In April of 2001, upon attempt to renew my inspection sticker, I decided that I could not, in good conscience and under penalty of perjury, agree to enter into and maintain a contract with a private corporation that was under no obligation to enter into and maintain a contract with me. I did then reason that the State could not impair the obligation of contract by constitutional restriction and to be forced into contract did not only impair that contract to the point of being null it did also force me into involuntary servitude. If the State did not have this power, then the Department of Safety and Corrections, its child, could not be given power, by the State, that it did not possess.

What force was used? I was soon to discover first hand. As the fates would have it, due to a clerical error on my part, my time, converted into federal reserve notes and sent to my master was postmarked the day after my insurance was due to expire, and my insurance was canceled by the master as punishment for my tardiness, and additional time(money) was required before reinstatement was permitted (a fact I did not learn for some 20 days.) I was also told that the slave owner (Insurance Company) did notify the State's militia of my failure to submit. Since the money I had sent was tied up in transit and the additional fees were not available I was not able to effect a reinstatement.

It was at this time that I was stopped by a Jefferson Parish Policeman because my license plate had expired. He then found that my insurance card which , by expiration date, seemed to be valid was indeed invalid. At that time my daughter and I were cast out on the side of the street, with such personal property as we could salvage, and the vehicle and its contents were taken, by force and impounded by the Parish of Jefferson. I did then demand that an inventory be taken of my personal property still left in the vehicle. The policeman did begin to comply but, upon realizing how much personal property there was, did quit and demand the vehicle removed with only a partial inventory and did give the tow truck driver the partial inventory allowing the potential of the tow truck driver removing any item not listed.

It was then and there that I fully comprehended the full nature of the force used. As I was standing on the side of the road knowing that shortly my daughter and I would be stranded, miles from our destination with more personal property than could be carried without a cart. I realized that I was now in walking distance prison.

I did also comprehend a different thought. If the State can so summarily take my vehicle literally from under my seat, in full view of my daughter, and leave us stranded on the side of the road, I must not own that vehicle.

Luckily my daughter had a cellular phone and I was able to contact someone who could pick us up and had sufficient room to carry the personal property I had salvaged and carry us to a destination of safety. I did then seek to retrieve the personal property from the impounded vehicle and was refused all access to the vehicle until it had been released by the Department of Safety and Corrections. I then proceeded to the Kenner office of the Department of Safety and Corrections, Reinstatement office and did pay the fines and penalties required to have my vehicle released. My registration was also revoked at that time, and my license plate seized. I did then travel to the impound lot and did pay the towing and storage fees and my vehicle was returned to me. I do remind the Court that all of these places were separated by great distance, are virtually inaccessible by public transportation, and well beyond the walls of my walking distance prison. This is the offense that was scheduled to be heard on the 16^th day of March 2004.

While awaiting my day in court. I was stopped by one of the Department of Safety and Correction's armed militia known as the State Police and issued a summons to appear in court to answer the charge of failing to wear a safety belt. I was scheduled to appear on the 17^th day of March 2004 the day after the March 16^th 2004 appearance.

In the interest of completeness, all promises to appear in court have been obtained by threat of arrest. In all cases I had asked what would happen if I do not sign this paper and in all cases I was told that I would be immediately taken to jail.

It was in March of 2004, while researching my position for my appearance in court, that I discovered the fraud that had been perpetrated on me. I did appear in court on the day specified and did deny the jurisdiction of the court at that instance. I did try to file paper with my position clearly delineated and was refused. I did inform the court, as best I could as the information was new to me, that I denied the jurisdiction of the court because I had found the cesspool from which the court's power flowed, and it was clearly unconstitutional. I did try to inform the court that if the legislation was unconstitutional so were my license and registration, hence, there were no contracts to be adjudicated. I did also try to inform the court that as a Citizen of the State I was entitled to better than to be dragged into court on only an information to fight an infamous crime. Hence, this court had no jurisdiction.

I had discovered that as a Citizen of the State of Louisiana I had rights under the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and as a territorial citizen I had none. I did find that I had a unalienable right to pursue happiness given me by my Creator, and that incumbent in that right was my Right to Travel to wherever my happiness may be. It is my right and my birthright and I am DEMANDING it.

Having discovered the fraud perpetrated upon me, I did not sit idly by. I have allowed my drivers license to expire as in under 20 days from the March court dates it was scheduled to expire. I did have the registration on the vehicle canceled and did turn in the license plate. I did renounce my social security number as the fraud that it was and I am in a search for any other such documents that would impair my claim as a Citizen of the State of Louisiana and to denounce it as the fraud that it is. I have never and will never knowingly give up my unalienable rights. Freedom is also a tenant of my religion.

Having attempted to inform the judge of my position, and after handing him the paper I had tried to file and was refused, he did hand the paper back to me and did say that he was not going to, on his own motion, move this case into a constitutional court. Since I was challenging the court's jurisdiction, I could not motion and since I was the defendant I assumed that he was talking to a district attorney on whose motion it would have to come. That the district attorney would have to motion this into the correct court.

The Judge did then inform me that this was not a constitutional court. I did take that to mean that he did agree with me. That I was a Constitutional Citizen entitled to a Constitutional proceeding and hence, this court had no jurisdiction.

I did leave the court with the impression that the Judge had ruled that he had no jurisdiction and that if the State did wish to pursue this matter further it would have to motion me into a different court. I did further believe, incorrectly it would seem, that the correct court would be the 24^th Judicial District Court and did ask the Judge that question to which I received only a shrug and did take that to mean that, since he had no jurisdiction, he was simply refusing to discuss the matter. I have since learned that in those cases where the State is a party the Supreme Court of the United States shall have original jurisdiction. So says the Constitution of the United States in Article III, Section 2.

I feel obligated to state that these fact concerning my appearance in this court in March of 2004 are remembrances that are almost 2 years old. I do remember trying to make a audio recording of the proceedings as the quickest and surest way to make notes on the proceeding while also defending myself. I was informed that I could not take notes using the same modern conveniences used by the court reporter. I was to be restricted to the 19^th century technology and could only use pen and paper to take notes. I guess that I should be thankful that they did not arbitrarily restrict me to stone age technology and only allow notes taken on stone tablets with chisels. However I do believe that the truth of my words will be confirmed by the court reporter's record, if it still exists. To my knowledge I left that court room with no future date set for appearance.

Imagine my surprise when I learned that an attachment had been levied against me by a court that has never, to this day, ever refuted my challenge of jurisdiction as is their burden. The court, knowing of my status as State Citizen, should have known that a duly obtained warrant was required for this citizen. I was arrested, my vehicle and all of its contents (my private property) was taken without inventory (see Internal Affairs of the Jefferson parish police department file numbers 20040112 and 20061209), or due process of law. I was taken to the Gretna detention facility where I was beaten, threatened, tortured, extorted, held incognito, denied counsel and the opportunity to compose writs for about 14 hours until I could effect my escape (see Internal Affairs of the Jefferson parish police department file number 20061209.) The 20061209 number is my best information. Two statements have been submitted to Lt. Toni Ulmer at Internal Affairs on the 27^th day of December, 2006 at approximately 1:30 pm. This being my first opportunity to formally complain since Internal Affairs had been closed from December 23rd through 26^th, 2006.

In point of fact, I was quite upset believing that the court had ruled that it had no jurisdiction. This meant that my only avenue into court was to demand the Certificate of Origin from the Department of Safety and Corrections and sue if my demand was refused.

I did appear on the 28^th day of December in First Parish Court after being told by the Clerk of Court that I would have to talk to the Judge about filing papers in this action. I did stand and challenge the jurisdiction of the court.

I tried to file my Notice and Demand for Dismissal for Want of Jurisdiction, and it was refused because it had no order attached. I had intended the Notice and Demand to be a simple statement of my objection. I could have simply read into the record all four pages, however I would then have no record that showed clearly that what I had intended to say was what I actually said, as I am not allowed to record voice. I did expect that the prosecuting attorney would have attempted to prove jurisdiction, and contrary to my argument the judge would have ruled that the court did have jurisdiction. A final decision that I could appeal. I told the Judge that I had a pen and a copy for the District Attorney and was ready to serve the District Attorney as soon as I could write in an order. I was refused, by the Judge, the opportunity to hand write an order. I then realized why the Judge would not allow me to hand write and order and serve the District Attorney. There was no District Attorney present. The court was improperly set. However, there being no prosecuting attorney in the room, the judge simply ignored my challenge of jurisdiction and did, contrary to the evidence that I told him, orally and in my Notice and Demand for Dismissal for Want of Jurisdiction, was in the sole possession of the Court Reporter, as I am not allowed to record voice as she is, he, on his own violation, did prosecute and rule that I was guilty of contempt for not showing up in court while in full knowledge that evidence existed that clearly, I believe, though I do not have a recording and it is a two year old memory, would have exonerated me. The Judge did then enter a plea of not guilty for the Defendant against the Defendant's objection. A plea can not be entered until the jurisdictional question is answered.

I was ordered to pay a contempt fine for failure to appear on March 16, 2004 case number F1523230 and failure to appear for case number F1525159. I did inform the Judge, in this improperly set court, that I had appeared on March 16, 2004 and that the court reporter's own records could verify the truth of my statements and that I had left that court believing that the case had been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and hence an appearance a few days later with the same arguments would have been yielded the same result. There was no proof that I had been in contempt of court. It was a contested issue of fact, with the State controlling and refusing to bring forth, the very evidence that would have exonerated me. I was also told, by the Judge, that if I kept defending myself against these injustices that I would be put in jail for contempt. A threat that I took seriously having seen the Judge tell a woman that she was going to jail for a few days for daring to argue that a hurricane, flood, forced evacuation to another State and closure of the court was sufficient justification to miss a court date, and send her to the punish bench to await removal to jail. Again, if I had been allowed to use modern technology in order to take notes, I would have had a record of the conversation with which to prove my innocence of the contempt charges. I was also informed that I would have to appear, yet again, in this court in thirty days to beg an extension of time to pay if I did not pay the illegal contempt charges before then.

At one point, I was sent to the punish bench to sit with the poor woman awaiting jail while the prosecuting judge dispensed with less contentious slaves. I took this to mean that the prosecuting judge was making sure that I understood that I was just a hair's breath from joining her in a smaller prison. I had also thought that it might be a delaying tactic to give the prosecuting attorney a chance to make an appearance, but since on one showed claiming that title, I guess I was wrong on that thought.

I did also ask if all three informations could be combined because the same defense is to be used on all three. This was also denied and I was ordered to submit a challenge of jurisdiction for each of the offenses. I did remind the judge that I was still incarcerated in walking distance prison and bus service is almost nonexistent in an effort to show that this would be an extreme hardship, but I was silenced and being still under threat of incarceration in a smaller prison, I objected as much as I dared. It is also to be noted that the Summons labeled B 8484588 P is not due for arraignment until the 23^rd day of January, 2007. I had instructed the Clerk of Court to have that record pulled and combined as they are all related being sins of omission contesting an unconstitutional and invalid lien. I did also ask the Clerk of Court to pull the two Louisiana Uniform Traffic Tickets and Complaints numbered JP-R 44686 and JP-R 44687 and combine these also and for the same reason. I was told that these complaints could not be combined as the paper work had not reached them, this paperwork being only seven days old. Thank God the government is so slow. In my current state of incarceration in walking distance jail, my resources would not allow for five copies in triplicate as I only have one ream of legal size paper and a dwindling supply of ink.

However, these two Louisiana Uniform Traffic Tickets and Complaints numbered JP-R 44686 and JP-R 44687 issued on the 21^st day of December, 2006 were incident to the seizure of my vehicle and personal property therein, without inventory, my arrest justified by an attachment that should never have been issued and the beginning of my confinement in walking distance prison, after my escape from the Gretna detention facility. These two complaints are scheduled for arraignment in February, 2007 the original writing says the 22^nd day and there is now an inked 15 in that position that I believe was written in by the Clerk of First Parish Court when trying to pull the record. The inclusion of these two informations are essential in the Defendant's ability to challenge his illegal imprisonment in walking distance prison, to regain custody of his property from the Department of Safety and Corrections and the Parish of Jefferson without having to institute a separate proceeding, in an appropriate court, suing the State of Louisiana as lien holder, Department of Safety and Corrections as administrator of the State's property, the Jefferson Parish Police Department and its agents for the recovery of my property and freedom from my walking distance jail. Again all five informations are charges of sins of omission based on a challenge of an unconstitutional and invalid lien.

There can be no doubt that I can not receive a fair and impartial trial in First Parish Court. I have been to two arraignments in an improperly set court. I have, at every instance, challenged the jurisdiction of the court, a challenge that has, to this day, never been refuted, nor proof of jurisdiction offered, nor ruling made. I have been ordered, by the judge, to submit my statement in the form of a motion in triplicate and for each case, hence six extra copies whose only difference will be the number of the alleged offense, despite my protest that this will impose upon this Defendant an unusually harsh burden. I have been convicted of contempt despite evidence to the contrary in the Court's exclusive possession. I have been attached, incarcerated, tortured, beaten, held incognito, denied right to counsel, paper and pen to write writs and extorted. I have, without charge, trial or conviction, been incarcerated in this walking distance prison. I have had my vehicle and my personal property therein taken, without inventory or due process of law and held, at my expense, and have been told by Brandy Cunningham of the Department of Safety and Corrections that they will not release my property until I have paid homage to the Overseer and insurance industry while storage charges still accrue. I have been threatened with a more restrictive jail, and torture chamber, for the heinous crime of demanding my rights. The very sustenance of the officers of that court depends on my arguments being declared invalid.