In civil court cases, they can compel you to testify, however George Gordon told me this:
When the judge asks you to swear in, tell them you can't. Tell them you cannot tell the truth because Romans 3:4 says that only God is true, and every man is a liar, and unless the judge can rewrite the Bible there's absolutely no way to reach the truth on this matter.
George Gordon. There's a name I haven't heard in almost 30 years. Goes along with Nat Denman out of Massachusetts. He's the nuclear engineer that taught me everything I know about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, how to file Federal lawsuits, Federal removals, appeals, and how to do legal research. That goes back to the late 1980s when I met him at a Fathers' Rights conference in Portland, Oregon. As Nat said: "This legal stuff ain't rocket science. A 9th grader could write better briefs and papers than most lawyers". He should know. He was a nuclear engineer. He's the only guy I know that sued a judge under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for violating his rights and won $50,000 from the judge personally. It's a published case. They tried to change the law under Title 42 Section 1983 to shield judges from suit and pay attorneys' fees. They changed part.
Ever have a family court judge (or any other judge) tell you that the Constitution doesn't apply in his/her courtroom. Stand up and object: "I object to that statement judge. Court transcriber, please play back what the Judge just said about the Constitution doesn't apply in his/her courtroom. Judge, You took a Constitutional Oath of Office to Uphold, Support & Defend the U.S. Constitution and Constitution of the State. By saying that the Constitution doesn't apply in your courtroom, you just revoked your Oath of Office, you're acting in complete absence of ALL jurisdiction, and you committed FELONY OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT. I want to halt these proceedings and go down to the Prosecutor's office (or call the State Attorney General's Office) and have them appear in Court ASAP to hear you answer to the FELONY!!!!!" (By saying this, you've trapped the words on the transcript). Say also, "I want the court transcriber or clerk to immediately print out a copy of the transcription of this hearing."
And, then there's Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886). Boyd v. United States, decided in 1886, is a landmark Supreme Court case that established a strong link between the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, specifically regarding the protection of privacy and against self-incrimination. The case involved a government request for business invoices, which the Court deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination.
Background:
The case arose when the government sought to obtain invoices from merchants, George and Edward Boyd, to prove they had not paid import duties on plate glass.
Constitutional Issues:
Intimate Relation between Amendments: The Court recognized an "intimate relation" between the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, stating that the government cannot indirectly compel self-incrimination by forcing someone to produce incriminating documents.
Protection of Private Papers: The ruling established that the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures extends to the compelled production of private papers.
"Mere Evidence" Rule: The case also set a precedent for the "mere evidence" rule, which limits the
government's ability to seize property that is not contraband or stolen goods but merely evidence of a crime.
Significance:
Boyd v. United States is a foundational case for understanding the scope of privacy rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. It laid the groundwork for the exclusionary rule, which prevents illegally obtained evidence from being used in court.
In civil court cases, they can compel you to testify, however George Gordon told me this:
When the judge asks you to swear in, tell them you can't. Tell them you cannot tell the truth because Romans 3:4 says that only God is true, and every man is a liar, and unless the judge can rewrite the Bible there's absolutely no way to reach the truth on this matter.
George Gordon. There's a name I haven't heard in almost 30 years. Goes along with Nat Denman out of Massachusetts. He's the nuclear engineer that taught me everything I know about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, how to file Federal lawsuits, Federal removals, appeals, and how to do legal research. That goes back to the late 1980s when I met him at a Fathers' Rights conference in Portland, Oregon. As Nat said: "This legal stuff ain't rocket science. A 9th grader could write better briefs and papers than most lawyers". He should know. He was a nuclear engineer. He's the only guy I know that sued a judge under 42 U.S.C. §1983 for violating his rights and won $50,000 from the judge personally. It's a published case. They tried to change the law under Title 42 Section 1983 to shield judges from suit and pay attorneys' fees. They changed part.
Ever have a family court judge (or any other judge) tell you that the Constitution doesn't apply in his/her courtroom. Stand up and object: "I object to that statement judge. Court transcriber, please play back what the Judge just said about the Constitution doesn't apply in his/her courtroom. Judge, You took a Constitutional Oath of Office to Uphold, Support & Defend the U.S. Constitution and Constitution of the State. By saying that the Constitution doesn't apply in your courtroom, you just revoked your Oath of Office, you're acting in complete absence of ALL jurisdiction, and you committed FELONY OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT. I want to halt these proceedings and go down to the Prosecutor's office (or call the State Attorney General's Office) and have them appear in Court ASAP to hear you answer to the FELONY!!!!!" (By saying this, you've trapped the words on the transcript). Say also, "I want the court transcriber or clerk to immediately print out a copy of the transcription of this hearing."
And, then there's Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 (1886). Boyd v. United States, decided in 1886, is a landmark Supreme Court case that established a strong link between the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, specifically regarding the protection of privacy and against self-incrimination. The case involved a government request for business invoices, which the Court deemed a violation of the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures and the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination.
Background:
The case arose when the government sought to obtain invoices from merchants, George and Edward Boyd, to prove they had not paid import duties on plate glass.
Constitutional Issues:
Intimate Relation between Amendments: The Court recognized an "intimate relation" between the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, stating that the government cannot indirectly compel self-incrimination by forcing someone to produce incriminating documents.
Protection of Private Papers: The ruling established that the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures extends to the compelled production of private papers.
"Mere Evidence" Rule: The case also set a precedent for the "mere evidence" rule, which limits the
government's ability to seize property that is not contraband or stolen goods but merely evidence of a crime.
Significance:
Boyd v. United States is a foundational case for understanding the scope of privacy rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments. It laid the groundwork for the exclusionary rule, which prevents illegally obtained evidence from being used in court.
Oh sheeeeeeit. 👏👏👏👏👏👏