This style of document, IS a lawful request which MUST be
supplied by anyone upon whom it is served, be it a: judge; court;
clerk; plaintiff; defendant; prosecutor; etcetteras, which should
be more properly be titled:
Interrogatories to be expounded to by (insert name) under Amendment 5 and other.
Be carefull to NOT use statutory authority for or in a common
law venue. Present Statutues are created under WAR TIME authority
(since the Civil War, particularly after 1933), under corporate
by-law stature, and are NOT constitutional guarantees, they are
benefits which may be removed whenever desired.
By using statutory authority, you automatically place yourself
into the corporate [corporatism/federalism] court.
This is the proper form for use against the accuser, prosecutor,
or attorney. [see:
for proper court version
You may use state and federal Civil Rules, as they come from
Supreme Court activities, however, used alone, they will place
you in an Admiralty jurisdiction. Admiralty jurisdiction is
controlled by the court, not by the constitutions, and therefore
is extremely hard to Appeal as the court generally follows
statutes, and corporate laws.
Having defined that, if this is not answered
fully and completely, you have the basis for Appeal to The
Supreme Court of The United States of America, if you have
the wherewithall, and funds to do so. BTW: these can not be
answered truthfully by any court, judge, attorney, lawyer,
government office, or other non individual, because to do so
reveals the fraud and criminal activities they are actively
engaged in.
A CAUTION: those who are members of any
Unions do NOT have the common law venue
available to them. You are bound by Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)
and are held under and by the special Laws created for Unions and
their members. Thank Congress and FDR for that.
You must use UCC sections which might allow you to avoid a
contract (that being the corporate court, and state and/or
federal by-laws) which you did not voluntarily enter into. Please
read the Expose` Volumes for more information on what you need to
follow and present. However, you do have have common law
remedies.
10-10-1999 document which provides the exhibits for criminal prosecution of Geauga magistrate, county prosecutor, others - Common Law venue
The magistrate [Mullins] struck this on behalf of the county prosecutor to save her from exposing their criminal activities, while the later reviewing judge ignored the striking, falsely stating no objections or other had been filed.
In the constitutional Geauga County Court of Common Pleas in Ohio
Purported case 91-DC-000792
GAIL BRAHIER
VS.
MAURICE BRAHIER
_____________________________________________
Notice of and Demand for a Bill of Particulars with Special Notice of Sections 27 - 33 pursuant to supposed ORDER and MOTION TO SHOW CAUSE
_____________________________________________
By Maurice Edward, Brahier, a private individual of the People in sovereignty. No waiver of jurisdictional questions or otherwise is extended, implied or otherwise. I proceed solely under my Rights to such Bill of Particulars before any action or activity in the Court or tribunal and answer or plea thereto, and before further activity in this purported action.
The parties to whom this is directed shall respond to these interrogatories/ questions under Oath and affirmation. And place copies of such, in the public record of the Court.
DEMAND FOR BILL OF PARTICULARS
Comes now Maurice Edward, Brahier, on behalf of the purported accused, whomsoever it might be:
pursuant to the limitations and mandates imposed upon plaintiff and this tribunal/Court and judge or magistrate and any party or Agent by the Constitution of the State of Ohio and Constitution of The United States of America, with authority and unalienable Rights to know the true Nature and Cause to the instant accusation(s) and other, in the above captioned statutory cause, to demand that plaintiff and others provide to any 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 instrument(s) and process of plaintiff(s), and the supposed authority under which the instant action purports to proceed; in and under the following particulars:
1.
What allegation(s) or fact(s) does plaintiff and others depend upon to establish the status of the supposed accused within purview of the statute or lawful method of this purported action?
2.
What a11egation(s) or fact(s) does plaintiff and others depend upon to establish the accused are within the venue of the process purported to be properly served upon the accused?
3.
What allegation(s) or fact(s) does plaintiff and others depend upon to establish the personal jurisdiction of the above captioned tribunal over the accused and to establish that such personal jurisdiction was regularly and lawfully obtained?
4.
Is the Statute, under authority of which plaintiff and other parties purport to bring statutory accusation against the accused, enacted by the General Assembly of The State of Ohio, under the authority of the Common-Law Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution for Ohio state?
Yes or No?
5.
Is the Statute, under authority of which plaintiff and other parties purport to bring statutory accusation against these accused, enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Ohio under the authority of the Corporate Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution of Ohio state?
Yes or No?
6.
Is the Statute, under authority of which plaintiff and other parties purport to bring statutory accusation against the accused, enacted by the General Assembly of Ohio state under the authority of the Admiralty/Maritime Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution for Ohio state?
Yes or No?
7.
Is the Statute, under authority of which plaintiff and other parties purport to bring statutory accusation against the accused, enacted by the General Assembly of Ohio state under the authority of the Martial-Law Jurisdiction, in a venue consistent therewith, as authorized by the Constitution for Ohio state? Yes or NO
8.
Does plaintiff and other parties invoke a Common-Law Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?
9.
Did plaintiff and other parties 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 and other parties invoke a Corporate Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?
11.
Did plaintiff and other parties 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 and other parties invoke a Maritime/Admiralty Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?
13.
Did plaintiff and other parties 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 and other parties invoke a Martial-Law Jurisdiction in the instant statutory cause in the above captioned tribunal? Yes or No?
15.
Did plaintiff and other parties 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 and other parties allege that the "person," as defined in and for the statute, violation of which said statute is alleged by the accusatory instrument of plaintiff, (is, are) Artificial Person(s)? Yes or No?
17.
Does plaintiff and other parties allege that the "person," as defined in and for the statute, violation of which said statute is alleged by the accusatory instrument of plaintiff, (is, are) Natural Persons? Yes or No?
18.
The parties and other parties 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 republic of Ohio in its place.
19.
Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) and other parties contention that INTERNATIONAL LAW now replaces the people's international constitutional Common-Law? Yes or No
20.
Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) and other parties contention that statue law replaces or removes the people's inherent and inalienable constitutional common-law? Yes or No
21.
Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) and other parties contention that the Constitution of Ohio state is a hindrance to (A) good and proper Law (B) and or, governance? Yes or No
22.
Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) and other parties contention that agreements with foreign states and or nations outweigh the constitutional rights of the people of the republic and or (the, these) accused as provided in the Constitution of the state?
Yes or No
23.
Where is the exact location of this individual within the republic, and name of this individual, or individuals whom has had this crime committed against them which must and will be produce before the tribunal or court?
(1)Is this person a member of the corporate THE STATE OF OHIO within the republic. Yes or No
(2) Are they a foreign national? Yes or No
24.
(1) Has THE STATE OF OHIO and GEAUGA COUNTY 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 state. Yes or No
(3)If yes, which article, with specifics.
(4) With whom or who has THE STATE OF OHIO and GEAUGA COUNTY entered into this contract or treaty, or compact and filed this paper work.
(5) Is THE STATE OF OHIO and GEAUGA COUNTY prepared to produce such documentation before this tribunal. Yes or No
25.
Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) and other parties contention that the purported accused and or Maurice Edward, Brahier, (is/are) ward(s) or chattel of THE STATE OF OHIO?
Yes or No
26.
A. Is STATE OF OHIO and GEAUGA COUNTY prepared to produce the mandatory contract(s) voluntarily signed by the accused which shows willing and willful contractual agreement between (corporate) THE STATE OF OHIO 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 or ORDER which has failed to be produced constitutionally? Yes or No
B. GEAUGA COUNTY and THE STATE OF OHIO 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 supposed accused, (2) the jurisdiction and authority of the tribunal or Court, (3) the jurisdiction and authority over the supposed accused.
27.
1.Is it plaintiff(s)'(s) and GEAUGA COUNTY and THE STATE OF OHIO contention that they may cause harm or damage to one of the People and or restrain them; or be instrumental in their harm or damage and or restraint in another State; and then bring them as supposed accused for purported criminal or other activity which is a direct result of that harm or damage and or restraint, and or in which the afore mentioned is instrumental in the cause thereof? Yes or No
And this, without bringing plaintiff(s) or the parties thereto:
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 creating or instituting (a)false prosecution and or (b) illegal prosecution, Yes or No;
5. and or, as becoming material instrument of fraud or collusion or theft, Yes or No;
6. and or, in violation of any other statutory or constitutional provision or Right.? Yes or No
7. And when the action is knowingly brought under non-existent authority, of which the plaintiff and Agents/Officers are well aware, yet falsely proceeding under? Yes or No
28.
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), or (a), (b), pursuant the listings below, to wit: (a)when before the Court, and, (b)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 and mens rea of the statutory and or International accusatory instrument (a),(b);
(B) and all other provisions stated within the STATUTE which it purports to be proceeding under. (1),(2);
(C) all of which are required for:
(1). Accusation, and Order (a), (b);
(2) and for any prosecution before any tribunal of (this, these) purported
accused. (a), (b)
29.
Plaintiff and the parties 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 or Court, and, (b) by any tribunal or Court; and (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".
30.
What is the exact type or style of action of which plaintiff pursues.
31.
Is it plaintiff's and tribunal's or Court's and other Agents contention that it or they (has/have) authority to bring action against one of the People and or a Citizen using STATUTES designed for and applicable only to enfranchised and or enslaved people and or citizens and or subjects? Yes or No
32.
The parties or Agents will describe with full and complete disclosure exactly who and or what body(ies) actually dictates the creation of the Peoples law under which they are subjugated. It is suggested parties research this carefully before reply.
33.
(A) Does plaintiff and the Court or tribunal contend that the original action under which this instant action purportedly continues in and under such authority, was constitutionally obtained? Yes or No
(B) Does the accuser and the Court or tribunal and judge or magistrate contend that: intrusion into the private lives of the People; and failure to provide equal access to law; and destruction/mutilation of evidence; and obstruction of justice; and other factors of the original action, do not make the original action fraudulently obtained and void as demanded by the Rights, Privileges, and Immunities of the Constitutions and other maxims and mandates of Law? Yes or No
(C) And that, due to these unlawful activities, the Plaintiff and Court or tribunal, and any other party or Agent, will be actively conspiring or in open collusion or other violation of Law, and yet should not be prosecuted; removed from Office; and or otherwise, for these or other crimes, violations of Rights, Privileges, and Immunities and mandates and maxims of Law. Yes or No
______________________________________
Failure of plaintiff and the Agents, Court/tribunal, and
Agents or otherwise;
to timely provide Maurice Edward, Brahier, and or on behalf of
whomsoever the accused is, the BILL OF PARTICULARS herein
demanded by Maurice Edward, Brahier and or the 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;
and other as hereon addressed;
will be considered an attempt by plaintiff(s) and the parties to
whom this is directed, to withhold full disclosure of the Nature
and Cause of the accusations brought by plaintiff(s) and will
make it impossible for any supposed defendant to meaningfully
respond to or defend against the accusations and process made and
issued or caused to be issued by plaintiff(s) and or the Court or
tribunal and other parties.
Should the parties and Plaintiff and Agents and Officers fail
to provide these truthful answers with full disclosure to this
Bill of Particulars;
the Court or judge or Magistrate must dismiss or otherwise
relieve Maurice Edward, Brahier from this action under and by its
own Motion, as his Rights have been deliberately violated and the
action may not continue.
____________________________
Maurice Edward, Brahier, a private person of the people, of sovereignty
At the USPS messenger service address of:
xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxx, Ohio xxxxxx
Copies to:
Gail Susan, (Davis) Brahier;
CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT;
Clerk of Court;
GEUAGA COUNTY PROSECUTOR OFFICE