.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(The most important information you might EVER read!!)
"Redemption is the deliverence from the power of alien dominion and the enjoyment of the
resultant freedom" --Zondervans Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible
For Study Purposes Only. Not to be Taken as Legal Advice.
Important Update: The following information has been RESPECTED FOR VALUE
There will only be a limited amount of info. that will appear here.
The reason for that is that it is a "Private Matter" and will remain that way.
There is a NEW FORUM located Here! Click Here! to get there. This forum includes seperate study areas for Roger Elvick, Sam Kennedy, Winston Shrout, 1099 Process etc.
Commercial Redemption Page 2 is located Here! - Click Here! (Added Dec. 2007)
Saddam Hussein :
"The true believers cannot but condemn this act, not because it has been committed by
America against a Muslim people but because it is an aggression perpetrated outside
international law," Saddam said in a statement.
"America could have further recourse to force, which could last some time ... and spread to
other countries as part of the settling of accounts sought by the United States," he added,
echoing widespread Arab fears that the operation against the Taliban and Osama bin
Laden could lead to a wider regional confrontation.
News Commentator :
Afghanistan's neighbour Iran was also prompt to condemn the strikes, with Foreign ministry
spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi describing them as "unacceptable", saying "they were
launched regardless of world public opinion, especially the Muslim nations."
Recently Written Dec. 2007 - Most Recent Update - Click Here!!
Website Editor's note : VERY IMPORTANT!! (2-2-01)
"Redemption" is a process and philosophy developed by Roger Elvick. over the last 10 years or so. As he was learning this process, he made mistakes, which landed him and several others in jail over different periods of time. This does not mean he is a criminal or was ever intending to break the law, as some people assume. He is a farmer, who was dealing with various forms of negotiable and non-negotiable instruments through his occupation, and he was also privy to knowledge of the Federal Reserve system in this country, and how it operates. In his search for truth, he uncovered the most important knowledge being kept from us, in relation to our present situation of economic bondage. This information and the importance of it could only be inspired by one source, and Roger's dedication to that source (God), and an inner quest for truth.
Roger, himself, does not teach this process to anyone directly. Several people, who are dedicated to learning from him, have conversations with him on the phone, and information is then transcribed from these conversations. Also, Roger. is not in the business of selling information or "programs", so there are no packages of information from R. Someone who understands (or thinks they do) R's philosophy has published the "Interpretive Writings" available below. This is a very good analysis, but not complete or totally accurate. It is, though, the closest thing to a "study guide" available, so far. The very best way to learn this material is to study the "transcripts of the conversations". I, myself, have had several conversations with R, which have been recorded and will be available in transcript form here, soon. Without going through the problems yourself, you have to generalize, and R does not like to generalize, so alot of people cannot get the right information, because they have no real problem to deal with at the time. Well, I have had my share of problems recently, and fortunately, I was conversing with Roger during the whole episode while I was in court. That information is available now. (Added 6-28-01) Click Here!!
When Roger spoke to the first people about this material, they "ran with it", without making sure they knew all the facts first. These folks were (wishes to remain anonymous), Rice McLeod, and Greg Williams (Qui Tam), I believe. This along with other Info. was first published in the "American's Bulletin" and instantly, it swept the country. The problem was, that R. only taught step A and B, but did not finish teaching anyone the rest of the steps. Immediately, people went out and started writing up "sight drafts" which several people have been indicted for already. Obviously, these people didn't know what they were doing, because they did not do what Roger does. These "Sight Drafts" were drawn on the Treasury on a mythical "Treasury Direct Account". This was taught by some of these initial people, but later, after people started getting into trouble, they were teaching NOT to do it, and that it was a bad idea.
Currently, there are only a couple of people teaching "true redemption" according to R. These people DO NOT include Ron Lutz or Right Way Law. I have to say this here, but it is the truth. Also, Howard Griswold is NOT teaching "Redemption", and neither is the book "Cracking the Code" which was offered on this website a while back, and neither is Qui Tam. And neither is "the aware group" and their $900.00 package. Alot of people are learning about this information from the "American's Bulletin", but they have to remember, that Robert Kelly is doing his best job to make "all the information available", without trying to be partial to one person's methods or another's. Since R himself is not teaching this, there wouldn't be anything to publish if the other material was not floating around. Here are some of the most common misconceptions :
1. There is a Treasury Direct Account created by the Birth Certificate or SS# that has $1 Million dollars in it, that is being held against your strawman. (False) That was a complete mis-understanding by several people.
2. Accept the Birth Certificate for Value and Chargeback to the Secretary of the Treasury. (This was not necessary, and is no longer being utilized, to the best of my knowledge)
3. We must file a 1040 ES either once or quarterly, to "bankrupt" the strawman (debtor). (False) Barton Butz did some research into this, and now we are learning that quite possibly Barton and the IRS were talking about two different things entirely, or this is simply, "not necessary". Either way, currently, it is not being done.
4. Redemption can be mixed with other procedures if "Acceptance" doesn't seem to work. (False) Acceptance is working, they will hide it though. When you mix processes, you are showing them you really don't know what you are doing, because R's process is EXACTLY 180 Degrees off from what common law activists were previously doing. (The attitude is that "Everything is done for our benefit. If they are not acting for your benefit, they are in violation of their fiduciary duty. They are the Trustees in Bankruptcy").
....And a number of other random misconceptions..too numerous to mention here by list. But, importantly, R. has stated that "there are alot of people here who are going to have to qualify their own positions. So we want to be careful about this, because this is the difference between general appearance and special appearance..... You can't just rely on a generalized idea. Eventually you are going to have to take a position called applying your principles". - And basically what he is saying (I believe) is that, you can't just rely on other people's information, you have to know some things and apply your beliefs, and they can't just be based on things you hear, that aren't proven, in some way, to you, personally.
After having been through all of this myself, and having utilized the "redemption information", I can only tell you this : "It is very powerful". -- I have learned many things along the way. If someone were to ask me though, "Does it work?", the answer would have to be something like this, "Nothing is guaranteed, and every situation is different. "Will it work?" really should be phrased "will I make it work?" -- Because of this -- When something as powerful as this, does truly work, it would be very easy for everyone to learn this like a 'loophole' to avoid responsibility. To counter this, the system MUST make it LOOK LIKE it isn't working, regardless of what the truth is. Otherwise, when proven to work, you would see the floodgates come bursting open with people trying to leave Babylon. Who could blame them? At the same time, who could blame the "system" for trying to keep it's slaves on the plantation. (Don't wonder near the 'outside' zone, you are likely to get 'ideas' and realize that only a piece of paper is keeping you locked up). Learning and studying this information is the only thing that will teach you whether this is "real" or not. And you will decide for yourself. Then, nobody can convince you otherwise. On one phone conversation with R., he said "Just because this stuff works for me, doesn't mean it's automatically going to work for the next person". What he meant by that is : Everyone's different, and if you are going to go out and do things and get into trouble and think this will work to get you out, then think again.... That would be a "loophole". Only when you truly understand this information, (by making the love of Freedom, and not the love of Money, your #1 focus), then everything will fall into place, and you can go out and apply the "principles" in the world as a true "principal" of the account. This is how R lives day to day, and it is all done without the use of Federal Reserve Notes, or debt instruments of any kind.
If I can offer a word of caution to anyone thinking about using "Redemption" in court, it is this : DO NOT try to start learning this or using this process because you have gotten into trouble. Instead, start learning it NOW, so you know what to do in case any problems come along in the future. If you are confronted with an immediate problem, there is NO TIME to learn this material. Average Expected time span for learning this should be 1 1/2 to 2 years minimum, more like 3 or 4 years. THIS IS NOT A QUICK-FIX for your problems, because if you have not internalized it, the system will eat you up through a technique called "Bluffing". And sometimes bluffing can consist of several weeks in jail, or threats of life sentences, or who knows what they'll come up with, but the fact is that they have to "balance their books and accounting records" and that is where "Accepted for Value" comes in". They have a "Tax Liability" on their hands, and they are now the criminals. (If you want to make this your life, I would recommend a couple of classes on the following : Basic Accounting, Business Law, Commercial Law, and Real Estate. These are not necessary, but this is not the sort of stuff you just "play with". You are either a Sovereign or you aren't, and it wouldn't hurt to know your "stuff".)
The entirety of it boils down to this :
1. They are trying to get you to testify, you are trying to get them to witness.
2. They are trying to get you to admit there is "money", you are trying to get them to admit there isn't.
AND, one thing I would like to add here for all the critics of R and the "Redemption" process :
Everything that has been criticized so far, in the media light, like Militia Watchdog, Larry Becrafty and various other groups is flawed because of this one simple fact; They have been criticizing other people's interpretations of R's information, having no direct info. from R, himself. All of the fallacies that have been exposed were actually other people's writings and interpretations of R's philosophy. None of the "exposed fallacies" have been from information gleamed from the "Transcripts", only from sources like the ones mentioned above, and others.
Here are some items for consideration :
The system is set up to mimic the electrical, or energetic system flow of our bodies. Electricity or energy is the "key" here. In our society, we use money (or so we call it) for all transactions. This money is often called "currency". Currency is electrical flow. The court is always after your money, or currency, hence most of it ends up going to the courts. The courts are set up to regulate this currency flow. That's why they call them "circuit courts". Now, when you interrupt currency flow, what happens? You are charged! So the system charges you with 12 counts of such and such, but in reality it is "financial", and electrical, and now they have set up 12 "accounts" for you in your name, that you are charged with owing on. BUT, since we don't know this, we don't ever "pay" the account and it remains open in escrow, and your body is then held as the collateral against the debt, and it is said "You are paying your "debt" to society." How many times have you heard the expression "released on his own recognizance"? This literally means "to recognize the debt" according to the law dictionaries. When you are freed from prison there is a "release", and when you are let out of the army it is called a "discharge".
And finally, the definition for the word "charge" from Black's Law 4th reads as follows : v. "To impose a burden, duty, obligation, or lien; to create a claim against property; to claim; to demand; to accuse; to instruct a jury on matters of law. To impose a tax, duty, or trust. - In Commercial transactions, to bill or invoice." & n. "An incumbrance, lien, or claim; a burden or load; an obligation or duty; a liability; an accusation" -- then a little further down, it says "Conversion of electrical energy into chemical energy within a cell or storage battery". -- (This would be our body) - And for the word "charges" -- "The expenses which have been incurred, or disbursements made, in connection with a contract, suit or business transaction. (So there you have it...for those with eyes to see, and ears to hear....)
(Just added 2-15-01) - If you want to tell the difference between someone who understands "redemption" and someone who doesn't, then all you have to do is ask them...."Do you want to be charged?" (with a criminal offense) If they say "yes", then they probably understand what they are doing, and if they don't want to be charged, then they obviously don't understand "redemption" at all, and they are still into "dishonor", not "acceptance".
According to R, you want to be charged, because then they have to give you the "property". What they usually do, is the attorney steals the charge, and is holding it "in bar", and not paying the taxes on it, or making the "tax return". When you do your acceptance, the attorney becomes the delinquent on the tax, and liable for the charges.
(Just added 4-11-01)
There have been a few cases recently which indicate that the criminals within the system have resorted to new tactics to steer people away from this info., and from applying it in court. A few cases recently resulted in criminal trials, where, after sentencing, the person was put in jail, but only briefly. One person spent a whole day in and they released him on a "technicality". He was supposed to do "time", but not 24 hours, more like a few months, but they let him go. Why? Because of the accounting. They have to, or else, they are in big trouble! - What I am saying here, is that they are testing people more and more to see where they are within all of this. Whether they are using it to get out of something, or whether they truly understand what they are doing. That is what it all boils down to, so don't do anything without knowing what you are doing. -- Before, when we applied this process, they backed off right away. But when they realize that everyone and their grandmother is going to be doing this soon, they have to make it look like it isn't working. And that is exactly what they are doing right now, and putting people to the test. This used to be called something like "trial by fire". More recently, it was known as the "inquisition", but now it has become romanticized by calling it "courtroom drama".
Lately, alot of people have been writing in asking questions such as "If there isn't anyone out there teaching this correctly, and everything I have been learning is somewhat incorrect, then what is correct and what is incorrect? How do I know the difference? -- Usually, the answer I give is this : "Apply the principles". - Which means, read the transcripts over and over AND the interpretive writings until most of your questions go away naturally by "applying the principles". - Then, you still may have questions left over, naturally. - So I have made up a page and asked a friend to respond to some "general questions" frequently asked - Click Here! Questions for Junkbond Joe
Added - 12-10-01 -
I wanted to express a few things to the many people attempting to learn "Redemption" at this time. These are a few of my rare thoughts I will share on this matter with the public. For all those who study these principles.
The main thing you want to remember is that "we are not opposed to the government" or what they do. Everything they do must be for our benefit, or else we need to request they do as we wish. In order for them to "do as we wish", we need to have a clear understanding of what they can and cannot do, and what they are required to do according to THEIR OWN RULES. This is perhaps the most important thing to remember at all times. Redemption is about "Acceptance" and not "dishonor". Acceptance means accepting everything, but accepting it for value. Especially now, in these times of war, like Bush said, "You are either with us, or you are in support of the terrorists, and you too will be considered a terrorist" or something to that effect. It is important to remember that if you want change from within OUR government, which belongs to us, we the people..., then we better wake up from our positions as debtors, and return to our rightful positions as masters and creditors of this nation. Then, and only then, can we "effect" government and produce the outcome we desire. A "debtor" has no rights to effect the financial flow of their corporation. The creditors direct the actions and financial decisions of the corporation.
Next.... The reason, I believe, that "Redemption" is being fought by those in power is due to several reasons. Mostly, the MIS-understanding of what this is really all about and how it works, combined with a serious refusal to admit when one is wrong about something or has learned something wrong and has been applying it their whole life to the detriment of themselves and society. The "Private" (flesh and blood) will ALWAYS be SUPREME over the artificial corporation (UNITED STATES, DISNEYLAND, or any other ALL CAPS CORPORATION. But we have many people in power who have hidden behind the "corporate veil", and have been abusing their power over the private individual. It has become a "way of life" so much so, that to think or question for a moment even....that the private individual retains his status regardless....seems absurd to most in society. Yet, those same people question how the government can take all their rights away while they can't so much as complain. More and more, especially these days, since Sept. 11, people are asking themselves, "How can the government take this much power for themselves and do all these things?" and the answer lies in this statement : "The government can do whatever it wants to in the capacity of the CORPORATION, but it does not affect the private individual who knows how to retain his or her own privacy". -- This is something very difficult for the power structure to come to terms with, and who can blame them? After all these years of manipulating society to think we are all slaves, a few people have woken up to the fraud that has been perpetrated, and now they are scrambling to keep their ranks of ignorant. It is very similar to the Taliban wanting to keep hold of their soldiers when most of them are defecting over to the Northen Alliance. The reason : They see the new ORDER coming and they want to get in line instead of being left behind or left out. They see the benefits of change instead of holding onto the "old mentality". Ths was the inevidible consequence in Afghanistan as much as it is the inevidible consequence of "Redemption". "Redemption" once fully understood by a good portion of people will sweep the country and change everything as we know it today. I have full confidence in this. I know of several people who are utilizing these principles sucessfully in their life without much problem. The reason is because they understand what they are doing, and nobody gets "injured" or "damaged" in an way. This is the way of the "Jedi", who fully understands the talk they talk and the walk they walk.
This is the very first and most important document to read in relation to "Redemption". -
On May 23, 1933, Congressman Louis T. McFadden brought formal charges against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system, The Comptroller of the Currency and the Secretary of United States Treasury for numerous criminal acts, including but not limited to, CONSPIRACY, FRAUD, UNLAWFUL CONVERSION, AND TREASON. - Click Here!!
This is an elementary introduction to banking, interest and theft. Essential reading for beginners and the un-informed.
I Want the Earth Plus 5% - Click Here!
A Comprehensive Glossary of Redemption Related Terms - Absolutely Essential Study Material!! - NEW!! - 4-11-01
Roger Elvick Transcripts - (This stuff is the most important)
* Jan 17, 1999 - (From Seminar - Discussing Elvick, Methods used, and Methodology)
"Sir. are you the defendant?" something like that or "What's your name? Okay?
* Feb. 2, 1999 - (Roger, Jean, and Dave)
Jean: I have a couple of questions. Let me see if I understand the whole thing: when the[y] register the birth certificate, that becomes a lien, becomes the UCC-1 form?
* March 5, 1999 - (Roger, Jean and Dave)
Dave: Jean has a few questions.
* Unknown Date - (Early 1999) - (Roger, Jean and Dave)
Roger : Sure, Yeah. Oh yeah. See, that's a "Commercial Dishonor" and a commercial dishonor is an equal value of the offer. And it is eligible to trade in the marketplace independant of all the rest
of it. So you see, you've got the "value" right there to pay the bills with.
* May 19, 1999 - Wally Pederson, Greg Allen, and a Banker
Greg: We need to ask some questions.
* Aug. 8, 1999 - (Ron Boggs & Roger)
Roger : What kind of deal you got?
* Nov. 22, 1999 - (Elexis and Roger)
Lex: Hello…Roger
Roger: Who is this?
* Nov. 26, 1999 - (Ron Boggs and Roger)
Ron - Hey Roger, How’ve you been?
Roger - Fine
Small talk between the two re weather, busy etc.
* March 12, 2000 - (Elexis & Roger)
Elexis : Hello is this Roger ?
Roger : Who is this?
Elexis : This is Elexis from California with a cold.
* March 14, 2000 - (Elexis & Roger)
Roger : Hello
Elexis : This is L from California, I need to impose on that Norwegian intelligence again.
Aug. 8, 2000 - My Case - (1st Conversation W/ Roger)
* Hi Roger, How are you doing?
Roger: Good
* I have been involved in the movement for around 7 years or so, and studying sovereignty and I've learned alot about the different things going on so I'm up to speed to some degree, but I've got a bunch of problems hitting me because, I think, because I'm a political target right now, and they keep coming after me.
Oct. 28, 2000 - My Case - (2nd Conversation W/ Roger)
* Hi Roger.....(Small Talk)....
* I had the probation officer on the stand, after the prosecution had asked their questions.
* Jan 5, 2001 - Notes from meeting W/ Roger
Article he shared: Access to Energy, P.O. Box 1250, Grand Junction, Oregon 97523 ?
Regarding how we don't think anymore.
Credit Card NOT CASH item it is PAYMENT IN FACT
*Jan 5, 2001 - (2) - More Notes from Meeting W/ Roger
Situation with a guy who keeps getting IRS notices, accepting them but IRS is ignoring them and threatening to put a lien against his retirement funds.
UPDATED 3-13-03
Hello Everyone. I have provided some new study material for you folks out there who really need this info. If you want to stay on top of this info. (keep in mind that although this is VERY important to study, it is old material. If you do not study it though, you will be lost if you get the updated materials. To do this correctly, study persistantly. If you want to be up to date here it is.
Far too many people think they can make a phone call, talk to someone who will help them, and all their problems will be solved. Wrong approach, think again. Go back to the drawing board and sit down and take the time to STUDY. The transcripts are THE best source. So, here are some "gems" for the tried and true.
More Roger Elvick Transcripts - (WARNING!!! -- Some of the information contained here is OUTDATED and INCORRECT. It should be studied as information only, not advice of any kind. Currently, as of Dec. 2008, the process is not utilizing Sight Drafts, and any use of Bills of Exchange is not encouraged. Do your proper studies. They can both be used correctly and incorrectly. It is my understanding that they are not necessary. Study the Proper Use of Promissory Notes.
Original Letters (Approx. 2000-2001) - Samples - Be Responsible, Learn First. Do Not File or Send Form Letters or You Admit You Are Not Yet Educated. (These are also a bit outdated)
A.) Letter To Send With Acceptance
B.) Letter to Send for Second Request with Request for Taxpayer ID Form W-9
C.) Bill of Exchange Letter
D.) Treasury Letter
E.) Accounting Instructions
* Oct. 2000 - Transcript-
** From previous conversation you were going to use one of the forms we sent you.
* March 1, 2001 - Transcript -
** Hi R, won't keep you just wanted to see how everything went with you yesterday with the grand jury.
* March 9, 2001 - My Case - (3rd Conversation W/ Roger) Transcript
Roger : You just let them know here, that civil litigation won't hold up because all commerce is criminal now.
March 27, 2001 - Transcript from Conversation W/ Roger
This section is to go on the sight draft in the memorandum area:
* April 23, 2001 - Transcript -
Do you have a minute….. (2 hours later)
** Just talked to someone and you told them to not use the bankruptcy forms just run an ad.
* May 1, 2001 - Transcript-
** In response to your letter dated April 9th, addressed to this Mr. Kent Lewis, (he is the CEO of Bank of America,)
* May 17, 2001- Transcript -
Conversation with Roger Re Draft and Involuntary Bankruptcy
**Hi Roger, I tried to pay some property taxes off last month with a draft and I put the bank route number, you know like you said.
* June 18, 2001- Transcript - (Followup of my Case)
* Hi Roger, how are you doing?
Roger : Oh, o.k..
* Well let's see, I just finished up my whole court thing that was going on down in Van Nuys.
June 21, 2001 - Transcript
** Hi, glad I caught you. I have a couple of question regarding someone who has been accepting everything for value on a law suite coming at them and yesterday they went to court and they put him in jail.
* July 27, 2001 - Transcript -
** Hello… Oh I just got a notice and was going to fax it to you if you weren't in. It is that effective July 1, 2001 the Treasury in Washington is now a bank.
* Aug. 7, 2001 - Transcript - (Conversation between P & Roger)
Roger : This report is the straw man's report. The straw man that is staying with you.
* August 2001 - G, W, & Roger - Transcript
G: What do you do when the Bank returns your check and it is not stamped "closed?"
* Aug. 7, 2001 - Transcript -
**: Hi, I have a friend going to court in a couple of days on a 2 year old ticket that she accepted for value from the start.
* Sept. 6, 2001 - Transcript -
** Oh Hi, did you just get in?
Roger : Well no, I've been in for awhile and just got my shower and trying to get something to eat, but I can eat an talk.
Oct. 8, 2001 - (C-1, C-2 and Roger) - Transcript
C-1: Hi, do you have a minute to ta1k?
R: Yeah - go ahead….
C-1: OK - C-2 is on the 1ine a1so. C-2: Hello -
C-1: We've got his Dad in jail again…
October 11, 2001 - Transcript
** Hi R* - How are you? (he sounded very tired)
R* Good… had some thing happened here today, but go ahead first…
October 22, 2001 - Transcript
** Hi, did you just get in? Is it okay to talk?
R: Yeah we just got in but I can still talk…
October 24, 2001 - Transcript
** Hi just a quick question about yesterday in court with R** and also with K*, they are putting them through a psychiatric evaluation.
October 25, 2001 - Transcript
** Hi, It’s B* and R*j and we just wanted to share something that happened today with R*j if you have a minute. It’s kind of funny!
Nov. 3, 2001 - Transcript
R: This book is for my personal information…
*A (jokingly) How do we know he’s not an IRS agent gathering information…
November 3, 2001 - Transcript
*** Hey R, how you doing? Are you busy?
R: Well I’m busy, just trying to raise above all the paperwork.
*** That’s a never ending condition!… Isn’t it? At least that’s how we feel.
November 12, 2001 - Transcript
** Oh Hi, hope I’m not calling too late.
R: No, no
** Good, I won’t keep you very long. I just wanted to touch base with you and let you know about the corporation.
December 9, 2001 - Transcript
*** Hey just thought I’d give a call and find out if there is anything planned on you coming out this way this year.
January 17, 2002 - Transcript
** Glad I finally caught you… We were having R withdrawals (chuckling)
R: Well that’s good… when you withdraw you have something to spend… (chuckling)
January 28, 2001 (?) Could be 2002 - Transcript
This conversation was a bit choppy in the beginning because of telephone connections.
Call was originated to update R about the progress of paying property tax and the results and information learned from doing it.
Feb 7, 2002 - Transcript
** Something came up with a guy that was in prison for about 14 months and he got this letter and it looks like OCWEN Federal Bank, and it has an account number and he doesn’t recognize the number.
March 5, 2002 - Transcript - Conversation with Roger Elvick
** Good afternoon! It’s B* in LA. I just wanted to tell you what happened to R*’s trial and the outcome.
March 9, 2002- Transcript
** Hi it’s B* and R*. We got this copy of the habeas corpus and wanted to run some things past you if you have a minute.
March 29, 2002 - Transcript - *** N E W P R O C E D U R E ***
** Oh Hi, Welcome back!… did you have a good trip?
R: Yeah…yeah…yeah
March 31, 2002 - Transcript
R*** all he needs to do is tell them he requests an appearance bond. Ok
April 2, 2002 - Transcript
** Oh Hi, here I am twice in one week! Got two other totally different situations and I was wondering if what you told me last time could work for these to.
April 15, 2002 - Transcript - RE: Involuntary Bankruptcy, Change of address.
** Hi, I think I’ve got some wonderful information.
April 24, 2002 - Transcripts - Shared conversations from Canada
Conversation going on between two males talking M1 in Canada and M2 in Japan… conversation
Sample Paragraphs From Roger Elvick - Approx. 2002 - (Slightly Dated Material, but principles are still applicable)
Steps for Redeeming - Roger Elvick - April 2002 - (Slightly Dated Material, but principles are still applicable.)
When the Sheriff Comes.....What do you say? Here is the answer.
May 2002 - Transcript
May 13, 2002
D** You know J** is going in for sentencing tomorrow and I think she is pretty well prepared
RE: Involuntary Bankruptcy Dismissal
June 11, 2002 - Redemption - Transcript - Not Roger, but according to his Theories and Teachings
There are actually about 5 or more people on line. Bc (nick name initials) and *** are in California others are in Canada.
June 20, 2002 - Transcript
** Hi, is it too late?
R: No, no! Go ahead.
** Good. Are you up to your neck in alligators with all the people getting sentenced?
June 22, 2002 - Transcript
After the preliminaries, i.e. who I am, what has happened to me, what I've been doing about it, I explain where I am in my lawsuit.
July 2, 2002 - Transcript
** Some small chit chat before I asked R if we could add another person into the call who had a problem because he was arrested and a family member bailed him out.
July 16, 2002 - Transcript
** Hi, I hope you’re not all talked out… I tried you earlier and the line was busy for the past couple of hours… are you up to talking?
July 30, 2002 - Transcript
** Hi, it’s B* in LA. You’re a tough one to catch up to…. Chuckling
August 4, 2002 - Transcript
** Oh hi! I needed to ask you a couple of short questions and I hope I’m not catching you too late.
August 9, 2002 - Transcript
M: Is this R?
R: Who’s calling?
M: ** from ** I spoke with you a while back - probably about a month ago about the case that I have going here.
Sept. 8, 2002 - Transcript
** Hi I just heard you were back and took a chance on reaching you.
Sept. 9, 2002 W/ Roger Elvick and Gail Martin - Transcript
On July 30, I filed an Ex Parte Order for Summary Judgment and an Ex Parte Summary Judgment.
September 16, 2002 - Transcript
** Oh boy am I glad to catch you! I’m so glad to hear your voice… (chuckling) There is a lot of activity going on.
Sept. 17, 2002 - Transcript
1st hour of a 2 hour conversation. Two men talking to Roger…. One regarding an Apt. bldg. that dishonored his acceptance and exchange and he is in the process of taking the bldg.
Sept. 17, 2002 - Transcript - Part 2
K* We’ve got some rolling stock here…
R: …. (some lost from tape) you offered back here cause it’s pre-paid. You can have my
share of the stock.Sept. 23, 2002 - (Between Barbara and Gail - Not Roger) - Transcript
“B”?
B: Yes.
► I’m ►►►. I’ve communicated with you before via email. The reason I’m calling is because “O,” who has also communicated with you by email, has been arrested.
September 25, 2002 - Transcript - Re Bankruptcy – Chapter 11
R: I called to let you know what I’m doing…
** Oh okay. Glad you called back cause I was in the shower your first call and you said just enough on my machine to put me in suspense
October 6, 2002 - Transcript
Quiet Title This conversation is regarding a mortgage company trying to sue on a Quiet Title action for paying the mortgage with a closed account.
October 13, 2002 - Transcript
Conversation w/ Roger and R* or ** which is easier to follow.
Conversation slightly in progress when tape started.
R: We’re on a 24 hour schedule.
October 17, 2002 - Conference Call with Roger - Transcript
There were only about 5 or 6 other interactive people so they will be identified as Female or F1, F2 or male will be M1 or M2 etc
October 19, 2002 - Transcript
In progress:
**: ‘. . . just issue my check’
R: From my account.
October 25, 2002 Conversation with Roger and N* or R and N - Transcript
N: I’ve been reading your transcripts and of course I talked to you on the conference call and we’ve got an arraignment on Thurs.
November 3, 2002 - Transcript
** Oh Hi, it’s B* in LA. Feel like talking or are you all talked out?
Nov. 4, 2002 - Roger Elvick & G - Transcript
R: If you have had any past court orders that demanded money (such as our bankruptcy four years ago against the IRS), you can go back after them and demand a check for that amount.
Nov. 25, 2002 - Repossession of Property - By Roger Elvick - Kingswood Hospital
December 2, 2002 - Transcript
** Good I caught you.
R: Was that you who called a minute ago?
Dec. 3, 2002 - (Notes) - If you are Arrested and Brought Before a Judge
December 4, 2002 - Transcript
R: Hello …
** Oh good you are there?… We have a gal in jail! She was taken into custody yesterday afternoon for writing checks on her closed account.
December 11, 2002 - Transcript
J* and B* calling Roger re the different court events from this week. J* regarding the purchase of 2 pickup trucks and them keeping the checks but taking the vehicles back by force.
December 11, 2002 - (Goes with Above Transcript) - Request for Proof of Claim and Bar I.D. Number - Letter to Court
December 13, 2002 - Transcript
Few tidbit conversations before faxing on Dec. 12th.
R: Okay I’ve got another form for you to file. That means the Tort Claim, Form 95.
Quiet Title Action - Paying a Mortgage with a Private Check - What Happened in Court - Approx. 2002
Dec. 22, 2002 - Sample Letter - Notice of Dishonor / Request for Immediate Settlement
Dec. 29, 2002 - Assessments : Presumed or Fact - Roger Elvick
Dec. 2002 - If you are arrested and brought before the judge - Notes
Jan. 4, 2003 - Civil Action on Diversity - Transcript
** Happy New Year! Just got back and got your messages.
R: Yeah to you too!! After I talked to R* and K* I remembered you were going to be gone.Jan 12, 2003 - Roger Elvick Letter
Jan. 15, 2003 - Short Note from Roger Elvick
March 13, 2003 - Sample Letter Request for Settlement & Order to Show Cause
May 6, 2003 - Transcript
R: Hello
** Oh Hi! I hope I'm not waking you up.
R: No... I've been on the phone all night.
May 9, 2003 - Summary Judgment (necessity) - Transcript
** Good morning! We’ve got some information back from a tort claim that I’d like to run by you.
May 11, 2003 - Conversation that goes with Request for Warrant that Corresponds with Order - Court Order
Conversation going on before I started taping about using the bible or having the spiritual aspects in the court or trying to eliminate it from the court.
May 11, 2003 - FOLLOW THE CAPS (Goes with above Transcript)
May 11, 2003 - Bank Presentment for Collection - (Goes with Above Transcript)
May 12, 2003 - Trumped Up Charges - Transcript
Those of you who are prisoners on trumped up charges should start making written requests for certified copies of the judgment and the corresponding Finding of Fact and Conclusion of Law.
May 12, 2003 - Letter Example - Buddy Straw
May 12, 2003 - General FTB Show Cause Letter
May 12, 2003 - FTB Final Request for Settlement - Letter
May 12, 2003 - Letter to Remove / Diversity of Citizenship
June 13, 2003 - Transcript
** Oh hi, I was wanting to talk to you. We have so much going on that I wanted or need to talk to you about.
Dec. 12, 2003 - Letter from Roger Elvick - Felonies Reduced to Misdemeanors
Dec. 15, 2003 - Letter from Roger Elvick
Dec. 26, 2003 - Letter from Roger Elvick - Study of the Word "Even"
Dec. 30, 2003 - Letter from Roger Elvick - Supervised Release (Unfortunately, it didn't happen)
Jan. 15, 2004 - Message from Barbara
Jan. 31, 2004 - Transcript of Conversation (Not Roger)
** Re: R’s condition and he indicated he would like to have you in the mix of what is going on and I understand you have the 50 pages of info from the court appointed attorney.
Feb. 9, 2004 - Transcript of conversation (Not Roger)
** Touching bases with you regarding our conversation last week about our friend.
Oh yeah! What’s happening?
March 2, 2004 - Transcript of Conversation with Roger Elvick - Prepare Motion to Dismiss!
** Have some interesting things going on with our friend. Seems that removing his signature is making them want him now to sign for anything he gets from the Clerk of Court
March 12, 2004 - Notes from Transcripts Part 1
If they don’t answer the order to show cause or they answer inefficiently in law then you go back to the judge and you petition the judge to issue the writ.
March 15, 2004 - Notes from Transcripts Part 2
Stamp or write: Accepted for value and returned for value as consideration in exchange for settlement and closure.
March 15, 2004 - Discussion of Notes Part 1
C: It is important, in construing section 624 of the Administrative Code, to ascertain the meaning of the term "indebted" as there used. To be indebted is to owe a debt.
May 29, 2006 - Letter from Roger Elvick
Got your letter today so will try to get a prompt answer out to you since its early enough in the week to get mail out.
I just spent the last couple hours visiting with JR and I shared your letter with him.
Roger's Tax Recovery Letters - March-December 2006 - 1099OID and 1040 Process Explained
Sept. 1, 2007 - Letter from Roger Elvick to Arlene
#1. Credit is a maritime money. Credit cannot create a debt. So without the bill for the debit, the credit by itself can’t create the debt.
Oct. 10, 2007 - Letter to IRS - Roger Elvick
I am writing regarding my recent filings of 1040 and 1040X and accompanied 1099 OID's as Original Issue Discounts.
Oct. 11, 2007 - Letter from Roger Elvick to Art
You have my letter ahead of this one that should tell you the area of the taxable estates we are dealing with. I wasn’t able to comment on Barton Buhtz problem like you asked due to several reasons.
Oct. 20, 2007 - Roger Elvick Letter to Art
Today is Saturday and I still do not have the 200pp of the papers you said you were going to send me.
Nov. 2, 2007 - Roger Elvick Letter to Art - No facts to agree to until after Tax
Today, being Friday, the Ohio parole people (2) from this County of Delaware were here to make their pitch for their control of matters; they made their usual subtle assumptions and I had to set them straight.
Nov. 3, 2007 - Letter to Rocky to Art - Short Explanation of Escheat
I am still in Ohio due to the PRC They, actually don’t have to hold me here in Ohio but since they wish to assume that I am voluntarily accepting the same as a post-dated check (a tax warrant));
Nov. 6, 2007 - Roger Elvick Reply for Sal’s Summary Assessment Letter
I got the copy of Sal’s letter, today, and I think, maybe, a simple answer/response would be best to address the situation.
Nov. 13, 2007 - Letter from Roger Elvick to Friend
I recently wrote to my ex-wife, like I mentioned before, trying to give her some understanding of the assessments.
July 14, 2008 - Simulated Offer and Acceptence - Parking Enforcement - (Worked)
Related Articles, Books and Letters
The Anti-Government Movement Guidebook - For US Government Operative Spies for the Crown (Members of the Bar)
What you didn't know about Taxes and the Crown, Deevy Kidd, and Larry Becraft - Mark Owen - Feb. 17, 2005
When all crimes are commercial - CFR 27, Chapter 72.11 - Victimized by our so-called "Legal System"
Aug. 30, 2006 - The Game Explained (Possibly Roger Elvick, Not Sure)
What is it? It is the Issue - Likely authored by Roger Elvick
The Nature of a Remedy - 1099OID / 1040 Process - Jim Rivers and Obi One Kanobi - From America's Bulletin
Why the UCC Filing?
Judges Trust - Marvin Bryer
Act of State in English Law - 1906 - (Very Good Reading for Studying Sovereignty)
Howard Freeman - Public Law vs. Public Policy
How to Respond to Contempt of Court - (Know Rights or No Rights) - By William Mayhar
US ATTORNEY TRIAL MANUAL #664 - RE: TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION...THEY KNOW THE TRUTH BUT CONCEAL IT!
Dec. 26, 2004 - Letter to Jean Keating from David H.
Jean Keating Workshop - Dec. 25, 2004 - Sorry about the confusion...
Jean Keating Workshop - Statutes are Bonds
Only Compensated Acts Need Are Under License
What is a Surety Bond? (Frequently Asked Questions)
For Kings and Priests Only # 21
Exceprts From "How to File a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy with or Without a Lawyer"
Comparison of Chapted 11 and Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
BOOK - The Dispatch of Merchants - William Avery
Intro to "Banking Secrets"
AMERICAN BANKING ASSOCIATION - Principles of Banking, Fifth Edition by Paul Carrubba
Answer to the Enigma of a Capitalized Name
Fiction of Law
Fictional Names
National Check Fraud Center - 20 UCC Provisions Every Banker Should Know By Mary Beth Guard Attorney & Editor
In Review (Redemption) From Right Way L.A.W.
The 'Straw Man' - Corporate Entity - The 'ENS LEGIS'...as Explained from an International Perspective - Richard R. Riley
Interpretive Writings Of My Understandings Of Redemption. (Ver.2)(Written Anon. Not by this Website's Editor.)
The Hierarchy of the Law & the Application of Commercial Law : The Private Process for the Sovereign? - Author Unknown - American's Bulletin - Nov. 1999 - (This article was written prior to REDEMPTION and applies primarily to Commercial Law)
The Core of the Conflict - Redemption or Institutionalized Control and Servitude? - Dan Meador vs. Larry BeCraft - From American's Bulletin - Oct. 1999
Traffic "Win" in Oregon - From The American's Bulletin, May-June, 2000 - Click Here!!
Traffic "Win" in Colorado - From American's Bulletin, May-June, 2000 - Click Here!!
People as Products of Commerce - More Follow-up Articles
"Is Your Child Human Capital?" by Cindy Weatherly
&
Executive Order 13037 (Relative to above)
Walmart and the Prison Industry - Howard Griswold
Just Found!! - 73rd Congress, Sess I CH 1. March 9, 1933 - VERY IMPORTANT!!
General UCC Commerce Studies
Title of Nobility - Howard Griswold - 1994 (Good Introduction to UCC & Commercial Law)
Equitable Maxims
(Warning : People are getting into trouble using the ("Sight Drafts" the wrong way. I don't recommend you use them until or unless you are thoroughly aware of what you are doing and the possible consequences of what may happen anyways. And even then, I don't "recommend" that anyone use them. If you "need money" or you want to get "free money", then this is not for you and you don't understand this information. Ordering the package WILL NOT make you a multi-millionaire or put ANY money in your pocket. This has nothing to do with "getting rich" or anything like that. Using a "Draft" is exactly the same as the "Acceptance", except that it is something which they understand to be an "instrument", unlike an "Acceptance". That is the only difference. It is exactly the same, though. But, the bigger, more important difference is that when one is tendered in acceptance of an offer, the vendor usually does not know what to do with it, and they attempt to deposit it like a check. It comes back and they say "your check bounced", but they do not realize that it is not a "check", and therefore it cannot be treated like one. Then they want you arrested because they think you attempted to defraud them. The problem is that people do not understand what they are doing, here, without going into great detail.
(Web Editor's Note: "There is alot of controversy over the Redemption program. I myself have
been to many meetings and conversed with many important people. I am in touch with alot of
'key' people either directly or indirectly. My point I would would like to make here is that
THE MOST AMAZING THINGS YOU COULD EVER IMAGINE HAVE BEEN
HAPPENING AROUND REDEMPTION!! There are more and more GOOD things
happening all the time, and the process is just NOW (1-15-00) being PERFECTED.
People have been doing things wrong, but coming real close. Close enough that the judges or
whoever involved might either fight or walk away from it, BUT a recent event ended in the
judge stating to the defendant, "Oh, I see you are one of those 'EDUCATED' ones.".
Resulting in 2 counts being dismissed. There is plenty more good info. and i'll add a section for
it all soon)