You are here:   Forums
Register   |  Login
etter_Future_Ahead_01

Welcome to the Crimes Against Fathers Forums

Minimize
 
ForumForumLinks to BooksLinks to BooksLinks to Books Parent ForumLinks to Books Parent ForumLiving Free in ...Living Free in ...Chapter 20 - Rescind Your Presumed Consent to the ‘Marriage Contract’Chapter 20 - Rescind Your Presumed Consent to the ‘Marriage Contract’
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
New Post
 11/16/2011 3:06 AM
 

 

1.              Rescind Your Presumed Consent to the ‘Marriage Contract’

 

One of the most important things in this document is the following affidavit that you can then follow up with a default judgement. If you are ALREADY MARRIED then you, sir, are WELL ADVISED to rescind the implied consent that you have agreed to the ‘Marriage Contract’ that people talk about.

 

In ALL THE FORMER BRITISH EMPIRE LANDS the ‘marriage contract’ is a fraudulent contract. There are four key elements of a contract for that contract to be lawful.

 

1.                Full Disclosure – Meaning that both parties must be fully open in setting and agreeing upon the details and the terms of the contract. Both parties must be left with no doubt or confusion about the terms set out in the contract.

2.                Consideration – Meaning ‘that which is offered’ in the agreement. The “Consideration” must be something that all parties to the contract agree is of enough value to involve their participation in the contract. .

3.                Terms and Conditions – Meaning the structure and the requirements of the agreement and the obligations of each or all of the involved parties.

4.                Signature – This is the most important part of the Contract and is the proof that the agreement took place. It also implies ‘consensus ad idem’ or a ‘meeting of the minds’.

 

If the contract is not lawful then it can be rescinded. This comes from the fundamental position in common law of “to not use fraud in your contracts”. The re-presentatives of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” make the presumption that when signing the “Certificate of Marriage” that you are entering into a three way binding contract with “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA”. They are claiming the following:

 

  1. That they are the superior party to a three party contract.
  2. That they own ALL PROCEEDS of the marriage including ALL PROPERTY, ALL CHILDREN and any other assets that are brought to the marriage from prior efforts as well!!

 

So? Here is a question for you if you are a married man? Where you ever presented with a contract, namely a set of pieces of paper, that provided:

  1. FULL DISCLOSURE
  2. MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL CONSIDERATION
  3. TERMS AND CONDITIONS

 

For your ‘marriage’?

 

And did you ever discuss this contract with a re-presentative of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” such that you had a “meeting of the minds” and did this re-presentative of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” sign this contract in your presence such that it was clear to all parties as to the nature of this contract?

 

And if you, Sir, did NOT have this? You are the victim of a fraudulent contract and you can rescind that contract from the beginning. You can complete your Affidavit, Proposed Remedy and Notice of Intent should you wish to, and should the re-presentatives of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” not be able to show you the contracts signed under the conditions above you can create a default judgment and send it back off to Gillard and Krew saying that you are no longer legally married and NEVER WERE LEGALLY MARRIED because the presumed contract was NEVER VALID as the presumptions were based on a fraud.

 

Yes Sir. If you want? You can divorce “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” and your WIFE and she has no recourse to the ‘FAMILY LAW’ or to the FAMILY COURTS the minute you issue the default judgment.

 

Update: 2011-03-24. I have now served on Julia Gillard my Default Judgement for my rescinding my presumed consent to the marriage contract from the beginning. No rebuttal was forthcoming.


 

 

How do you go about ‘divorcing’ “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” and your wife?

 

Simple.

 

Take the following Affidavit and customise it to your own needs. Send it off to the ‘usual list of suspects’ depending on the country in which you live. In Australia that would be the Prime Minister, Governor General, Attorney General and the Queen, just to be nice to Lizzy to let her know one more of her slaves has ‘run off the plantation’.

 

Then, given an appropriate time period like 2-3 weeks, if the re-presentatives of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” have not produced the correct paperwork, and they won’t, you issue a default judgment to rescind any implied consent to be married.

 

This procedure works whether you perform a Strawman Recapture or not. This affidavit is performed at the common law level. You were tricked into believing you had a contract with “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” when you did not. And fraud can never be the basis for a lawful contract. When fraud is used to make presumption of a lawful contract that contract is NEVER in force. It is ‘null and void’ from the beginning (ab initio).

 

What does this mean? This means I have just put into the public the lawful mechanism for ANY MAN IN AUSTRALIA, or indeed the former British Colonies, to divorce their wives and NOT be subject to ‘Family Law’! How about that? Any man who wishes to send me a donation via paypal would be most appreciated!!! The donation button is on the front page of my website!

 

Quite seriously. ANY MAN who does not IMMEDIATELY rescind his consent to be “married” to “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” and is subsequently taken to the cleaners by ‘wifey’? I will no longer have any sympathy for such men. Really. I can’t do ANY MORE than give them the paperwork to complete.

 

Now. Women are going to bitch and moan that I have done this. GOOD! They are going to say:

 

“Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) is a scumbag because he promotes divorce?”

 

Western women are hypocrites. They have been promoting divorce for decades and they have been vicious and ruthless about it as well. They can say whatever they like about me.  The women who have been good and loving wives to their husbands have nothing to fear. The husband can rescind his consent to be married to “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” unilaterally and he can sign up a ‘Marriage Agreement’ with the wife he is happy with.

 

The only women who have anything to fear from this paperwork are women who have been complete bitches to their husbands whom the husband would be very happy to be without.  THOSE women SHOULD be worried. Any man who divorces one of THOSE women? GOOD LUCK TO HIM!

 

I worked for over 18 months to enrol women into the possibility of discussing the vast bias in the courts, the ‘pussy pass for perjury’ and the deaths of so many men. Western women REFUSED TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE.

 

When I walked into the Australian Federal Magistrates Court on November 26th 2009 and proved my remedy? That was the last day that women could have offered a ‘peace offering’ to go forward. Women hated on me for 18 months while I created my remedy? Well? Now they only have themselves to blame that I am making that remedy available to ALL MEN in the former British empire. All common law lands.

 

This document will work in such places as:

 

Australia

Ireland

USA

Canada

New Zealand

INDIA (I LOVE THAT!!)

And all the other ‘Commonwealth’ countries.

 


 

 

1.1.         What about current assets?

 

I would suggest that ALL MEN of any significant means get a bank account in a THIRD PARTY JURISDICTION AS SOON AS YOU CAN.

 

Just because you have contracts in place does NOT mean that the PTB will not try and steal from you. You are well advised to get your money out of THEIR system as soon as you can because THEIR system is on the downhill run. You can put your ‘money’ into a foreign jurisdiction or you can turn it into silver (I think gold has been cornered by the Illuminati) or some other form of persistent wealth.

 

I propose that I will run a service to get bank accounts created in Switzerland because I have dealings quite close to Switzerland.  The going rate for foreigners opening up a bank account in Switzerland via an ‘agency’ is EUR700 or so for the ‘agency’. This is quite a fair fee for the legwork involved. I could make a very good business of that.  There is no law saying that you can not open a bank account in Switzerland or any other third party jurisdiction if you want to. Certainly the Swiss will be happy to have your ‘money’.

 

I also know men in Australia who are working on creating a bank that they will run. When it is off the ground that will be another option. Once it is off the ground I will announce the details on my web site.

 

If you have a house and a mortgage? I would recommend you learn how to clear your mortgage so that you owe the bank no ‘money’. Once you do that? Sell your house immediately and turn the asset into something that the Illuminati can not steal from you. The Illuminati has a plan to ‘seize’ all houses even if you have claimed it back through your strawman. This plan includes “guns, lots of guns”.

 

If you have NOT somehow reclaimed your house back from your ‘strawman’ the guvment still owns it and you are a tenant in your own house. This is how they make you pay land taxes lawfully and legally.

 

Sir? If your wife gives you ANY STATIC about clearing out your mortgage and selling the house so that you can put YOUR ASSETS out of the reach of the CRIMINALS in the guvment? ANY STATIC AT ALL? You KNOW what that means. You don’t need me to tell you.

 

Women bring 90%+ of ALL divorces (those numbers provided by women by the way) and the women have been making out like bandits in divorces for decades. The women know this. Hell, so do most men. So all those INTELLIGENT MEN OUT THERE? You are going to use this paperwork and then move on. You might stay ‘married’ or you might leave. But whatever it is you do? You will have YOUR ASSETS beyond the reach of YOUR WIFE and the CRIMINALS in the guvment.

 

And that is a REAL smart idea.

 

Just remember men. I was stripped of 95% of the assets I created over a 25 year period. Once you take into account ‘legal fees’ I was out about EUR40,000 for 25 years of work. Women LAUGHED at me. So I say no man should have ANY SYMPATHY for the women’s loss of ability to screw you over via the courts. The women have done this RUTHLESSLY for decades now. Men have pleaded with the women FOR DECADES to stop doing this. And they refused to. Well? All I am doing is setting the playing field level.

 

I am not suggesting men rip women off. I am suggesting that women have THEIR ability to rip men off removed. Experience in the US has shown that if the woman does NOT massively financially benefit from divorce that the divorce rate drops like a stone.

 

Those US states where divorce laws were very biased and they were changed BACK to 50/50 custody is standard unless PROOF of wrong doing and no alimony because of the 50/50 custody?  Those states saw divorce rates drop like a stone. Well? We are likely to see the same in the west. Once women are no longer able to screw a man over in the courts? I believe we are going to see women return to be a whole lot nicer people rather than the complete bitches so many western women have been these last 40 years. Try reading www.the-spearhead.com to read about how horrible women have been to men of late.

 

Gentlemen?

  1. Divorce your state. Why would you want to be married to your guvment?
  2. Get your money out of the country before your country gets your money out of you.
  3. THEN decide if you still want to be married. Be a free man who is married, not a slave. Or leave. Up to you!


 

 

                              From the free man commonly called
    Peter-Andrew: Nolan©,

Standing in God’s Kingdom

            In Care Of xxxxxxxxxxxx

 

To:

Lawful Notice To Respondent:

The human being calling herself Julia Gillard also claiming to act as Prime Minister of the Company commonly known as ‘THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

PO Box 6022

House of Re-Presentatives

Parliament House

Canberra ACT 2600

Phone: + 61-2-6277-7700

Fax: +61-2-6273-4100

 

 

1st November 2010

 

 

 


 

 

Lawful Notice To Respondent:

The human being calling herself Julia Gillard also claiming to act as Prime Minister of the Company commonly known as ‘THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA’

PO Box 6022

House of Re-presentatives

Parliament House

Canberra ACT 2600

 

 

1st November 2010

 

 

FIAT JUSTITIA, RUAT COELUM

Let Right Be Done, Though The Heavens Should Fall

`

Notice to principal is notice to agent.

Notice to agent is notice to principal.

 

I, commonly addressed by the calling of Peter-Andrew: Nolan©, hereinafter the “Principal”, in my correct public capacity as beneficiary to the Original Jurisdiction, being of majority in age, competent to testify, a self realized and free sentient man, my yes be yes, my no be no, do state that the truths and facts herein are of first hand personal knowledge, true, correct, complete, not just true and correct, certain and not misleading, so help me God.

 

This Notice is addressed to the the human being calling herself Julia Gillard also claiming to act as Prime Minister of the Company commonly known as ‘THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA’.

 

AFFIDAVIT WITH RESPECT TO
RESCINDING CONSENT TO A MARRIAGE LICENSE
AND IMPLIED CONTRACTS
BETWEEN
JENNIFER MARGUERITE ROBINSON
AND
PETER ANDREW NOLAN

 

 

1.           Principal is of legal age and competent to testify.

 

2.           Principal has first hand knowledge of the facts stated herein.

3.           Principal makes oath that on the date of 7th of October 1989 he and Jennifer Marguerite Robinson undertook the ceremony of ‘Marriage’ in St Pauls Church, Fernleigh Road, Turvey Park Wagga Wagga, New South Wales on a land commonly known as Australia.

4.           Principal makes oath that he applied his signature to a document called “Certificate of Marriage” which is headed as “Commonwealth of Australia – Marriage Act – Registered Number 35078”.

5.           Principal makes oath that the “celebrant” that did countersign this “Certificate of Marriage” was a man that presented himself as a “Minister of the Anglican Church” by the name of John Cohen. A man known to myself and my bride for some time to be re-presenting himself as a “Minister of the Anglican Church”.





6.           Principal makes oath that the extract of the “Certificate of Marriage” shows that it was “registered at Sydney, NEW SOUTH WALES” on 20th of December 1989 and signed by a said “Principal Registrar” the name of whom is not discernable from the signature.

7.           Principal makes oath that he was not present at the signing of the “Certificate of Marriage” by said “Principal Registrar” on 20th December 1989 and at no time did said “Principal Registrar” contact Principal and discuss or disclose any claimed conditions of any implied contract associated with this “Certificate of Marriage”.

8.           Principal makes oath that at the date of signing this “Certificate of Marriage” no evidence was presented to Principal as to what the “COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRLIA” actually was.

9.           Principal makes oath that only after extensive reading and research did he find in 2008 that the COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA is a sovereign entity registered on the UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION and is merely a privately held run for profit corporation and not, as represented, a Constitutional Monarchy run by a government working in the best interests of the people who inhabit the land mass commonly known as AUSTRALIA. Further. This corporation was only registered on the UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION in 1999 after the ‘referendum’ on Australia becoming a republic which was a fraudulent referendum to my knowledge.

10.        Principal makes oath that he has never, at any time, been presented with any evidence of the lawful and legal existence of an entity known as “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” at the time he signed the “Certificate of Marriage”.

11.        Principal makes oath that to his certain knowledge the alleged terms and conditions of the “Marriage Act 1961” were varied since 7th of October 1989. This has been done by successive “Acts of Parliament” by which the “Marriage Act” and “Family Law Act” have been vastly altered in the period between 7th of October 1989 to 11th November 2007.

12.        Principal makes oath that he has seen no facts or material evidence to the effect that:
For a contract to be binding it does NOT require all of the following and sincerely believes none exists:

                                                    i.     Full Disclosure – Meaning that both parties must be fully open in setting and agreeing upon the details and the terms of the contract. Both parties must be left with no doubt or confusion about the terms set out in the contract.

                                                   ii.     Consideration – Meaning ‘that which is offered’ in the agreement. The “Consideration” must be something that all parties to the contract agree is of enough value to involve their participation in the contract. .

                                                 iii.     Terms and Conditions – Meaning the structure and the requirements of the agreement and the obligations of each or all of the involved parties.

                                                  iv.     Signature – This is the most important part of the Contract and is the proof that the agreement took place. It also implies ‘consensus ad idem’ or a ‘meeting of the minds’.


13.        Principal makes oath that he has seen no facts or material evidence to the effect that:
Once a contract is executed by the signing of the involved parties that the contract can be altered without such documents as a contract amendment or contract variation that must also be in writing and must also meet the 4 conditions listed above for the contract amendment to be binding and sincerely believes none exists

14.        Principal makes oath that the ‘Terms and Conditions’ to the “Certificate of Marriage” that the entity calling itself “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” re-presented by the non-present party calling himself “Principal Registrar” at no time attached or presented the “Terms and Conditions” claimed to be the “Marriage Act of 1961” to the “Certificate of Marriage”.





15.        Principal makes oath that he never had full disclosure of the alleged “contract” as he was led to believe that the “Marriage Certificate” was a “formality” and did was not in any way, shape or form create a “contract” with the legal entity calling itself “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA”.

16.        Principal makes oath that at no time did the man calling himself John Cohen and presenting himself as a “minister” of the Anglican Church say that he was also acting as an agent of the entity calling itself “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” and therefore Principal makes Oath that it was at no time disclosed that the there would be a presumption that signing the “Certificate of Marriage” would create any sort of binding contract with the entity calling itself “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA”.

17.        Principal makes oath that at no time did any self declared re-presentative of the entity calling itself “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” make offer of consideration in exchange for signing an alleged contract.

18.        Principal makes oath that at no time did any self declared re-presentative of the entity calling itself “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” make presentation that the “Certificate of Marriage” was a three way binding contract with “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” being the superior party and claiming ownership and title of all property and offspring of the Principal and his bride Jennifer Marguerite Toal.


 

Therefore be it now known to any and all concerned and affected parties, that I, the free man on the land commonly called Peter-Andrew: Nolan© standing in Gods Kingdom do hereby say clearly, specifically and unequivocally that I rescind any presumed consent to enter into any contract with the entity known as “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” via the signature of the Trademark named PETER ANDREW NOLAN via the document commonly called a “Certificate of Marriage”.

Furthermore, I claim that all actions deriving from the claim of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” that it had a lawful contract must be compensated under the Proposed Remedy or by a common law de jour jury or any such mechanism as can be found to be effective.

 


 

 

Further Principal saith not,

 

As Good As AVAL        _______________________________________________________ 
                                    Peter-Andrew: Nolan© Principal. Only in the capacity as beneficiary of

                                    the Original Jurisdiction. Third party Intervener and aggrieved party.

 

Done this...................Day of the Eleventh Month of the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Ten Anno Domini, (4th November AD2010) near London, England.

 

 

JURAT:

ss: Sworn and subscribed near the city of London, on this day personally appeared before me Peter-Andrew: Nolan© known to me to be the living breathing life-force free man described herein who executed the foregoing instrument acknowledged to me that Peter-Andrew: Nolan© executed the same as his free act and deed as true, correct complete and not misleading.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

KNOW all men that I, ______________________________ of  London, England, at the request of Peter-Andrew: Nolan© , there being no notary public readily available, did on the Fourth Day of November 2010 Anno Domini, witness the above autograph of Peter-Andrew: Nolan© before

_____________________________________ and

_____________________________________.
              

                                                                                   Yours Faithfully,                          

                                                                                    By,

 

 

(Autographed)   ………………………  
All rights reserved.

Witness  1  ………………………………...                       Date: ………………….

 

Witness  2   ………………………………… 

 

 

 

 


 

 

Proposed Remedy

 

 

The re-presentatives of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” have made quite a nuisance of themselves to the Principal these last three years.

 

The loss sustained by Principal has been in excess of $A350,000. The Principal has had his house stolen and sold against his will, his children kidnapped against his will. He has been subject to extortion and theft. All these crimes were predicated and perpetrated by re-presentatives of “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” based on the false claim that there was a binding contract created by the placing of the Principals Signature on the “Certificate of Marriage”.

 

Therefore, Principal claims the following damages to be paid as fair and just compensation for the loss of property, ‘money, children, and time taken to remedy this crime against him.

 

Loss of Property:                                   $A290,000

Loss of Money: Watts McCray:               $A45,000

Time and effort for Remedy:                   $A100,000        (1,000 hours at $A100/hour)

General pain and suffering:                    $A100,000       

Loss of children:                                    $A2                  ($A1 per child)

 

Total:                                                    $A535,002.

 

This amount to be placed into the following account by 25th December 2010.

 

Name:                           Peter Nolan

Address:                       c/- xxxxxxxxxxxxx

                                    Wagga Wagga

                                    NSW 2650

Bank:                            St. George Bank

BSB:                            xxxxxxxxxxx

Account Number:           xxxxxxxxxxx

 

Since Respondent is well aware that “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” can create this ‘money’ out of nothing with no effort or expense at all Respondent is encouraged to take ‘the easy way out’ of simply making a ‘payment’ of ‘mythical money’ and we can all live happily ever after.

 

Should the Respondent believe that there is any false point on the above affidavit or wish to contest Principals Claim then counter claim my be lodged with the Principal by the date of 30th November 2010.

 

Should no response be forthcoming it will be determined that Respondent has accepted the points of this Affidavit and a Default Judgement will be generated by the Principal and sent to the Respondent.

 


 

 

Notice of Intent

 

The re-presentatives of the “THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA” have been singularly unwilling to respond to prior Lawful Notices. Just in case the Respondent continues this trend Principal wishes to make clear his Intent should this Remedy Payment not be made by 25th December 2010.

 

Principal retains the right to issue a default judgement on his own signature and authority as Beneficiary to the Original Jurisdiction, to place liens against the property of Respondent or to form a court dejour and present matters of fact to the court de jour to make a judgement as to any and all violations of the property rights of Principal and any remedy for those violations.

 

Principal advises Respondent that non-response is considered dis-honour under law and that Principal reserves the right to generate default judgments by his own signature and authority as Beneficiary to the Original Jurisdiction, place liens against the Respondents property to be seized by the appropriate Sheriff,  or convene a court dejour to persue remedy should Respondent choose to go into dis-honour.

 

Yours Sincerely
By

Peter-Andrew: Nolan©
Human Being

Signed 



___________________________________ 
All Rights, Privileges and Powers Reserved Without Prejudice

Date: ______________________________

 

 

 

 

Previous Previous
 
Next Next
ForumForumLinks to BooksLinks to BooksLinks to Books Parent ForumLinks to Books Parent ForumLiving Free in ...Living Free in ...Chapter 20 - Rescind Your Presumed Consent to the ‘Marriage Contract’Chapter 20 - Rescind Your Presumed Consent to the ‘Marriage Contract’