An Open Paper By

                                         BILL MEDINA
                                       Post Office Box 70400
                                    Sunnyvale, California, U.S.A.
                                      Postal Zone: 94086-0400
 
REFERENCES

Black's Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition. (Hereinafter: Black's, Page _____.)
Bouvier's Law Dictionary and Concise Encyclopedia, Third revision (Eighth Edition) 1914, ISBN 0-8994-335-8, (Hereinafter: Bouvier's Volume _____, Page _____.)
Constitution FOR the United States of America (hereinafter: by Article or Amendment), in pari materia with the California Constitution pursuant to Article III, Section 1 thereof.
The Supreme Court on ABROGATION OF RIGHTS: Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491 (1966).
The Supreme Court on COMMON-LAW PLEA TO JURISDICTION: Roberts v. Lewis 144 U.S. 653:
The Supreme Court on the COURTS OF STAR CHAMBER: Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806
The Supreme Court on JURISDICTION: Maxfield's Lessee v. Levy 4 U.S. 308, 311, 312 (1797).
The Supreme Court on RIGHTS OF CONTRACT: Hale v. Henkel, 20 U.S. 43, 74-75 (1906)
 
                                              PART ONE

STATUS
"The status of an individual used as a legal term, means the legal position of the individual in or with regard to the rest of the community. L. R. 4 P.D. 11. The rights, duties, capacities and incapacitates which determine a person to a given class, constitutes his status; Campb. Austin 137. ... ... The action of assumpsit must be reckoned a technical instrument which gave no small help to the forces which were making for the transition from status to contract; 3 Holdsw. Hist. E. L. 349." Bouvier's Volume 3, page 3129.

MAJOR PREMISE
NATURE'S GOD Created Mankind, Mankind created Constitutions, Constitutions created governments created Rules, Codes, Regulations, and/or Statutes (hereinafter called Enactments), most of which are nefariously Executed and Applied as some government -sponsored Court - Crime -Revenue Raising-Activity.

The presumption that the THE PEOPLE are subject to government Jurisdiction by way of government Enactments, presumes that THE PEOPLE are subject to those Jurisdictions created by the Constitutions, which in-turn created Such governments in a self-perpetuating fashion.
The Colonists' intent not to create a SOVEREIGN but rather, to further bind the Branches of government is made clear in the Preamble To The Bill Of Rights-December 15, 1791.

"The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, IN ORDER TO PREVENT MISCONSTRUCTION OR ABUSE OF ITS POWERS, THAT FURTHER DECLARATORY AND RESTRICTIVE CLAUSES SHOULD BE ADDED: And as extending the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution."
The Unlawful presumption that the Colonists intended to establish a SOVEREIGN, by Their Constitutional Charter, thereafter conferring upon Such SOVEREIGN certain Jurisdiction over the Colonists Themselves, is properly debunked by: Article I., Section 9, Clause 8

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: --"and Article I., Section 10, Clause 1 "No State shall ... grant any Title of Nobility."

Any Jurisdiction emanating from a presumption of a fiction is presumptive or fictitious, and Such is a Factitious Tool For Unlawful Control.  Government sovereignty over THE PEOPLE is a presumption and a fiction, and which when once repudiated, must thereafter be proved to exist.
If the Individual cannot be Proved to be subject to the Jurisdiction of any Constitution or Other Social Contract or Compact, He also cannot be proved to be subject to the Jurisdiction of any Branch of government Created Thereunder. Likewise, if it cannot be Proved that The Individual is DIRECTLY Subject to the Jurisdiction of any Legislature, it also cannot be Proved that He is INDIRECTLY Subject to Such Jurisdiction by way of any Legislative Enactments. In the absence of proof that The Individual is subject to the Jurisdiction of any Constitution or other Social Contract or Compact, Jurisdiction over Him DOES NOT EXIST.
 

ARGUMENT - SUMMARY
The general requirement that "... the burden is on the defendant to show the nonexistence of Jurisdictional facts; Russell v. Butler, (Tex. civ App.) 47 S.W.406; Gilchrist v. Oil Land Co., 21 W.Va.115, 45 Am.Rep.555.", (Bouvier's Volume 2, Page 1763), is resolved by Article VI which defines exactly Who is subject to the Jurisdiction of the Constitution, and exactly Who shall be Contractually Bound by Oath or Affirmation to support Such Constitution in Consideration for Offices Of Public Trust and those Benefits of Public Service and Public Employment. "... The Senators and Representative before mentioned, and the members of the several State Legislatures, and all executives and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several
States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; ..." Article VI

Since the intent of Article VI is to define exactly to Whom the Constitutional Jurisdiction applies; since the fact exists that THE PEOPLE are excluded from the requirements of Article VI, prima facie; See: INCLUSIO UNIS EST EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS: Black's, Page 687; since no presumption that THE PEOPLE are subject to the Jurisdiction of the Constitution is, or can be made; since all Constitutions are considered in pari materia with all other Constitutions; since all Constitutions are subject to the provisions of Article VI; since no Constitution operates on THE PEOPLE at-large by virtue of the fact that THE PEOPLE are excluded from the requirements of Article VI, et sqq; then in pursuing His occupations of Common-Right, the Individual has made no Oath or Affirmation supporting any Constitution, and He is not subject to any Constitutional Jurisdictions.

CONCLUSION - SUMMARY
If The Individual is not subject to any Constitutional Jurisdictions, He is also not subject to any Enactment made by any Constitutionally Created Legislature; if He is not subject to any Constitutional Jurisdictions, He is also not subject to any Jurisdiction presumed by any
Constitutionally Created Executive Branch of Government; and if He is not subject to any Constitutional Jurisdictions, He is also not subject to any Jurisdiction presumed by any
Constitutionally Created Judiciary.

In the complete absence of any Lawful and verified Oath or Affirmation made by a Non participant Individual, to support any Constitution; or in the complete absence of proving a Higher Title to that Property Known and Described as the Non participant Individual Himself, In Personam Jurisdiction does not exist; and in the complete absence of proving a Lawful and voluntary contract made by Such Non participant, pledging Himself and/or His Property- Rights to certain specified performance, Subject Matter Jurisdiction does not exist; and in the complete absence of any Lawful and verified complaint made against Such Non participant, wherein a Real Injured Party Claims a Damage, no criminal Jurisdictions exist; thus in the complete absence of proving the existence of either In Personam and or Subject Matter Jurisdiction, governmental Jurisdiction over the Non participant Individual does not exist. QUOD ERAT DEMONSTRANDUM.

TORT REMEDY

Every Act perpetrated by any Constitutional Created Branch of government while absent Jurisdiction; every Such Act being required to be made unlawfully under Forces of Arms; and every Such act having been made without probable cause; then, every Such Act is required to have been made as a Trespass, and/or other Tort upon a Non participant Individual, and shall
constitute a Case to be pursued against the Perpetrator in an Action At Law for the recovery of Damages.