Transcript: PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE C. CLIFFORD SHIRLEY, JR. October 18, 2017 9:35 a.m. to 11:24 a.m.

by / Friday, 03 November 2017 / Published in Absolute Data, HATJ

HATJ-RKB

 

 

Transcript: PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE C. CLIFFORD SHIRLEY, JR. October 18, 2017 9:35 a.m. to 11:24 a.m.

 

RL10.18.17(USA vs. Beane and Tucci-Jarraf)

 

 

To download the transcript directly click here

RL10.18.17(USA vs. Beane and Tucci-Jarraf)

 

Paul- pulled these links together for you in a note:

 

>> And … for your delight, delectation, enjoyment and ease of reference, here are a number of links to each of the praecipes mentioned in the transcript. The first one has two exhibits along with it.

Praecipe – Doc# 43 – http://tx0.org/gv
Exhibit 1 – Doc# 43 – http://tx0.org/gw
Exhibit 2 – Doc# 43 – http://tx0.org/gx

Praecipe – Doc# 54 – http://tx0.org/gy
– There’s a correction to this praecipe at Doc# 56 which does not have a link to it on the syndicated feed of the record of the alleged court. Suffice it to say that the correction is at Declaration of Due Cause, Article II and whereby the words ‘Documents 42 and 50, restated, …’ are corrected to – ‘Documents 18, 25, 43, 48, 49, 52, 54, 55, and the DAR from hearing on 8/24/17, all restated, …’

Share

32 Responses to “Transcript: PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE C. CLIFFORD SHIRLEY, JR. October 18, 2017 9:35 a.m. to 11:24 a.m.”

  1. Jay J says : Reply

    When asked, I will say, “No, I don’t THINK HATJ knows what she’s doing. I KNOW she knows what she’s doing.She and the OPPT have done this for all of us.” Thank you so much for posting this.

  2. Lisa says : Reply

    amusing.. you are not answering me. yes she is, you just don’t understand the system as well as she does… or in the way she does. hahahaha he must be having quite a time reading up on all of this… <3

  3. CeeCee says : Reply

    Thank you Heather! All of I AM stood in that courtroom, I could FEEL it as I read this document…beautifully stated, beautifully done.

  4. Brandon says : Reply

    The court left this in recess but did they pick it up later that day and finish? Where do they go from here?

  5. Laura says : Reply

    Best 92 pages I’ve read in awhile! Amazing how What IS just IS and it STANDS in Truth like a beacon lighting up the dark!
    I have compassion certainly for all in that room that day – how we must tenderly AND powerfully open hearts and minds with the intent that only Love, Joy, Liberation, Abundance, Cooperation and Peace prevails for ALL! Thank you to all who are handling the details, holding the intention, loving the children, feeding their families, blessing the “actors” and sending out the invitations for the afterparty! Can’t wait to chat with jolly old Mr. Shirley at the punch bowl and have a good laugh! All is Perfect and Perfectly Done! Thank you Heather for your 20+ years of working towards these moments and for the brilliant job towards “finishing IT”!

  6. Bonnie-Lee; Boden says : Reply

    At the end Mr. Shirley says, “…court stands in recess till trial resumes this afternoon.” Is that how to adjourn court? I like that it went like that, no matter what. He feels like a giving soul. It is easy to send blessings his too.
    Wow, Hedge, such a brave woman!!
    Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf – You Rock the world!!
    I have absolute love for you and Randy…such brave souls.
    Thank-you, Thank-you, Thank-you!!! <3

  7. RBK says : Reply

    Man, Heather had the judge on the fence the whole time! Go Heather! Awesome read. It seems to me the judge had a very hard time understanding what was going on…Ignorance doesn’t even begin to describe the level that judge was on. It sounds like no matter what the judge does or says, Heather can’t be touched.

    Really interested to see how this plays out. When will the next part be happening?

  8. Cynthia says : Reply

    Epic and Gratitude!!

  9. Tallison says : Reply

    I just completed reading this document. I am amazed at the focus and intention that Heather held and maintained throughout Judge Shirley’s onslaught of doing everything he could muster up to derail her! The energy in that court room had to be extremely intense.
    Well done Heather.
    Is it true he is supposed to to respond within 30 days? 11/18?
    Only Love can set you free!

  10. Heart love & light in all ways to all on the front lines and beyond … We Stand in Love United … thank you thank you thank you

  11. Joey says : Reply

    AMAZING

    I read this at like 5am this morning….AMAZING!!!!!

    FULL AND COMPLETE!

  12. Neil Wolfe says : Reply

    BZ the court did adjourn or recess with the court deputy stating “All rise this court is in recess.”
    In an earlier comment you stated that this did not happen. Just wanting to clear up the record.

    • BZ ⒾAM Riger says : Reply

      yes. But you will see in your own quote it was not adjourned- it is in recess, and I believe- paraphrasing here, as I don’t have the transcript in front of me, currently… the judge says— when the trial continues this afternoon.– There was no trial on the morning of October 18th, 2017 at 9 AM ET, in Judge C. Clifford Shirley’s courtroom 3B, so it can not continue, there was no motion so it cannot adjourn. There was no “court room hearing” so the best judge Shirley could do in his “script” languaging was to take a recess…

      There is a big difference in an “adjournment” and a “recess” there was no adjournment stated-

      An adjournment and a recess are both temporary delays in the court’s proceedings, but there is an important difference between them.

      Adjournment refers to the putting off of court business to a future day.The item hasn’t been approved or defeated.

      Recess refers to a temporary suspension of court proceedings. Usually a recess is called because there is some procedural quirk that needs to be ironed out.

      This is where compassion comes in, as this was the biggest, “Procedural quirk” the honerable Judge C. Clifford Shirley has ever encountered in doing the job he loved- believing things worked the way he was told they did.

  13. derek Fenner says : Reply

    Aho Namasté greetings I-UV HATJ and all free sacred beings of harmony wisdom and love

    Gratitude and Thank you for setting the Hu mamalty and Gaia Sophia and all who dwell under in on and above her body, in its full glory waterways icefields and moons our father sun and all that is

    May the healing begin

    weareone
    wearetan
    onepeopleism
    onelovexpressed

    DahMah
    Derek Fenner

  14. dave says : Reply

    I can’t wait until the inevitable smack down! Wonderful BEing and DOing! This was Heather at her finest!

  15. Cary says : Reply

    wow! beautiful all <3 blessings to the rising of the ONE that is all of us with LOVE <3 🙂 )))

  16. Jeff says : Reply

    each i am is perfection perfected in all ways, always! Love You Heather!

  17. james says : Reply

    Here it is the new unimproved pilot test for the new version of court, It’s a courts martial, or Courts Marshal, Yes know all about this for South Dakota West River is now another country of its own inside of the 49 and a half States, Its called Lakota Dakota Nakota Nation. Why was this not reported on the main stream news? now the courts are military, small claims civil is prosecuted, it is the worst, a parking ticket is jail time. Its a trick this is the trial no jury, just a plain and simple experimental courts martial on a civilian. The rule is if an attorney is appointed the court does not have to expose that its a courts martial. remember before the transfer from DC all of them calling each other generals, these are not attorney general’s these are military and national guard generals for courts martial. This is what takes place when their jurisdiction is pulled. Nip it before it is too late, so far it is being decided upon a civil matter or a criminal matter, it is time to declare unrecognizable vangsness of a court at law. prove that it is not a courts martial of one not militarized. possibly a crime against the United States of America

  18. CLAUDIO says : Reply

    VERY GOOD

  19. FreedomFires says : Reply

    What happened after lunch?

  20. The US is not a corporation says : Reply

    The U.S. really isn’t a corporation. I was in the exact same position HATJ is in and trying to use the same defense. It doesn’t work because it really isn’t a corporation. That statue she cited number 1. Is only applicable to that part of the law which is debt collection and number 2. It doesn’t mean the US is a federal corporation it means a federal corporation is also considered to be the US for that section of laws.

    There are many federal corporations. There are also corporations call the United States with DnB numbers and all…but there is no act of congress that created a new United States corporation and without an act of congress there is no United States Inc. The act of 1871 is also used as “proof” but it’s clear our freedom loving, witch hunting friends do not know how to read law as that act consolidated the government of Georgetown and Washington into one Washington DC as s seperate federal state with its own government using the constitution like its state constitution. This is totally within the authority of the federal Constitution and did not create a corporation called the United States.

    I’m sorry this isn’t what everyone wants to hear but I believe, and have been given the intuitive info, that HATJ and crew were duped from the beginning. In my opinion, and this is just my opinion from my years of research and experience, a challenge of federal jurisdiction of the court acting outside the federal zone as well as a challenge of mistaken identity as to the PERSON is a much better way to go.

    The district court of the United States is NOT the United States district court just the same as The United States of America is NOT the United States. See Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 28 USC 1746(1). Despite other patriot mythology, there are real crimes. Not ALL crimes are commercial however, most if it all courts are commercial enterprises but it all depended on where you’re located…been there, done that and got my case dismissed.

    Holding HATJ in the light

  21. William says : Reply

    After reading this case I can only refer one to the original draft of the Declaration of Independence for clarification of natures laws as well universal law. As well to the references of correcting a corrupt governing body.
    One, a declaration is nothing more than a written statement that is agreed to or not for it is the power of agreement that expresses what we experience. Also the reference of the united states is pre the corporate takeover. The signed declaration has been altered from its origins and was really only agreed to by some in congress. Therefore I could not agree to any such terms.

    I can however agree to the original draft because its basis was arrived through the act of observation and documented as such. This brings me to nature laws or the axioms known as laws of the universe which in all accounts support life in a universe.

    One we hold these truths to be sacred and undeniable, selfevident. This clearly states by observation of the BEing. That all men are created equal and independent. This statement alone expresses no authority exists and all are humans BEing. It goes into our inherent and inalienable rights which most importantly is the preservation of life, which is a universal term and not limited to anyone living, but to all living. With liberty which is simply freedom from impositions from others who make stuff up.
    It also goes into the crimes that were committed which are like many we see today. This act was to create corrections and is not far from what we are seeing today and the work that has been done here. Keep in mind that most if not all have never taken the time to read, apply and understand this document to form this type of agreement. In fact I have found very few who get this yet it is very much part of this very case as defined.

    After understanding this I could only ask so what does the B.A.R. actually stand for and with that wouldn’t this be a repeat of history keeping in mind that the banking practices of today carried over from British rules?

  22. Jeffrey says : Reply

    Heather doesn’t seem to understand the mess she has put herself and Randall in.

    The judge explained it in clear English, you cannot foreclose on anything via unrebutted UCC statements let alone all the governments and corporations on earth. The court has both personal and subject matter jurisdiction over her and Randall and none of the paperwork she has filed will prevent her from being found guilty and sentenced to jail.

    • Paulo says : Reply

      Isn’t that the way UCC works: through rebutal/no rebutal?
      It seems to me that this is the way foreclosures (real estate) are operated by the banks. Therefore, I cannot see where Heather went wrong. Maybe you could explain how UCC works so we can better understand the situation.
      Also, judges do not always tell the truth (between you and me).

    • NRF says : Reply

      Jeffrey, you appear to be the only person commenting here who is thinking with any clarity at all about this situation.

      Randy is going to be tried, convicted and sentenced to a long period in federal prison
      Heather is going to be tried, convicted and sentenced to a significantly shorter time in prison.
      If Heather truly believes that so-called TDA accounts exist, and that she has the right to access hers, why not just do that, instead of duping one of “followers” into being the guinea pig? I believe Heather should be punished more harshly than she likely will be, because she is the instigator of all this nonsense.

      Why do Heather and all her followers refer to “unrebutted” so often. The government and its court system are under no obligation to “rebut” nonsensical claims. Such claims are simply ignored.

  23. Nader Tanner says : Reply

    Well done Heather. Well done Randall. You guys are the bravest souls on earth today.

    Your selfless acts and love for ALL are unparalleled in the world today.

    I’m praying for you everyday, and I only see a bright future for ALL ahead.

    Stay strong and never give up.

    I feel like this bible verse is so appropriate for what you’re doing / have done:

    Luke 12:2-3
    For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known. 3 Therefore whatever you have spoken in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have spoken in the ear in inner rooms will be proclaimed on the housetops.

    God bless all those involved.

  24. EstherBE says : Reply

    I Truly Love And Enjoy The Energy Brought Forth In All Of This. Thank You Heather For All of Your Efforts In Freeing Humanity From The Corrupt System.

    I feel that many people have projected themselves through their Titles, i.e. Judges, Lawyers (Esquire), Chiefs, CEOs, Presidents, Managers, etc., that they lose sight of BEing Human. I often have to ask the question, “Can you be human for a moment?” Look outside of your educated label and just be human. You will start to feel and possibly react accordingly; Loving The People vs. Unfair Laws.

    Darn All The Complicated Lingo That Many May Never Overstand!

    Human Simplicity Is Key.

    Love & Respect,
    EstherBe

  25. noel says : Reply

    Jeffery: If what you say is true, then why is the same principles in COMMERCE used by all businesses, Corporations etc, to FORECLOSE or REPOSSESS anything that is not fully paid for, the victim if you like, is given a certain time (72 Hours) I believe, to Rebut the Claim, if it is not REBUTTED it stands as UNIVERSAL TRUTH.
    Correct me if I am wrong, but the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE / UCC was set up as a TRUTH SYSTEM to rely on an AFFIDAVIT of TRUTH. I believe the POPE is the HEAD of the UCC.
    This System of Commerce is for Corporations (Dead Entities) everything done in commerce is by Contract, they cannot contract with you if you do not consent, you consent if you answer to your so called name also. Hence HEATHER did not consent.

  26. Nick says : Reply

    Unfortunately, I believe, like in Canada, the judge will ignore everything Heather said. The problem is, like I’ve been saying for 15 years, we don’t have enforcement. They can enforce anything they want, lawful or not, legal or not and they do. We always lose because they have enforcement & we don’t. I fear Heather & Randall will spend many years if not decades in prison & nothing they do or did will help the rest of us. What a sad, sick world we live in. To many waited to long to wake up & now it’s to late, I’m sorry to say.

  27. Karen.L says : Reply

    READ people Heather Is right ………………………………
    MISSING AND/OR DEFECTIVE CREDENTIALS:
    The U.S. District Court for the District of Tennessee is not a court ordained with power under the Constitution, Art. III. It must be an Art. III court in order to have jurisdiction over One of the People
    charging document was not a valid “indictment” because it too violated 28 U.S.C. 1691, and was signed by personnel lacking one or more OATHS
    5 U.S.C. 2903, 2906, 3331;
    18 U.S.C. 4, 912, 1961 et seq.;
    28 U.S.C. 453, 951; and,
    44 U.S.C. 3512(b)
    Furthermore, the failure to produce any evidence of any duly executed OPM SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS has very far-reaching criminal consequences for all Federal employees who are similarly situated. See e.g. 18 U.S.C. §§ 912, 1341, 1951 and 1961 et seq.
    Also, The UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT stated a long time ago that “The practice of Law CAN NOT be licensed by any state/State.” This was so stated in a case named Schware v. Board of Examiners and is located for all to read at the following pages in volume 353 U.S. pgs.238, 239 of the United States Reports.

    Another case which bore this out was Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925). In this case the opinion of the court was that “The practice of Law is an occupation of common right.”

    A state supreme court may only issue a CERTIFICATE, not a license. A CERTIFICATE gives no power to anyone to practice Law as an OCCUPATION, nor to do BUSINESS as a LAW FIRM.

    A state bar association, if one exists, is a “PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION.” The “STATE BAR” card is NOT a LICENSE. The card is a “UNION DUES CARD”
    The “CERTIFICATE” from the State Supreme Court:
    ONLY authorizes,
    To practice Law “IN COURTS” as a member of the STATE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.

    Can ONLY represent WARDS OF THE COURT, INFANTS, PERSONS OF UNSOUND MIND (SEE CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM, VOLUME 7, SECTION 4.)

  28. Karen.L says : Reply

    SUMMARY OF PROBABLE CAUSES

    NOTICE OF DEFAULT, said USDC/TENN Docket

    now contains verified factual evidence calling for the following

    conclusions of law, to wit:

    (1) JUDGE________ lacks the second OATH OF OFFICE expressly

    required by 28 U.S.C. 544 and Article VI, Clause 3 in the

    U.S. Constitution (“6:3”);

    (2) US ATTORNEY lacks power of attorney legally to represent the

    “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” as such before Federal courts:

    see 28 U.S.C. 530B, 547, 1345, 1346, 1746(1) in particular;

    (3) _____ is not an “authorized assistant” hence not a lawful

    “attorney for the government” as the latter terms occur at

    FRCrP Rules 1, 6 and 7 (definitions, who can be present,

    who can sign);

    (4) ________ has twice failed or refused to disclose valid

    U.S. Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) Standard Form 61

    (“SF-61”) APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS expressly required by

    5 U.S.C. 2104, 2903, 2906, 3331, 3332, 3333, 5507, and 6:3;

    see also 18 U.S.C. 1519;

    (5) CLERK OF COURT has also failed or refused to disclose the second

    OATH OF OFFICE expressly required of Clerks and Deputy Clerks

    of Court by 28 U.S.C. 951, and 6:3;

    (6) CLERK lacks the mandatory SENATE CONFIRMATION

    expressly required by 5 U.S.C. 2902(c), and by either the

    Appointments Clause (“2:2:2”) or the Recess Appointments

    Clause (“2:2:3”) in the U.S. Constitution

    NOW ALL CAPS NAME WHO APPEARS IN COURT
    In all court cases, be it Municipal, County, District, State, or Federal Court, you merely need to request a Certified Copy of your DEATH CERTIFICATE, which they cannot produce!!
    Scott v. McNeal 154 U.S. 34 (1894)
    NOW WHAT ???? Believe me now???????
    BOTTOM LINE THEY CANT JUST REFUSE TO ANSWER HEATHER ON JURISDICTION OR THEIR CREDENTIALS BEING PRODUCED PERIOD…

Leave a Reply

TOP