Unveiling the Shocking Presumptions in Roman Courts
Unveiling the Shocking Presumptions in Roman Courts
Introduction
In a legal system shrouded in mystery, the Roman Courts operate under a veil of presumptions asserted by private Bar Guilds. These presumptions stand as unquestioned truths unless openly challenged, granting immense power to the legal profession while potentially undermining the rights of individuals. Explore the alarming presumptions that govern these courts and learn how to navigate this opaque system.
The Presumptive Power of Bar Guilds
Rather than adhering to a codified set of laws, Roman Courts rely on a series of presumptions put forth by private Bar Guilds – essentially legal professional associations. These presumptions govern various aspects of legal proceedings, from the nature of evidence to the rights of individuals involved. Unless explicitly rebutted, they carry the weight of law, creating a system heavily favored towards the Bar Guilds and their members.
The Twelve Presumptions Unveiled
1. Public Record: Legal matters are presumed private Bar Guild affairs unless stated otherwise.
2. Public Service: Bar Guild members are presumed to act in public service roles.
3. Public Oath: Bar Guild members are presumed to act under a public oath, contradicting their Guild oath.
4. Immunity: Bar Guild members are presumed immune from prosecution for their actions.
5. Summons: Accepting a summons presumes consent to being treated as property.
6. Custody: Individuals can be presumed lawfully held in custody as property.
7. Court of Guardians: The court presumes authority over individuals as legal minors.
8. Court of Trustees: The court presumes to act as a trustee over individuals' estates.
9. Government as Executor/Beneficiary: The government presumes itself the executor and beneficiary over individuals' legal estates.
10. Executor de son tort: Individuals can be presumed executors of estates without appointment.
11. Incompetence: Individuals are presumed legally incompetent.
12. Guilt: Individuals are presumed guilty unless proven innocent.
Rebutting Presumptions of the Court
One of the most significant revelations from CAFRs is the existence of hidden funds and assets that are often not disclosed to the public. Despite claims of budget shortfalls and deficits, many governments possess substantial financial resources in the form of investment accounts, reserve funds, or surplus revenues.
By understating their financial position and claiming budget deficits, governments can more easily justify tax increases or additional borrowing, even when they have ample resources available. Auditing and scrutinizing CAFRs can help uncover these hidden funds and hold governments accountable for their financial practices
Generating Wealth through Investments
Rebutting Presumption #1: Public Record
To challenge this presumption of privacy, individuals must clearly state their intention for the matter to be on the public record. Failure to do so implies consent to the Bar Guild's jurisdiction and adherence to their internal protocols.
Rebutting Presumption #2: Public Service
Bar Guild members are presumed to prioritize their Guild's interests over public duties unless this presumption is explicitly rebutted. Challenging this presumption raises concerns about conflicts of interest and erosion of public trust.
Rebutting Presumption #3: Public Oath
Unless challenged, Bar Guild members' actions are presumed carried out under a public oath, even if it violates their Guild obligations. Rebutting this presumption is crucial to ensure impartiality and fairness in legal proceedings.
Rebutting Presumption #4: Immunity
Bar Guild members are presumed immune from prosecution or liability for actions taken in their official capacity. Challenging this presumption often requires substantial evidence of malicious intent or gross negligence.
Rebutting Presumptions #5 and #6: Summons and Custody
By rejecting a summons and asserting one's status as a living, sentient being, individuals can rebut the presumption of being treated as mere property subject to custodial control.
Rebutting Presumptions #7 and #8: Court of Guardians and Trustees
These presumptions treat individuals as legal minors or wards under the court's guardianship or trusteeship. Rebutting them is essential to reclaim personal sovereignty and autonomy over one's affairs.
Rebutting Presumptions #9 and #10: Government as Executor/Beneficiary and Executor de son tort
These presumptions assert the government's authority to act as the executor and beneficiary over individuals' legal estates, or treat individuals as executors without appointment. Challenging these presumptions is crucial to protect personal rights and freedoms.
Rebutting Presumption #11: Incompetence
To overcome the presumption of legal incompetence, individuals must formally declare their competence and demonstrate a clear understanding of the legal matters at hand.
Rebutting Presumption #12: Guilt
The presumption of guilt undermines the fundamental principle of "innocent until proven guilty." Rebutting this presumption is essential to ensure due process and fairness in legal proceedings.
Conclusion:
The presumptions asserted by private Bar Guilds in Roman Courts have far-reaching implications for individual rights and the integrity of the legal system. By understanding and properly rebutting these presumptions, individuals can reclaim their sovereignty, assert their competence, and demand due process and fairness within the judicial system. Stay vigilant, challenge the presumptions openly, and seek competent legal counsel to navigate this complex and opaque legal landscape.
