledge for the record of the court.