*Sending out this prayer chain request for the Rascento Family domiciled on
the land; Franklin County,
north-carolina territory.
*Witnesses are needed, if you can make it email me back for
request of details, location e.t.c.
thanks
*
Detail below of the showdown tomorrow --->*
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: rascento
Date: Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 10:06 AM
Subject: RE: Family Update
Blessings and Hello;
I'll try to keep this short, however, if I do not succeed, you may one to
print out :-)
Tomorrow, Monday, 9th, we will have our Hearing and I'll briefly go into
what we will be standing on and the expected outcome.
But, first to update thus far, in an effort to obtain documentation to
support our claim that the Court has a conflict of interest "PRESIDING" a
matter involving a bank. These docs, which we could have obtain for
ourselves from the Secretary of STate's office, but would have more of an
impact from sworn witness....just so happens these witnesses would have been
the Clerk of the Court, herself, a Superior Court Judge & a County Manager.
The Clerk of the Court, denied issuing our subpoenas and said that she would
take them to the Sr. Resident Superior Court Judge....which he denied our
right to subpoena for evidence. Stating that we were trying to delay the
hearing, when in fact the deposition would have been almost 2 weeks prior to
the hearing, so that wasn't his "real" excuse. The real reason is the docs
we were asking would have shown that there is billions of dollars, within
the state budget, allocated towards judges retirement by and vested with
banks.
We also were trying to request their campaign contribution statement (all
are public records if you can get them) which will also show financial
conflict of interest for a judge to hear issues coming before them when
banks are a party.
I like how a dear friend pointed out the term "preside", that judges have
already "pre-sided" their judgment and to whom they are truly representing
the best interest of.
By the court not issuing our subpoenas, thereby violating our rights to
obtain evidence in an open case, we have submitted a letter to the judge
stating numerous case laws where the supreme court has ruled in favor of
cases like these.
We've also, submitted claims against both the Clerk of Court and Judge's
bond with the state's insurance company.
Now, what the first hearing will be about (there will be two with Wells
Fargo 2nd team who's handling the Complaint against them):
Hearing 1: *Motion to Vacate Orders Or For Recusal And Withdrawal
>From The Case* - here Don will state several arguments and I will state the
rebuttals, basically its when the Judge cuts Don off I will question
whether the judge is moving forward with its' jurisdiction challenged, or
whatever the issue maybe.
Issue #1 - refusal of the Court to allow subpoenas for itself
concerning the facts we have found suggesting that conflict of interest do
exist obviously are issues very sensitive and potentially damaging to the
Court and County Government)
#2 - that there is prima facie evidence from the
pleadings (of the opposing attorneys) that the style of the name of the
state in their Service of Process is not that designated as the legal name
of the state found in the preamble to the North Carolina constitution and
numerous other constitutional references, and which is legally required for
Service of Process necessary to carry the authority of the Constitutional
government of North Carolina to hear our case
#3 - we also found that the North Carolina general
statues cited in the Court's Summon and in the opposing attorneys' pleadings
(Notice of Foreclosure and other foreclosure documents) as state law had
either no enacting clauses or enabling acts, or lack the necessary
promulgating and implementing regulations passed by the legislature and the
Certification documents required to be filed with the Secretary of STate to
be enforced as law of the STate of North Carolina upon which a Court sitting
under the authority of the judicial branch of the Constitutional government
may make judicial determinations in our case.
#4 - we also find that the Court itself is identified on
Dunn and Bradstreet as a Private Company branch location of Judiciary Courts
Of the State Of North Carolina, were as the Clerk herself is "doing business
as" under her name engaging in commerce, commercially trading and
financially interconnected as pseudo government entities. Evidencing that
the judges are NOT an unbiased judicial court of government the voters
believed they have elected through the sovereign electors on North Carolina
to protect their rights.
#5 - and more importantly we ask that the Court
establishes, on the record, what jurisdiction of government the Court's oath
is to. Which is either North Carolina, the state of the republic, and the
constitutional republic, united States of America OR to some other entity of
the same name that is not the government directly created through the
sovereign electors on the land, on North Carolina.
It has been determined by the Supreme Court that "There has been
created a *fictional
federal 'State* Of North Carolina' *within a state*." And in other federal
law (which we will give copies to the opposing attorney of the laws cited)
that Congress defines various places of exclusive federal jurisdiction as
"States". These places are *not "state of the Union".*
My rebuttals are to make sure it is stated, in the record, that the Court's
is proceeding with its jurisdiction challenged and unestablished and we will
ask the Court to vacate its Orders, dismiss this case from its Court or we
will move to subpoena the documents and persons to testify on these issues
in future action and jurisdiction.
And if after that, we are allowed to proceed, we will argue that we have
sent non-cash payment and the bank has not returned to us any dishonoring of
our payment had they negotiated it for recovery and settlement.
Also, lets not mention our oral argument on whether the opposing attorney's
oath is to uphold the Constitution created through the sovereign electors on
North Carolina or is his oath to the federal area STATE OF NORTH
CAROLINA and the federal [corporation] UNITED STATES created by Congress
functioning under the Emergency War Powers Acts of 1861 and after, whose
protections are not unalienable rights.
By law we have a right to require and know these things before we have to
face opposing counsel in our defense.
And another issue we'll be bring up will be the attorney's licensed to
practice law. Under numerous statues of the Code regulating attorneys,
attorneys needing and having a license to practice law and take the
prescribed oath. We will ask that the opposing counsel produce any evidence
for the Court of a copy of the oath he has taken and any evidence he as
such a license required to practice law in this state court. A Bar Card is
not a license...we have yet failed to see a "REAL" license. Now, he if tries
to produce a bar card as license and of course the court will except it, our
question will be "What jurisdiction of government is it issued under?" That
makes a difference folks!!!
Okay, in a nutshell these are the issues we will try to be heard on...of
course we do expect the judge to trample right over us, evading every issue
on jurisdiction (the most important one) and granting the opposing attorney
the right to foreclose.
Actually, the more the judge violates our rights the better. Because we will
take this to a higher court (if the Lord so move us).
This isn't about the house, its about light exposing darkness and
deception..its about learning to Stand without Fear, a characteristic, I
believe will be necessary for what is to come...But, there must be
wisdom/knowledge which can only come from the Father.
Well, hope that wasn't too long!
Will keep you updated.
Thank you for listening, your prayers and your wisdom/knowledge some have
offered.
Love In Christ,
the family; rascento
