DMVP "Writ of Enforcement" for $20M "Lien"

[David Merrill]

The common denominator is these public figures have all been terminated from their jobs in the wake of my process.

Uh, no. There are a myriad of other things, other "common denominators" that occurred immediately prior to their termination. Your ranting letter was among them. It does not necessarily follow it was your letter or "process wake" that did it.

As someone else mentioned, this is the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc

You might also want to fathom in that mentally disturbed brain of yours the difference between correlation, coincidence, and causation.

http://recordingsearch.car.elpasoco.com ... earch.aspx

The one I enjoyed was the Return of Bill of Indictment on May 12, 1999 against Robert E. RUBIN. I wish I had the images in a photo bucket to show you. I published that at #099075970 at 11:22 in the morning. So it was already 1:22 in DC and RUBIN announced his resignation in time for the 5:00 News MST!

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P1-21560719.html


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Judge Roy Bean]

I remember a horse we were boarding for a family member that kicked a stall hard enough the post on the outside of the barn holding up a 1" hydrant broke and the riser pipe was bent enough to where it was spraying a fine mist into the corral.

I guess that must have been as a result of the email I sent the owner the day before pointing out that her gelding wasn't getting along in his new surroundings and it was time to move him home.

If you believe in the "wake" of Van Pelt's "process," clearly then my email message infuriated the horse.

[wserra]

Not satisfied with the clerk having designated federal jurisdiction based on govt plaintiff, David has filed the usual civil cover sheet which typically accompanies new civil cases. Well, perhaps David's isn't "usual".

The coversheet has checkbox choices for the basis of federal jurisdiction; David checked "diversity". Now, that choice would seem to create a problem, since David (a citizen of Colorado) purports to be enforcing a claim against the State of Colorado. Not a lot of diversity there. So David has stricken out the line for his "County of Residence", making no entry. He gives his address as the process service he uses. In the box for party state citizenship (typically used to establish diversity) he has typed in (as his citizenship) "denizen of organic state"; for Colorado, he has typed in what appears to be "Foreign Nation Bar Ass. since 1933". At the bottom, David has provided special directions: "Clerk, Make no changes. David Merrill is not Pro Se. David Merrill is a man who is heir apparent to the original estate (outside contract with the Fed)".

I would say that this mess will be dismissed as soon as the MJ (to whom the DJ referred it a couple of days ago) looks at it - but there is nothing to dismiss, since there is no lawsuit. I predict simply some sort of order closing the docket. But sooner or later, David, they will not be amused. Look what happened to Kennedy Russell.

[wserra]

I split off the stuff about SARS, "advanced resonance plasma physics" and time travel to its own home on "Flames", in a (likely vain) effort to keep this thread on topic.

David has filed something he titled a "restricted appearance". Needless to say, the collection of nonsense he has filed doesn't make a lawsuit, so it is difficult to discuss it as though it were. Still, David, one doesn't get to file a suit and then put in a "restricted appearance". A "restricted appearance" is for a defendant who contests jurisdiction. If a suit actually existed, you would be a plaintiff who invokes jurisdiction.

What makes the filing worth discussing is that he has included a couple of interesting transcripts - transcripts that show exactly how sovrun nonsense doesn't even work to delay when faced with a judge who won't put up with it. In one appearance, David tries his "I was never arraigned" line; the judge notes that the court entered a plea of "not guilty" which, if not satisfied, David can always change to "guilty". David then tries the old sovereign chestnut - ask the judge a stupid question, like "Are you practicing law from the bench?" The judge then says OK, how do you plead? David won't answer. The judge directs him to do so. David won't. The judge then tells David that, if he can't understand that simple question, the judge has questions about his competence, and will commit him for a psych exam. David then pleads not guilty. When the judge tries to set a trial date on the next appearance, David raises speedy trial. The judge notes that, under Colorado law, the speedy trial statute (six months) runs from arraignment, and David was just arraigned a couple of weeks before.

It's enough to make you feel bad for David. Then you remember that he preaches this stuff to the gullible. It's important that people see how it doesn't work for the preacher himself.

[David Merrill]

At least note that SAMELSON approved the change in the header to DAVID MERRILL.

I think that is something important to note for ignoramuses like Judge Roy Bean and Prof who still insist the encryption include my family name.

As far as these distortions go, why not tell us what you are leaving out, Wserra? I did not ask SAMELSON if he was practicing law from the bench; I asked him if he is a practicing attorney. It is all perspective - as we know Wesley is a practicing attorney too. It makes a lot of sense that he would be trying to form a law suit out of an evidence repository built on Doc 1 being a simple lien.

Here's how you do it if you want the bill/lien itself.

http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/busines ... r_Form.pdf

Fill in #20092001574 at CERTIFIED COPIES - checking the Other box and it says include $2. Likely though, they will include a remittance for $1 overpaid so you can just print out a second order form with the remittance and send that to a friend or better yet, you Quatlosers should send it to the Department of Justice with your thoughts.

I enjoyed this from the other thread - Prof:

The UCC liens: These folks frequently file UCC-1's creating a secured creditor relationship between the human (Large and lower case spelling) and the strawman (all caps). First, a naked UCC-1 creates nothing; there must be another document called a security agreement; then value must be advance and the debtor must receive possession of the collateral before a UCC-1 perfects a lien. Since the all caps and upper and lower case persons are the same (see above), then even if all of the steps are talken, the doctrine of merger applies and the lien is subsumed into ownership and no longer exists. The doctrine of merger, which says you can't take a lien on stuff you own, applies in all states and the District of Columbia.

You want to pull up that first transcript and note how clear I was prior to SAMELSON placing his Order for a trial that I would be charging in the millions of $$$. Page 3 - Lines 10-11.

Maybe if I forbid Wserra from posting his PACER findings he will come clean with the entire picture for us.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[Nikki]

...
As far as these distortions go, why not tell us what you are leaving out, Wserra? I did not ask SAMELSON if he was practicing law from the bench; I asked him if he is a practicing attorney. It is all perspective - as we know Wesley is a practicing attorney too. It makes a lot of sense that he would be trying to form a law suit out of an evidence repository built on Doc 1 being a simple lien.
...

LIAR

According to the document you filed with the court, page 6 (transcript #1 - page 5), lines 11 & 12:

THE DEFENDANT: (David Merrill)
You entered -- that's practicing law from the bench.

Tehcnically, you are correct in that you didn't ask him. You ACCUSED him.

More word salad on your part.

[David Merrill]

You did not read Wserra's post. But I enjoy it when you are wrong, albeit I am not really reading your posts as much as Prof's. That was a good comment about the UCC and the STRAWMAN copyrighting names nonsense Prof. Thanks!

I have explained the same thing in another way, which is, Why would you copyright a version of the name and then try prohibiting others from using it after you gave it to them? - Same nonsense.

[Nikki]

David

One of the first rules of being a good liar is having a good memory.

You forgot that you TOLD the Judge he was practicing law from the bench and than denied you ever said it.

[grixit]

Maybe if I forbid Wserra from posting his PACER findings he will come clean with the entire picture for us.

Can't. I forbid you to forbid anything.

[David Merrill]

Maybe if I forbid Wserra from posting his PACER findings he will come clean with the entire picture for us.

Can't. I forbid you to forbid anything.

Enjoyable posts; both of you!

Nikki - you forget that it is quite impossible to evaluate your infatuation without knowing what you look like.

Wesley - your flash evaluation of the recent filing is too superficial to consider seriously. But what stands out most significantly is that you keep thinking there has to be a court case because the clerk of court sent my evidence repository to a new case category and assigned a judge. You admit the clerk was so sloppy as to call me US Government Plaintiff.

And you all ignore my Signature apparently - and just how helpful Prof is with his articulate descriptions about processing claims. This is really quite edifying.


Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. Grixit!

Your refusal is Refused for Cause.


The Defendant argues that he refused for cause certain documents either mailed or served upon him (it is unclear which) and this somehow relieves him of legal liagility for his conduct. This claim lacks any legal support. If someone could avoid responsiblility for their actions simply by stamping "refused for cause" on a document, anarchy would reign...

[wserra]

But what stands out most significantly is that you keep thinking there has to be a court case because the clerk of court sent my evidence repository to a new case category and assigned a judge.

You're the one who doesn't read the posts carefully, David. Far from writing that "there has to be a court case", I've been writing that there is no case at all. You'll find that out once some judicial officer takes a look.

You admit the clerk was so sloppy as to call me US Government Plaintiff.

More exactly, David, I wrote that the system of drop-down menus which ECF filers use (including clerks, I believe; lawyers, I know, because I use it) doesn't have a selection entitled "Meaningless Nonsense".

And you all ignore my Signature apparently

As far as I'm concerned, you can use whatever name you want. It's just that you can't pretend that, because a court may use a name with which you were born but which you now disfavor, what the court says doesn't apply to you.

[The Observer]

And you all ignore my Signature apparently

As far as I'm concerned, you can use whatever name you want. It's just that you can't pretend that, because a court may use a name with which you were born but which you now disfavor, what the court says doesn't apply to you.

I believe the signature David is referring to is his quote of the Prof's explanation regarding notices of tax lien. Not that David is quoting the Prof in context; he is simply trying to twist the meaning into something that will appear to support David's contention that "suitors" can "cure" a tax lien by merely filing David's worthless papers as a UCC filing. But I am still amused that David blurted out that a "suitor" would still need to go to federal district court when the IRS refused to recognize those UCC filings and continue to levy wages and bank accounts belonging to the suitor. It was even more amusing when David was not able to say that a suitor would prevail in such a suit - which was his way of admitting that he is just making all of this up as he goes.

[fortinbras]

At some point, I think on the defunct SuiJuris forum (although maybe the current one), DVP actually argued that while he - as David Merrill - either had or was entitled to fabulous sums of money, the several very very real liens in the public records against David Vanpelt (or Van Pelt) somehow didn't apply to him because those debts had been documented under a name he no longer used.

He may think this is clever. I think you shouldn't lend him money.

[David Merrill]

The reasoning behind that is fraud by omission.

[notorial dissent]

He may think this is clever.

That is the case, as with his other self propagating delusions, is that he is anything but. He is a generator of gibberish and nonsense, as this current magistrate will find out. I rather suspect that she is either very new or very low on the totem pole and thus gets the gibberish and nuisance cases to test her metal. The only question will be how long will it take her to get to the bottom of the current pile of other nonsense on her desk to determine that Merrill's latest effort is on par with his bicycle suit which former Judge Nottingham disposed of as meaningless drivel and dismissed out of hand. I suspect it is too much to hope that she will be as erudite as her predecessor, but who knows, we can only wait and see at this point. In any event, just more Merrillian drivel for the confetti machine.

[Nikki]

Magistrate: Mr Merrill, the documents associated with this case include what appears to be an allegation on your part that you are in possession of a judgement for $20,000,000 against the State of Colorado. What is the legal basis for this judgement?

DM: It is a claim against the bonds created by the judges oaths for deferred prosecution, violation of a timely trial, and for practicing law from the bench.

Magistrate: There is absolutely nothing in the file indicating you received any legal judgement against them or performed any type of service which would entitle you to a claim against them.

DM: I perfected the lien myself.

Magistrate: Case dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a justicable claim. Costs to be assessed against the plaintiff.

[Nikki]

David is beginning to waffle on the bullet-proof merits of his original alleged claim against the State:

Not just Shoonra but the Quatlosers too. The moderator Wserra (Wesley SERRA) keeps saying he can not even see a court case when I think just about any coherent court case/cause boils down to an unpaid bill. He seems to think I have failed to state a claim? I billed the state for $20M and they failed to pay!

Whether or not the unpaid bill is a valid lien? Hopefully that will be up to the jury soon.

Regards,
David Merrill.

1 - WSerra never said he can't see a court case. After all, he has posted several items from PACER regarding the case. What he DID say is that there is no VALID case since there's no valid underlying issue.

2 - You have failed to state a claim because there's nothing for which you could have validly created and issued the "unpaid bill" -- at least not on this planet.

3 - What jury? The case will be dismissed for any of a number of valid reasons before jury selection is even scheduled.

[David Merrill]

Pessimist!

I doubt you have ever read my Signature;

http://img683.imageshack.us/content_rou ... rial1s.jpg

Demosthenes; Please change my slogan from biosocios... word generator to 'capital integration'.


Thanks!


David Merrill.


P.S. How long do you suppose it takes a magistrate to schedule the next step?

I wonder how many people have been ordering up the bill? Did you get yours yet Nikki?

http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/busines ... r_Form.pdf

#20092001574

[Nikki]

David

Pessimist? No, I'm being optimistic that the court won't sanction you for bringing a frivolous suit and for filing a bogus lien against a public official.

Also, what possible reason is there for me, or anyone else, to spend anything to get a copy of what you've posted all over the Internet?

Is there some arcane magic associated with possessing an officially certified copy of a worthless (except for the comedic value) document?

It's absolutely astonishing that you believe a certified copy of a document carries more weight than the original and that it is actually of some value for others to have copies of the copy.

[David Merrill]

Then order it because it is astonishing!