Maurice Edward, Brahier

a private person of the People

in sovereignty

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY

CALLOWAY CIRCUIT COURT

DEMAND FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS

Pursuant to the Notice placed and indication of ordered compliance:

Comes now Maurice Edward, Brahier, on behalf of the purported accused, whomsoever they might be:

pursuant to the limitations imposed upon plaintiff and this tribunal by

Article(s) 1, 11,112,113, & 140 of the (new) Constitution of the Commonwealth

of Kentucky, with authority and unalienable right to know the nature and

Cause to the instant accusations, in the above captioned statutory cause, to

demand that plaintiff provide to the accused a Bill of Particulars to make

more definite and certain the accusatory instrument of plaintiff in the

following respects, to wit: the venue in which the process of plaintiff was

issued and served, and the nature and cause of law, and the jurisdiction of

this tribunal, and cause, and the party(ies), invoked over whatever accused

by the accusatory instruments and process of plaintiff(s) in the following

particulars:

1.

What allegation(s) or fact(s) does plaintiff depend upon to establish the status of these accused within purview of the statute KRS 530.050 UOR#38010?

2.

What a11egation(s) or fact(s) does plaintiff depend upon to establish these accused are within the venue of the process purported to be properly served upon these accused?

3.

What allegation(s) or fact(s) does plaintiff depend upon to establish the personal jurisdiction of the above captioned tribunal over defendants and to establish that such personal jurisdiction was regularly and lawfully obtained?

4.

Is KRS 530.050 UOR#3810, under authority of which plaintiff purports to bring statutory accusation against these accused, enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, under the authority of the Common-Law Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution for the Commonwealth of Kentucky? Yes or No?

5.

Is KRS 53.050 UOR#38010, under authority of which plaintiff purports to bring statutory accusation against these accused, enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky under the authority of the Corporate Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution for the Commonwea1th of Kentucky? Yes or No?

6.

Is KRS 530.050 UOR#38010, under authority of which plaintiff purports to bring statutory accusation against the accused, enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky under the authority of the Admiralty/Maritime Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution for the Commonwealth of Kentucky? Yes or No?

7.

Is KRS 525.080 UOR#38010, under authority of which plaintiff purports to bring statutory accusation against the accused, enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Kentucky under the authority of the Martial-Law Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution for the Commonwealth of Kentucky? Yes or NO

8.

Does plaintiff invoke a Common-Law Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?

9.

Did plaintiff issue and serve process in a Common-Law venue to compel the appearance of the accused in the above captioned tribunal and cause consistent therewith? Yes or No?

10.

Does plaintiff invoke a Corporate Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?

11.

Did plaintiff issue and serve process in a corporate venue to compel the appearance of the accused in the above captioned tribunal and cause consistent therewith? Yes or No?

12.

Does plaintiff invoke a Maritime/Admiralty Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?

13.

Did plaintiff issue and serve process in a Maritime/Admiralty venue to compel the appearance of these accused in the above captioned tribunal and cause consistent therewith? Yes or No?

14.

Does plaintiff invoke a Martial-Law Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?

15.

Did plaintiff issue and serve process in a Martial-Law venue to compel the appearance of the accused in the above captioned tribunal and cause consistent therewith? Yes or No

16.

Does plaintiff allege that the "person," as defined in and for the statute, KRS 530.050 UOR38010, violation of which said statute is alleged by the accusatory instrument of plaintiff, are Artificial Persons? Yes or No?

17.

Does plaintiff allege that the "person," as defined in and for the statute, KRS 530.050 UOR#38010, violation of which said statute is alleged by the accusatory instrument of plaintiff, are Natural Persons? Yes or No?

18.

Does plaintiff contend that the Court is now an active plaintiff in the accusatory instrument as shown upon the face of the INDICTMENT? Yes or No

19.

Is it plaintiff(s)s'(s) contention that the tribunals and judges may now come into active participation against the People of the Commonwealth and or the accused? Yes or No

20.

Plaintiff will specifically state the constitutional provision which provides for the abolishing of the People's constitutional Common-Law, and specifically state with clarity, the provision that provides for institution of foreign and or INTERNATIONAL LAW in the Commonwealth in its place. 21. Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that UOR now replaces the Commonwealth's constitutional law? Yes or No

22.

Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that INTERNATIONAL LAW now replaces the people's international constitutional Common-Law? Yes or No

23.

Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that statue law replaces or removes the people's inherent and inalienable constitutional law? Yes or No

24.

Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that the Constitution of the Commonwealth is a hindrance to (A) good and proper Law (B) and or, governance? Yes or No 25.

Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that agreements with foreign states and or nations outweigh the constitutional rights of the people of the commonwealth and or these accused as provided in the Constitution of the commonwealth?

Yes or No

26.

Where is the exact location of this person within the Commonwealth, and name of this person, or persons whom has had this crime committed against them which COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY must and will produce before the tribunal?

• (1)Is this person a member of the corporate COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY within the Commonwealth. Yes or No
• (2) Are they a foreign national? Yes or No

27.

• (1) Has COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY obtained a treaty or signed the necessary paperwork to claim corporate status. Yes or No
• (2)And is this authorized by the Constitution of the Commonwealth. Yes or No
• (3)If yes, which article, with specifics.
• (4) With whom or who has COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY entered into this contract or treaty, or compact or filed this paper work.
• (5) Is COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY prepared to produce such documentation before this tribunal. Yes or No

28.

Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that the purported accused and or Maurice Edward, Brahier, (is/are) ward(s) or chattel of COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY?

Yes or No

29.

A. Is COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY prepared to produce the mandatory contract(s) voluntarily signed by the accused which shows willing and willful contractual agreement between (corporate) COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY and any accused, rather than some vague and vain attempt to show implied consent while under duress, coercion, acceptance of "benefits" and or for convenience purposes or through inability to proceed in any other manner through forced compliance by "invisible" contract or unaccepted and unacceptable executive order or legislative law or the silence thereof? Yes or No

B. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY will list each and every authority, document, or otherwise, with specifics and complete disclosure of applicability, of which it claims as contractual or other basis for: (1) the jurisdiction and authority of the accusatory instruments levied against the accused, (2) the jurisdiction and authority of the tribunal, (3) the jurisdiction and authority over the accused.

30.

• 1.Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that it may cause harm or damage to one of the People and or restrain them, and then bring them as accused for purported criminal activity which is a direct result of that harm or damage and or restraint, and or in which the afore mentioned might be instrumental in the cause thereof? Yes or No
• And this, without bringing plaintiff(s):
• 2. as (a) conspirator and or (b) in complicity and or (c) as contributor? Yes or No;
• 3. and or, as instituting (a) selective or (b) malicious prosecution, Yes or No;
• 4. and or, as producing illegal seizure, Yes or No;
• 6. and or, as creating or instituting (a)false prosecution and or (b) illegal prosecution, Yes or No;
• 7. and or, as becoming material instrument of fraud, Yes or No;
• 8. and or, in violation of any other statutory or constitutional provision or right, such as protection from double jeopardy? Yes or No

31.

Plaintiff(s) will supply Yes or No answer to each of the specifics below, stating with clarity for each, and with specific numbered sections as listed below, and with subheadings which will be created as (1),(2), (3). or (a), (b), (c), pursuant the listing below, to wit: when before the Court, when before the Grand Jury, and, before the Judge, which are required for creation and prosecution of these accusatory instruments.

• (A) (1)Has plaintiff proofed; and, (2)will the plaintiff proof the corpus delicti of the statutory and or International 530.050 UOR#38010 and or accusatory instrument, which states in part:"(2.)...which he can reasonably provide..." (a),(b),(c);
• (B) and which states in part "(2.)...when he persistently fails...". (1),(2),(3)
• (C) both of which are required for:
• • (1). Accusation, (a), (b), (c);
  • (2). Warrant of Arrest, (a), (b), (c);
  • (3). Indictment, (a), (b), (c);
  • (4) and for any prosecution before any tribunal of these purported accused. (a), (b), (c)

32.

Plaintiff will explain, with concise and clear and complete and full disclosure and definition, the difference between: (A) an Attorney; and, (B) a Lawyer; and, (C) Counsel;, and the Law of which these parties represent and or have: (1) jurisdiction; (2) authority; (3) knowledge; (4) expertise;, and, (D) full and complete disclosure of the ramifications of their use: (1) (a) in any tribunal, and, (b) by any tribunal; (2) (a) by, and, (b) against, any accused; and,(3) (a) by, and, (b) against, the people;, pursuant to each of the above listed "authorities" or "counsel".

33.

What is the exact type or style of action of which plaintiff pursues.

34.

Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) contention that "from April 3, 1998, through September 4, 1998" as attested to by the foreperson signatory of the Grand Jury is the time period of which the accused has committed this crime? Yes or No

______________________________________

Failure of plaintiff to timely provide Maurice Edward, Brahier, and or on

behalf of whomsoever these accused are, the BILL OF PARTICULARS herein

demanded by Maurice Edward, Brahier and or these accused; to make more

definite and certain the accusatory instruments and accusations of plaintiff

in the aforesaid respects for clarification of the venue, and Jurisdiction of

the statute depended upon by plaintiff and the venue and jurisdiction invoked

by plaintiff in the above captioned tribunal, and the nature and cause of

law, and nature of the plaintiffs, will be considered an attempt by

plaintiff(s) to withhold full disclosure of the nature and cause of the

accusations brought by plaintiff(s) and will make it impossible for any

possible defendant to meaningfully respond to or defend against the

accusations and process made and issued or caused to be issued by

plaintiff(s).

Subscribed this __________________ day of the eleventh month, in the Nineteen Hundred and Ninety-eighth year, Anno Domini.

_______________________

Maurice Edward, Brahier, a private person of the People, of sovereignty

Kentucky state

Commonwealth of Kentucky

I, Maurice Edward, Brahier, being put upon due and solemn affirmation hereby state that I do not understand the true nature and cause of the accusations in the particulars questioned by the foregoing In Demand for a Bill of Particulars and the foregoing DEMAND FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS is presented to Plaintiff(s) in good faith and is not interposed for the purpose of delay or any other purpose.

Subscribed and Affirmed this __________________day of the eleventh month in Nineteen Hundred and Ninety-eighth year, Anno Domini.

____________________________

Maurice Edward, Brahier, a private person of the people, of sovereignty

At the USPS messenger service address of:

P.O. Box 781In Calvert City of Kentucky We, the undersigned, witness this day that one known to us to be the above signatory did personally appear before us in the County stated below in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, and upon due and solemn affirmation executed and affixed the above signature and seal hereto.

__________________________________________ a person of Kentucky state

__________________________________________ printed name and address

__________________________________________ with county

__________________________________________ a person of Kentucky state

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

__________________________________________ a person of Kentucky state

__________________________________________

__________________________________________

PUBLIC NOTICES

Notice of DEMAND FOR A BILL OF PARTICULARS

Notice that the foregoing DEMAND FOR A BILL OF PARTICULARS was filed with the Clerk of the Calloway Circuit Court.

_____________________________Maurice Edward, Brahier a private person of the People, of sovereigntyKentucky state

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby affirm that a true and correct copy of the foregoing DEMAND FOR A BILL OF PARTICULARS and PUBLIC NOTICES consisting of these nine pages, was or will served upon Michael D.(unknown), Ward, COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY's ATTORNEY and or authorized representative or receiver thereof, at 803 Poplar Street in the city of Benton of Marshall County, Kentucky, 42025, by hand delivery, this ___________________ day of the eleventh month in the Nineteen Hundred and Ninety-eighth year, Anno Domini.

______________________________

Maurice Edward, Brahier

Kentucky state