Docket #63 RKB Request to Join in 113017 Co Defendant Filling HATJ

by / Friday, 01 December 2017 / Published in Absolute Data, HATJ


Docket #63 RKB Request to Join in 113017 Co Defendant Filling HATJ




Doc# 63 – RKB Request To Join 113017

To download directly click here

Doc# 63 - RKB Request To Join 113017




Nov 30th A

To download directly click here

Nov 30th A




Nov 30th B

To download directly click here

Nov 30th B

18 Responses to “Docket #63 RKB Request to Join in 113017 Co Defendant Filling HATJ”

  1. Jay J says : Reply

    The thugs that beat up RKB have planted a terrible seed – even though they are playing a role, there are consequences for actions and harm brought on others (each sentient being has an unalienable and unconditional right to be divided and protected from the negative actions of other sentient beings) plants a seed that grows into terrible tasting fruit once you have to eat it (I have not always been a nice person, I know from experience). I am praying for Randys’ safety and release from prison (each sentient being has an unalienable and unconditional right to freedom).

    The OPPT know what they are doing and I wish them the best in all of this. I wish there were more I could do. HATJ is doing a great job, I continue to be amazed at how fast HATJ is responding on all of this.

    seems like a good time to post this clip from a movie I love dearly.

  2. myaraine says : Reply

    deepest appreciation to you Heather and Co and Randal.

  3. Dan'l says : Reply

    Maybe this will get her thrown back in the hoosegow?

  4. Jane Dunn says : Reply

    Postal Power:
    the admiralty jurisdiction called Are you Lost at “Sea”? from Pastor Richard Standaring, in Cincinnati, Ohio
    real morpheus of today tricks & traps part 1,2,3,4,5,6.7 with Mark-Kishon: Christopher
    Tricks & Traps of The Court pt 1,2,3,4,5,6,7. : Mark-kishon: Christopher.

  5. Dude says : Reply

    Soooo, what happens next???

  6. Zach says : Reply

    Recomnends? Are there other instances where they’ve used other terminology that I could view directly on documents like this?

  7. I am greatly interested in this matter. Unfortunately, I do not understand in layman’s terms what it all means. Love to have an explanation. Thanks.

  8. Marty says : Reply

    This appears to be an impasse, it is not. The Magistrate is denying the true facts, acting in dishonor, doing the prosecutors job, practicing law from the bench, making presumption…. Heather is standing squarely on the truth with honor. There is only one possible lawful outcome, dismissal. These characters can not have it both ways, using UCC claims only when THEY deem them just, and discounting them when used against them. Cherry picking the constitution is inappropriate as well, The constitution gives the courts authority over those who have consented to the contract, the constitution. Heather is correct when she says she didn’t sign it, therefor it has no power over her, this is simple contract law, she has not consented to it, there has been no meeting of the minds, a contract is null and void if the facts are not fully disclosed, it is coerced, or made under duress. One is only a citizen if one is born in the ten square mile area know as Washington D.C. or naturalized, even then one may denounce ones citizenship. The Constitution is the bylaws of the corporation Know as the “United States” a different entity from “The United States of America” as per the reconstruction of 1860-1871. In international law the court is the person and suite of the sovereign; the place where the sovereign sojourns with his (her) regal retinue, wherever that may be. Heather is a State onto herself, Estate, a foreign national to the United States. She has claimed her court, the un-rebutted facts have been stated, the judgement made, she has been sensitive to the magistrate of this court and offered a praecipe in conclusion, it has been denied whiteout honor. I do not believe for an instant that the actors in this case do not understand her ruling, they are tap dancing around the truth.

    • Zach says : Reply

      I don’t know who else could talk to these guys as far as giving them the truth. I’m sure they’ve had to of been contacted by someone about all of this. Thanks for the comment Marty.

  9. Ginger Snap! says : Reply

    given how long this is being stretched over time, i have wonder who/m are still paying the judges … as they are just puppets … and it appears hundreds of politician indicements are about to be unsealed … once that all goes down in full public view … i am expecting both Heather & Randal’s releases

  10. Jeffrey says : Reply

    Heather was always asking for someone to rebut her filings with specificity, the judge finally gave her what she wanted. A shame that Randy has to pay for Heathers mistakes with jail time.

    • Justice says : Reply

      Shirley did not rebut the filings. He made a report to his boss of his interpretation of her defense. He merely agreed with the alleged government that the filings are of “no legal relevance or consequence” and further stated he thought they were “devoid of intelligible argument” neither of which are a rebuttal.

  11. Aidan says : Reply

    Every Court system is Rigged all across the IMF if this Judge is so righteous then Why is his Corrupt Court allowed to create Huge Monetary Bonds called ‘off ledger bookkeeping’ he must be off his Rocker to think all the Documents

    submitted by Heather are no good & he profits off the Bonds from the DEBTOR STRAWMAN ACCOUNTS…A Court is a Bank the Judge is the Bank Manager DEBTOR SERVER & that is a fact…How much is this Court Case worth go down to

    the Clerk’s Office & ACCEPT FOR VALUE…If I was in Court I would ask to see the Judges entire file & ACCEPT IT FOR VALUE with a blue ink pen…Not the Clerk’s File…There are 2 files in each Court Case the Judge has the one you want…I hate everything about the Judicial system it is FILTH…

  12. Aidan says : Reply

    Have someone in the NY Stock Exchange check & see how much Money this Court Case is worth now

  13. Bobby says : Reply

    I know my constitution people in main “Jack and Margy” repeat over and over and over again that the powers that be cannot violate their “OATH OF OFFICE” it shackles them to the constitutiuon to protect and serve the people …you either act accordingly to YOUR OATH or YOU DON`T and are then quite guilty of TREASON AND SEDITION !!!!!!!!! period
    If people would only completely believe and understand our constitution????????? There is no room for games.

    • Justice says : Reply

      In 1991 all alleged judges were required to sign new oaths of office of which were altered from the original which you are referring to. The new oath states ” to uphold their constitutional responsibility under the constitution” which is a farce because nowhere in the constitution is there a statement addressing judges oath of office. So yet another fraud by the BAR.

Leave a Reply