Sheriff Tim Norton
Elbert County Sheriff’s Office
Dear Sheriff Norton,
I hope this letter finds you well. My name is (redacted), and I reside at (Redacted). I am writing to you in light of my upcoming legal matters involving foreclosure proceedings with Alliant Credit Union and a repossession claim from Porsche Financial Services.
I wish to express my appreciation for the important work you and your office perform in upholding the law and ensuring the safety and rights of our community. However, I am writing to address a concern regarding the principles of consent and contract law as they relate to these proceedings. It is my belief that the court system and financial institutions often operate on an assumption of consent and validity without sufficient justification. Specifically, I am concerned that the court may issue orders against me that could violate my fundamental rights and personal consent. The courts appear to assume consent based on statutory and constitutional frameworks, while banks assert the validity of the US dollar and the enforceability of claims, despite the fact that US dollars and bank loans are created from nothing. This creates a situation where banks cannot demonstrate real injury or loss resulting from an individual’s failure to pay, thus lacking a valid basis for claims and undermining the concept of genuine consent.
Therefore, I respectfully request that any actions taken by the Elbert County court, including those potentially enforced by your office, be justified with clear evidence of my explicit consent or clear evidence where I have caused injury to another individual. Given that banks create money from nothing and cannot prove actual loss, any claims against me for payments, foreclosures, or property repossession based on such invalid grounds may infringe upon my individual liberty and the foundational principle of consent. Additionally, I wish to have assurance that you understand the significance of this issue and my position on the matter.
Furthermore, I request that the property at (redacted), along with any property contained within, not be tampered with, taken, or destroyed. Any such actions would be considered a violation of the law and undermine the authority of all government, including the foundational principle of the consent of the governed.
I understand that I do not have the authority to compel you or any other official to act outside of valid contractual obligations. I am merely asserting that I do not grant the Elbert County court, or any individual or corporation, the right to violate my consent in these matters.
Thank you for your attention to this issue and for your ongoing dedication to justice and individual rights. Should you need any further information or clarification to process this request, please let me know.
Sincerely,
*****
This is really coming together yall. Not only is establishing the right to non-compliance the basis for the law, it is also the basis of law enforcement. The reality is that we are the judges, jury, and sheriffs of our towns and we don’t answer to each other, we answer to the law and are compelled by law to protect each others consent and liberties. Using this argument at once reminds our fellow citizens of their duties while also establishing ourselves as equally responsible. Notice how I established the requirements the sheriff would need to prove in order for him or his office to take any lawful action against me while at the same time I noted that I personally had no authority to compel his action. The law doesn’t act until there is a violation. Law enforcement doesn’t act unless there is proof of the violation.
This is true of anyone who wishes to live peacefully and creatively in society. None of us have a right to compel performance and each of us has a right to defend ourselves against compelled performance. This is source of the law among us and within us.
******
Consent is the key to setting up your own rights and demanding your neighbors establish the law among you by acknowledging consent and by extension property rights and contractual obligations
I’ve always wanted to be an architect but I won’t do it in the current environment. Unless I have assurances of law, why build so others can destroy? I also have a daughter with special needs. There are future doctors out there like I’m a future architect, waiting in the wings for us to acknowledge the law so that we may innovate without opposition. I do expect her to be healed, but not until this is accomplished
Someday…
Comments
Post a Comment