Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

(For Frank ‘Austin’ England III) 

(Blog Masters Note:   All past posts are now located in a drop-down under comments.  This post starts off as ‘pure’ Austin and ends in his style.)

 

STATUTE FRAUD

Step 1: Fraud in the Inducement: “… is intended to and which does cause one to execute an instrument, or make an agreement… The misrepresentation involved does not mislead one as the paper he signs but rather misleads as to the true facts of a situation, and the false impression it causes is a basis of a decision to sign or render a judgment”.
Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.

Step 2: Fraud in Fact by Deceit (Obfuscation and Denial) and Theft:

• “ACTUAL FRAUD. Deceit. Concealing something or making a false representation with an evil intent [scanter] when it causes injury to another…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Fraud’.

“THE TORT OF FRAUDULENT DECEIT… The elements of actionable deceit are: A false representation of a material fact made with knowledge of its falsity, or recklessly, or without reasonable grounds for believing its truth, and with intent to induce reliance thereon, on which plaintiff justifiably relies on his injury…”. Source: Steven H. Gifis, ‘Law Dictionary’, 5th Edition, Happauge: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc., 2003, s.v.: ‘Deceit’.

Step 3: Theft by Deception and Fraudulent Conveyance:

THEFT BY DECEPTION:

• “FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENTThe hiding or suppression of a material fact or circumstance which the party is legally or morally bound to disclose…”.

“The test of whether failure to disclose material facts constitutes fraud is the existence of a duty, legal or equitable, arising from the relation of the parties: failure to disclose a material fact with intent to mislead or defraud under such circumstances being equivalent to an actual ‘fraudulent concealment’…”.

To suspend running of limitations, it means the employment of artifice, planned to prevent inquiry or escape investigation and mislead or hinder acquirement of information disclosing a right of action, and acts relied on must be of an affirmative character and fraudulent…”.

Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Concealment’.

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE:

• “FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE… A conveyance or transfer of property, the object of which is to defraud a creditor, or hinder or delay him, or to put such property beyond his reach…”.

• “Conveyance made with intent to avoid some duty or debt due by or incumbent or person (entity) making transfer…”.

Source: Black, Henry Campbell, M.A., ‘Black’s Law Dictionary’, Revised 4th Edition, St Paul: West Publishing Company, 1968, s.v. ‘Fraudulent Conveyance’.

(Blog Masters Note: This is the portion that is not Frank ‘Austin England III’s here is the Link I will fill in portions below, as I can.)

U.S. SECURITIES REGULATIONS OF WHICH INSTITUTIONS
HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE IN BREACH [SEE REPORTS]:

• NASD Rule 3120 et al.
• NASD Rule 2330, et al
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 3040
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and IM-2110-1
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and SEC Rule 15c3-1
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 3110
• SEC Rules 17a-3 and 17a-4
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and Procedural Rule 8210
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and 2330 and IM-2330
• NASD Conduct Rules 2110 and IM-2110-5
• NASD Systems and Programme Rules 6950 through 6957
• 97-13 Bank Secrecy Act, Recordkeeping Rule for funds transfers and transmittals of funds, et al.

U.S. LAWS ROUTINELY BREACHED BY THE CRIMINAL OPERATIVES AND INSTITUTIONS:

• Annunzio-Wylie Anti- Money Laundering Act
Anti-Drug Abuse Act
• Applicable international money laundering restrictions
Bank Secrecy Act
• Crimes, General Provisions, Accessory After the Fact [Title 18, USC]
Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act
Economic Espionage Act
Hobbs Act
Imparting or Conveying False Information
Maloney Act
Misprison of Felony [Title 18, USC] (1)
Money-Laundering Control Act
Money-Laundering Supression Act
Organized Crime Control Act of 1970
• Perpetration of repeated egregious felonies by State and Federal public employees and their Departments and agencies, which are co-responsible with the said employees for ONGOING illegal and criminal actions, to sustain fraudulent operations and crimes in order to cover up criminalist activities and High Crimes and Misdemeanours by present and former holders of high office under the United States
• Provisions pertaining to private business transactions being protected under both private and criminal penalties [H.R. 3723]
• Provisions prohibiting the bribing of foreign officials [F.I.S.A.]
• Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (R.I.C.O.)
• Securities Act 1933
• Securities Act 1934
Terrorism Prevention Act
• Treason legislation, especially in time of war.

• Please be advised that the Editor of International Currency Review and associated intelligence services cannot enter into email correspondence related to this or to any of the earlier reports.

We are a private intelligence publishing house and have no connections to any outside parties including intelligence agencies. The word ‘intelligence’ on this website and in all our marketing material is used for marketing/sales purposes only and has no other connotations whatsoever: see ‘About Us’ on the red panels under the Notes on the Editor, Christopher Story FRSA, who has been solely and exclusively engaged as an investigative journalist, Editor, Author and private financial and current affairs Publisher since 1963 and is not and never has been an agent for a foreign power, suggestions to the contrary being actionable for libel in the English Court.

BACKGROUND re STATUTORY FRAUD

Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901).” (Purportedly decided if the constitution applies to U.S. territories.  In actuality, unleashed the great fraud of unlimited statutory power misapplied throughout the continental united States of America.  Dissenting opinion of Justice Marshall Harlan.  “…two national governments, one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions, the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to…a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will result…We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism…It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence.”  In other words, a genuine de jure united States of America congress is always bound to enact laws within the jurisdiction of the constitution.  He held to the obvious truth that congress does not exist, let alone have powers, outside the constitution.  Harlan said, “This nation is under the control of a written constitution, the supreme law of the land and the only source of the powers which our government, or any branch or officer of it, may exert at any time or at any place.”)

– Section 802, Patriot Act.  (Defining the People as terrorists.  Defining terrorism as a maritime event.  Excluding private meetings on the land from terrorism:  “(5) the term `domestic terrorism’ means activities that–(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended– (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and  (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”) 

Constitution of the State of Oregon Article I,Section 10 (1857) (Administration of justice) (No court shall be secret, but justice shall be administered, openly and without purchase, completely and without delay, and every man shall have remedy by due course of law for injury done him in his person, property, or reputation.);

New York Times v. Alberto Gonzales, 04 Civ. 7677 (RWS) (USDC S.Dist. N.Y. 02/24/2005) (These motions present competing considerations of the role of secrecy in our society. Secrecy may well be seen as the enemy of freedom when it conceals facts important to public understanding.2 [2] “Everything secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity.” John Emerich Edward Dalberg, Lord Acton, Letter of Jan. 23, 1861, in Lord Acton and his Circle 166 (Abbot Gasquet ed., 1906);

“The very word ‘secrecy’ is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.”

Nam: The reason of contrary things is contrary {Contrariorum contraia est ratio};

The law is so written {Ita lex scripta est};

Nothing against reason is lawful {Nihil quod est contra rationem est licitum; Coke, Litt. 97};

Nothing that is inconvenient is lawful {Nihil quod est inconveniens est licitum};

That which is inconvenient or against reason is not permissible in law {Quod est inconveniens aut contra rationem non permissum est in lege};

The thing speaks for itself {Res ipsa loquitur};

RIGHT TO ASSERT STANDING

Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 74, 26 S.Ct. 370, 50 L.Ed. 652 (1906) (The individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his own business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the state or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights. On the other hand, the corporation is a creature of the state. It is presumed to be incorporated for the benefit of the public. It receives certain special privileges and franchises, and holds them subject to the laws of the state and the limitations of its charter. Its powers are limited by law. It can make no contract not authorized by its charter. Its rights to act as a corporation are only preserved to it so long as it obeys the laws of its creation. There is a reserved right in the legislature to investigate its contracts and find out whether it has exceeded its power.) aff’d. Wilson v. United States, 221 U.S. 361, 31 S.Ct. 538, 55 L.Ed. 771 (1911).

Advertisements