Ed and Elaine Brown: Victims of Satanic Control. - Thanks for all of the good post. MaidMarion has had so many good things to say about you, and your support of the Browns. We were discussing this issue here, http://www.suijurisclub.net/announcement-awareness/6591-ed-elaine-brown-affidavit-jurisdict

Posted: Thu Sep 24, 2009 5:26 am

Ed and Elaine Brown: Victims of Satanic Control.

By Raymond Ronald Karczewski©

Following is the most recent tactic used by the fictional government court system designed to misdirect public attention away from the court's avoidance of following the law and simply answering the question of their possessing Jurisdiction over Ed and Elaine Brown, a living, breathing, flesh-and-blood, sentient, natural man and woman, without the latter's consent. See: . CRUDEN v NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70 . The law states: "There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent." . In other words such corporate administrative rules, regulations, and legislation do not apply to non-corporate natural men and women who stand in Common Law and in full legal capacity as one of the sovereign people. Does that not sum up the Case of the State vs. Ed and Elaine Brown?

It has been said that those who make the rules and control the news usually win the game otherwise known as Hell on Earth. Nowhere is that truism more evident than in the present prosecutorial case of Ed and Elaine Brown. It, the fictional policies of government and banking industry can be seen by the spiritually sighted to account for the unfoldment of the present, accellerated destruction of this Constitutional Republic we call the united states of America.

Just who is it that wields such power, establishes such tenuous, thought-based realities through words and ideas which remotely control the minds of millions of those who hear and read them? What instrument is used to effect such control? Is it not Intellect? Is the manipulative use of such intellect not the very nature of mind control?

Are the laws of nature superior to the laws of rhetoric? What say you? Each of You? Are you capable of seeing such simple truth which lies beyond the letter of the word? If not, then do you not find yourselves living in a topsy-turvy, BASSACKWARD world of illusion where realities can be changed merely with the turn of a word?

What is wrong with a world where images are considered to be more important than Truth, where emotions trump clarity of sight, where complication overwhelms simplicity, where confusion reigns supreme?

One can see all these things running through this article which veils the conduct of a judge and prosecutor who will not answer a simple question under oath or affidavit. Do they, as officers of a fictional court and prosecutorial staff have JURISDICTION over any Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural man and/or woman who have not given their consent to participate in a limited fictional governmental court system?

Note how questions of a gold fringed flag are turned into a smear, referred to as a delusion rather than just answer the simple question of what does the gold fringe on a flag represent?

When those who prosecute others are immune from answering such fundamental questions of law, one indeed finds themselves enmeshed in a BASSACKWARD, Satanically (opposing) tyrannically ruled fictional world. Not one in a million is presently capable of seeing such simple truth. The Satanically ruled world is dependant upon such shallow vision to allow for its continuous hold over the minds of civilized men.

The average civilized man/woman would read the article written by Ms. KATZ of the Concord Monitor and would take a position based on the "authoritative" media disposition of events in the lives of Ed and Elaine Brown. They have been conditioned to allow such psychologically manipulative exercises of slanted rhetoric to form their realities in favor of the establishment corporate policies, while, at the same time, giving short shrift to defendants. It is all based in fear.

Well my sleeping brothers and sisters, this can all change if only you will awaken to the present Satanic spell which binds you as slaves to a system which is destroying your way of life. The power to change lies in your hands and your hands alone. So you ask yourselves, what can you as an individual do without the power of organization behind you to change the world you live in. Simply this. Know that you are the living, not the living dead ruled by fictional gambits of a fictional corporate structure which has made your life a Hell on Earth

Ed and Elaine Brown know this. That is the substance of their defense and they now stand alone while the country goes to hell in a handbasket. It does not require heroic behavior on your part. Merely make your presence known to the fictional court and demand by phone, mail, email, fax, etc. that that one question be answered under oath or affidavit by the courts and prosecution. Do they have JURISDICTION over Ed and Elaine Brown, a Living, Breathing, Flesh-and-Blood, Sentient, Natural man and woman, who do not belong to the present system now prosecuting them and have not waived their Rights nor given their consent. Do not allow yourselves to be swayed into accepting such tangents where Truth is sacrificed to the altar of Satanic illusion.

Do that, and Ed and Elaine will be freed to return to their rightful life of non-harm. Note that Ed and Elaine in Truth, harmed no one throughout the whole of their ordeal. Note also, that all of the the charges placed against them are fictional, coulda, woulda, shoulda's conjured up by rhetoric infected lawyers and judges.

Wake up America, Save Ed and Elaine and in the process you will be saving yourselves.

*********************************************
"No other man but I in the recorded History of
mankind, including JESUS CHRIST, has directly
revealed to the World the SATANIC WEAPON used to
enslave mankind -- INTELLECTUAL THOUGHT!!"

Raymond Ronald Karczewski© http://www.arkenterprises.com

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Defense questions Brown's sanity: Evaluation possible before sentencing

Margot Sanger-Katz Monitor staff
September 23, 2009 - 12:00 am

Ed Brown's lawyer has asked a federal judge to order a psychiatric evaluation of his client, arguing that Brown's "delusions" and his unwillingness to assist in his own defense could affect his sentencing, scheduled for next week.

In a motion to the court, Michael Iacapino said that he believes Brown suffers from a "delusional disorder with both paranoid and grandiose features."

Brown, 67, is facing a virtual life sentence for accumulating bombs and guns in an effort to prevent federal agents from arresting him. He and his wife, Elaine, were convicted on tax-related felonies in 2007, but evaded capture for nearly nine months by holing up in their turreted concrete home and making repeated threats of violence. A jury found the Browns guilty of a combined 11 felonies.

In a reply, Assistant U.S. Attorney Arnold Huftalen wrote that the government does not believe Brown is impaired, but does not object to a psychiatric evaluation.

If the judge orders such testing, it will likely delay Brown's sentencing hearing for a month or longer.

For decades, the Browns have been active members in militia, anti-government and tax protest groups, which often share unconventional - and discredited - views of the legal system.

The couple's court filings throughout their tax case and the more recent prosecution reflected those views. Among various legal theories the Browns argued were the assertion that the federal court is improper because it contains a yellow-fringed flag, the argument that their case is governed by commercial law and can be resolved through the payment of bonds, concerns that the prosecutor and judge are colluding against them, and repeated statements that no law exists that required them to pay federal income taxes.

Ed Brown has also made several attempts to fire Iacapino, though Judge George Singal has rejected Brown's most recent requests.

Before the Browns' trial, Singal ruled that he did not believe Ed Brown suffered from any mental illness that would compromise his ability to participate in his own trial. Iacapino did not object to that ruling.

But in his recent motion, he argues that Ed Brown's mental state has deteriorated since his conviction, and has rendered him unable to assist in his own defense. Brown was capable of participating in his trial, Iacapino's motion says.

"However, that has now dramatically changed," it says. "The Defendant has reverted to his former intransigence and reliance on matters that can only be referred to as delusions."

According to Iacapino, Brown has refused to communicate with him and has been making increasingly odd outbursts during his court appearances.

"Most recently the Defendant exhibited his delusional thought patterns when he claimed in open court that we were operating under 'English' law and that the same people who killed innocents at Auschwitz were running our country today," the document says.

Both Browns face lengthy sentences. One charge alone carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 years in prison. Recent court filings indicate that the government is recommending a stiffer sentence for Ed Brown than the one recommended in a Probation Department report.

In its motion, the government argues that Brown has demonstrated an allegiance to an extreme ideology, not any evidence of delusions that would hinder his participation in the sentencing hearing. Huftalen describes Iacapino's evaluation as "unschooled diagnostic references." The motion says that the government does not object to a mental health evaluation, however, so long as it is performed by experts at the Bureau of Prisons and that it only results in a "minimal delay" of the sentencing hearing.

Page 2

The lawyer for a man convicted of helping the Browns during their standoff made a similar argument before his client's sentencing last year. Sven Wiberg argued that Daniel Riley's post-conviction behavior - which included allegations that the judge was a "Satanist," and an insistence on wearing his prison uniform inside out - was evidence that Riley was insane.

In that case, Singal ordered an evaluation, in what he described as an effort to be "scrupulous." But a psychiatric expert for the federal Bureau of Prisons determined that Riley was not mentally ill, simply committed to a counter-cultural ideology.

The fact that what Mr. Riley "was saying was very much consistent with the ideas of a number of people that are part of the so-called anti-government or sovereign citizens movements were significant to me," said the expert, Dr. Christine Scronce, according to a prosecution filing.

Riley was sentenced to 36 years in federal prison for his participation in the standoff.

Elaine Brown's lawyer has not made a recent request to evaluate her competency. But he did ask for a psychiatric evaluation before Brown's trial. Singal denied that request, finding that Elaine Brown understood the legal process and its actors well enough to assist in her own defense.

The Browns remain scheduled for sentencing on Sept. 30. They each face mandatory minimum sentences of 30 years in prison.

Newbie Joined: Jun 01, 2009 Posts: 5

Thanks for all of the good post. MaidMarion has had so many good things to say about you, and your support of the Browns.

We were discussing this issue here,

http://www.suijurisclub.net/announcement-awareness/6591-ed-elaine-brown-affidavit-jurisdiction.html