Yusef El’s Top 10 Documents

15 comments on “Yusef El’s Top 10 Documents”

1. I talked to my friend who is bailswomen, who to me that putting my name on the paper work about bonds would be seen as
   Trying to act like a bail bondsman. When I not a bail bondsmen. But you can ask for the paper work about the bonds in your docket court case.

   Reply

   1. Can you type that in clear English please.

      Reply

2. Hello Yusef, my name is Shawn Ingram, and I highly appreciate what you are doing and has helped me out very much through your knowledge of this information. I recently read and downloaded the Using Your Redemption (pdf.file), and when I got to the example template of the “Bond” I was struggling with the green insert concerning . What should I put there? Is it the SSN#, the EIN#, the UCC Trust Account , or the complaint number on the administrative court document? Thank you very much.

   Reply

   1. Yusef does not manage this page. Try to contact him here.

      Reply

3. I’d like a contact (not the one noted above) for Yusef & Jean Keating. Is there someone who can assist me with a personal issue? PLEASE!

   Reply

4. Jean I need to reach you regarding my brother’s case that you are handling. Kelly

   Reply

   1. Jean does not manage this page.

      Reply

5. MANDATORY NOTICE OF CLAIMANT’S RIGHT TO COURT WITHOUT “FEES”

   As found in: New York ex rel. Bank of Commerce v. Commissioner of Taxes for City and
   County of New York, 2 Black 620 (1863)

   Please take mandatory notice (Federal Rules of Evidence 201(d)) that Plaintiff has a lawful right
   to proceed without cost, based upon the following law:

   The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a natural individual entitled to relief is entitled to free
   access to its judicial tribunals and public offices in every State in the Union . Crandell v. Nevada,
   6 Wall 35).

   And as stated by the United States Department of the Treasury 1789, the presenter made not be
   charged fees, or costs for the lawful and constitutionally secured right to petition for redress in
   matters in which he is entitled to relief, as it appears that the filing fee rule was originally
   implemented for fictions and subjects of the State and cannot not be applied to the presenter as
   he is not a collective entity, that he is a sentient self-aware, competent, responsible, adult who is
   a natural living man and entitled to relief (Hale v. Henkel)( 201 U.S. 43), and under international
   laws as well as the laws of humanity.

   Any coupons presented by the presenter is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States of America, is legal tender for all obligations associated with this matter.

   Declaration of “valuables”.

   It is determined that replacements, in accordance with the procedure established
   under section 3 of the Government Losses in Shipment Act (50 Stat. 479, as amended;

   5 U.S.C. 134b), of the articles or things or representatives of value enumerated
   and referred to in this section would be in the public interest; accordingly, they
   are hereby declared to be “valuables” within the meaning of the act.

   a) Money of the United States and foreign countries. Currency, included mutilated
   currency and canceled currency, coins, including uncurrent coins, and specie.

   b) Securities and other instruments or documents, private and public.

   ABSTRACTS OF TITLE.ASSIGNMENTS.BILLS.BONDS.CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT.CERTIFICATES
   OF INDEBTEDNESS.CHECKS, DRAFTS AND MONEY
   ORDERS.COUPONS.DEBENTURES.DEEDS.EQUIPMENT TRUST
   CERTIFICATES.MORTGAGES.NOTES.STAMPS, INCLUDING POSTAGE, REVENUE, LICENSE, FOOD
   ORDER AND PUBLIC DEBT.STAMPED ENVELOPES AND POSTAL CARDS.STOCK CERTIFICATES.TRUST
   RECEIPTS.VOTING TRUST RECEIPTS.WAREHOUSE RECEIPTS.WARRANTS.

   EXEMPTION FROM COURT FEES
   CLAIMANT’S EXEMPTION FROM FEES
   Claimant has no record or evidence that any fees, court costs, penalties, or any other financial medium is required to be paid, or forfeited, to any court or policing agency without the United States and within any state of the Union of States.
   ADMIT – Libellee(s) listed within this document admit to the guilt of tort and the breaching of contracts against Claimant under fictional falsity, a cloak to disguise a collateral undertaking, and malicious vexation by legal process to Claimant’s pain and injury.
   The US Supreme Court has ruled that a natural individual entitled to relief is “entitled to free access….. to its judicial tribunals and public offices in every State in the Union” (2 Black 620; see also: Crandell vs. Nevada, 6 Wall 35). Plaintiff should not be charged fees or costs for the lawful and constitutional right to petition this court in this matter in which he is entitled to relief, as it appears that the filing fee rule was originally implemented for fictions and subjects of government, and should not be applied to the Plaintiff who is a natural individual and entitled to relief (Hale vs. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43).

   “The Fee is the statutory creature moving within the fictional falsity as if it is presumed to be standing as the amortized obligation”. Ryan v Motor Credit Company, 130 J.J. Eq. 531, 23 A.2d
   607, 621
   This is the fiction of law, wherein the fictional falsities are perfected by devious means. Read Ballentine’s Law Dictionary.
   Fiction. Something is presumed to be true, which is false.
   The alleged determination of “commitment cost” of $ __100__(?)_ for alleged traffic tickets or court costs, fees, or penalties requires execution as a “cloak to disguise a collateral undertaking” in U.S. Funds and is “malicious vexation by legal process” under the disguise/pretense of a “lawful” government to enforce the unwritten Master – Slave relationship.
   “Although probable cause may not be inferred from malice, malice may be inferred from lack of probable cause.” Pauley v. Hall335 N. W. 2d 197, 124 Mich App 255.

   “Malice is a state of mind and an essential element of action for malicious prosecution and is to be found by jury from case, and want of probable cause is the other element of action for malicious prosecution which must be proved by plaintiff.” Lopez v. Modisitt 488 F. Supp 119 D. C. 1980.
   “The laws of congress in respect to those matters do not extend into the territorial limits of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national government.” CAHA v. U.S., 152 U.S. 211 (1894)

   See the whole decision:

   ***
   Forma pauperis is as the pauper, allowing for a waiver of all fees and prepayment of costs.pro per or pro persona – For one’s own person; on one’s own behalf -Sometimes shortened to pro perpro se- For one’s own person; on one’s own behalf ; without a lawyer-also termed pro persona sui juris- of one’s own right; independent 1. of full age and capacity 2. possessing full social and civil rights. *SUI JURIS* One who has all the rights to which a freemen is entitled; one who is not under the power of another, as a slave, a minor, and the like. To make a valid contract, a person must, in general, be sui juris. Every one of full age is presumed to be sui juris.
   THERE IS NO MONEY; The structure and guidelines for payment of Court filing fees and fees for service of process is set by the State, however, Article 1, Section 10 of the Constitution of the United States says “No state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts.” And, according to the United States Supreme Court in Hagar v. Rec. Dist. #108, 111 U.S. 701, “The Acts of Congress making Notes a legal tender do not apply to involuntary contributions in the nature of taxes or assessments exacted under State laws…”
   Therefore, non-redeemable Federal Reserve Notes or negotiable instruments drawn on accounts kept in Federal Reserve Notes are not legal tender for States to demand or receive in the nature of taxes or involuntary payment of assessments exacted under State laws such as the involuntary assessed payment of a service or filing fee of the Court mandated under State law.
   Federal statutes indicate that taxes assessed or levied in anything other than legal tender are unlawful, to wit:
   Title 31, United States Code, Section 3124 states in part:
   Exemption form taxation
   (a) Stocks and obligations of the United States Government are exempt from taxation by a State or political subdivision of a State. The exemption applies to each form of taxation that would require the obligation, the interest on the obligation, or both, to be considered in computing a tax….
   Title 18, United States Code, Section 8 states:
   Section 8. Obligation or other security of the United States defined:
   The term “obligation or other security of the United States” includes all bonds, certificates of indebtedness, national bank currency, Federal Reserve notes, Federal Reserve bank notes, coupons, United States notes, Treasury notes, gold certificates, silver certificates, fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or upon authorized officers of the United States, stamps and other representatives of value of whatever denomination, issued.
   It is clear that the State of IOWA computes excise taxes, business occupation or privilege taxes, registration fees, motor vehicle excise taxes, property taxes, fines, fees, penalties, assessments, child support, etc., in terms of Federal Reserve notes, since there is no other medium for calculation of such tax available for the State. It is clear that Federal Reserve Notes are “obligations” of the United States and are “debt instruments.” It is also clear that the U.S., i.e., United States is defined as merely a federal municipal corporation on the authority of 28 USC 3002(15). It is clear that 31 USC 3124 applies to a political subdivision of a State (Des Moines County), and that Federal Reserve Notes are exempt from taxation and that this exemption applies to each form of taxation which uses Federal Reserve Notes to compute the tax. Thus, it appears that excise or property taxes computed and levied in terms of Federal Reserve Notes are in violation of federal law.
   In 1983, in the case of American Bank and Trust Co., et al v. Dallas County et al., 483 U.S. 855 (Supreme Court Reports, Lawyers edition, page 3369), Justice Blackmun, writing the opinion, clearly lays out the logic and argument to support the above facts. Justice Blackmun begins by showing that prior to 1959 there was some ambiguity in the law, but in that year Congress amended Rev. Stat. Sec. 3701, 31 U.S. 742 by adding the sentence, “This exemption extends to every form of taxation that would require that either the obligation or the interest thereon, or both, be considered, directly or indirectly, in the computation of the tax.”
   The issue in this particular case was whether this amendment extended to state taxes on bank shares. The court ruled that it did. In his supreme court opinion Blackmun writes: “Under the plain language of the 1959 amendment, however, that tax is barred, regardless of its form if federal obligation must be considered, either directly or indirectly, in computing the tax. Giving the words of amended section 3701 their ordinary meaning, there can be no question that federal obligation were considered in computing the bank shares tax at issue here.” He further argues that, since Congress expressly excluded franchise, estate and inheritance taxes from the exemption,
   “…congress must have believed that such taxes required federal obligation to be considered, directly or indirectly, in the computation of the tax; otherwise the specific exemption of these taxes would have been superfluous, …..”
   It seems clear that the same argument applies to other property valued in terms of “obligations of the United States”. And, since Federal Reserve Notes are defined by law, Title 18 USC 8 to be “obligations of the United States,” and since Motor Vehicle Excise Taxes, Business Occupation or Privilege Taxes, and/or Retail Sales Taxes were not expressly excluded from this statute, 31 USC 3124, it follows that this State must follow and apply this federal law to Motor Vehicle Excise Taxes, Business Occupation or Privilege Taxes, and/or Retail Sales Taxes as well.
   Can any “levying of fines, fees, court costs, penalties, child support, Motor Vehicle Excise Taxes, Business Occupation or Privilege Taxes, and/or Retail Sales Taxes comply with Title 31 USC 3124?
   We have heard of “confusion of faces” from ancient texts, but I call your attention to “confusion of languages” in everyday use within the corporate fictional legislative tribunals commonly referred to as “judicial courts”, observe the following:
   “The answer is the law, wherein the litigant shall substantiate the Debt Collector is attempting to dispute the nothing as if it were the factual default of a statutory obligation, wherein fees, may be defined as interest.
   “The Fee is the statutory creature moving within the fictional falsity as if it is presumed to be standing as the amortized obligation“. Ryan v Motor Credit Company, 130 J.J. Eq. 531, 23 A.2d 607, 621
   …can any court with its alleged [judicial] officers (sic) who are in fact and law merely Administrative Clerks in Chemarin’s “black robes of treason”, pretending to be judicial officers, who are in fact and law “legislative officers – magistrates”, lawfully attempt to coerce me into becoming a tort-feasor as against the Constitution of 1791?
   bank bills are not money

   Reply

6. Very good information we should have taught this when we were born in our schooling why did they keep it a secret so long we could have lived a beautiful life not too late l b bv go

   Reply

7. If there is anyone out there who needs assistance with a court case contact me at matthewliverpool1123@gmail.com…I will come to any city…..Im tired of seeing halfway made statements Im tired of people withholding information when people are desperate for a remedy and they just act as if they forgot where they were when they were looking for help and answers…my time is very valuable and my energy definitely needs to be compensated/donations……

   Reply

   1. Hey good friend incarcerated in FL can we get him out?

      Reply

   2. Hi Matthew

      Can you provide me with a little assistance regarding a court case in UK?

      Reply

8. Aloha! I am so appreciative of the time, deffort and information you are sharing. In court the “judge” entered a plea of “no guilty” for me, I objected said, only I can enter… are you practicing law from …and asked if he was making a judicial determination that I was ” not guilty”… where can I find the “notice of default”? I am searching like crazy… Nothing is what i am finding? If thank you!

   Reply

9. peace and blessings to you, I have been trying to figure out which tax form I should place my 1099’s on for the return and where to place the amounts on the proper tax form, please help!!!

   Reply

10. GOOD

    Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.