Alberta Canada
SUBPOENA FOR MATERIAL EVIDENCE THAT COVID VIRUS WAS ISOLATED ACCORDING TO SCIENTIFIC METHOD IN HUGE CANADIAN COURT VICTORY DUE TO NO PRESENTMENT OF EVIDENCE DEMANDED PROVES COVID19 IS A HOAX & ALL RESTRICTIONS NOW DROPPED
https://www.bitchute.com/video/0QDx3Zl4MsFs/
No poof. No material evidence. Only presumption through disinformation that the scientific community took proper steps. But, proof the COVID virus was isolated is not available to enter into court records. The judge goes on record that the prosecution failed to prove its case.
PFIZER CONTRACTS EXPOSED - WORLD GOVERNMENTS NOW CONTROLLED BY BIG PHARMA
https://www.bitchute.com/video/E91B9qlTcFEX/
Now to Oregon STATE OF OREGON V LeBaron
MOTION TO QUASH the criminal prosecution from the DHS case. My daughter did her time she cannot be tried twice and imposed another penalty for the subject matter she served time for already.
500 TRILLION LAWSUIT AGAINST FEDERAL GOVERNMENT & MONOPOLISTS
This email serves as Due Notice of CEASE AND DESIST and Due Notice of Injection to the District Attorney’s Office of Portland
Declaration of Restoration
https://www.bitchute.com/video/W4EweJSHK2Cd/?fbclid=IwAR1fxjGk5a9uX3udkI8TWeZPDTN3jeyUy3R7poEzjHYsYoOOy2sDStFvXg4
Kidnapping and endangerment through hearsay exception rule and non judicial commercial lien abused by the District Attorney
DHS cannot lawfully speak for our children since a corporate agent not having a true voice. Corporate is a piece of paper that has no status as Corpus Delicti so no vocal cords or ability to speak. DHS isolate our kids from their natural voice and deny them an affidavit, witness tampering through denying their voice through affidavit written in their own hand, which is required to prosecute criminals, since the DHS is a corporate entity without the status of Corpus Delicti they cannot speak for our nations heirs, and abuse us through Hearsay Exception without redirect on the non judicial commercial lien process stealing, endangering, and silencing our kids leaving them where predators are more likely to rape, murder, or abuse them after removing them from family under a lesser standard of evidence while increasing the risk of harm and reducing the chance of justice after harm in foster care befalls them because the DHS and District Attorneys Office denies the forester victim an affidavit in the presence of family who are the lawful voice of our children, which is required to prosecute criminals, so no prosecution of the pedophiles after family ties are destroyed at the hand of the Deputy District Attorney's Office resulting in protection of pedophiles rather than our children who are safer in the custody of family supported by the prudent parent doctrine that blood ties are deemed to be naturally more protective than strangers and from that it is logical to deduce kin is blood, where totals strangers are not, and with total strangers more likely to abuse our kids this is legalized pillaging or our blood for the purposes of grabbing up our kids making them money concubines for BAR Member’s emoluments forcing a contract to arbitrary liabilities the STATE OF OREGON imposed upon themselves where a simple waiver of liability would absolve them making the forced application for a Walkthrough moot yet it is used to deny family their kin while there is way more dangerous to our kids due to the building codes being enforced. What a con job on a lie that that code keeps kids safe when not applicable as grounds for removal just used to prevent the return of kids to kin.
Municipal Liability Under Section 1983: The Importance of ... https://fedsoc.org/commentary/publications/municipal-liability-under-section-1983-the-importance-of-state-law. Department of Social Serv., 436 U.S. 658 (1978), a municipal government can be held liable under Section 1983 if a plaintiff can demonstrate that a deprivation of a federal right occurred as a result of a "policy" of the local government's legislative body or of those local officials whose acts may fairly be said to be those of the municipality. The state is a corporation, not an injured party with an affidavit. - This applies both with Federal Rules of Evidence and State Rules of Evidence... there must be a competent first-hand witness (a body).
There has to be a real person making the complaint and bringing evidence before the court. Corporations are paper and can't testify. "Manifestly, [such statements] cannot be properly considered by us in the disposition of [a] case." United States v. Lovasco (431 U.S. 783, 97 S. Ct. 2044, 52 L. Ed. 2d 752, (06/09/77
Comments
Post a Comment