Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Are we dealing with even FURTHER RETALIATION???
Wed Sep 27, 2017 09:43
184.63.170.49

scantv77
Ft. Smith Arkansas here is an UPDATE of what you should answer for:
So far an Attorney J. Shulan was 'Accidented' And the officials in Ft. Smith refused to do anything without the Attorney present. So therefore no payout of the court judgement. And the Attorney acting rather strange toward his client who should have been paid the funds due him.
Plantiff who has never been paid the funds due from Ft Smith just happened to be severly beaten.

Drive By shooting at the person's location whose case # 17-50000512 (or what ever number the case is changed to like the last time)
incident number 170055756for 6 months made sure the peerson could not do so. Dispite that the Ft. Smith officer was wrong in the first place.

for taking pain pill for pain? When you, given the same circumstances would most likely do the same?
Or are we talking retaliation?

Ft. Smith, you wait until the jail time in Crawford County is FINALLY called time complete. Sebastian County as waiting to take her to Ft. Smith for having someone close to her prescription in her purse because he didn't want to carry the prescription bulging in his pocket. Oh and he was right there with her being able to prove it was his prescription and she was just helping him by putting it in her purse temporarily. But the cop of course did not listen!!!

OK she has had a problem with drugs in the past BUT she was making great effort to put that in the past. Since she faught in the women's wrestlng yes, she has some additional pain. And that seems to have lead to extra drugs, EXCEPT when someone is trying to clean up their lives would it be nice if the Officials would encourage the person to do so?
Rather than discourage her, the court system is using two and three year old FTA's CR 2014-224, CR 2015-152 after cleaning up her act, these FTAs are being used to keep her away from her children even longer. September 27, 2017 she was supposed to be able to go to court to put all matters of the court away for good. So what happens? She is told she can not even have a court on the date set , she can NOT have any court, until DECEMBER 11, 2017. Boy that is certainly a speedy trail???
To top that off the 2015 FTA was caused by an 'Official' calling her and telling her she would not be allowed the help of drug court or any help there of. She understood it to mean if she showed up to court she would go directy to prison and not be there for her children.
Or was it the time that she had the perscription of the person, with her, in her purse. Because the person didn't want it in his pocket. The
cop would not even listen to the person whose presecription was in her purse. All that was needed was to simply check out the priscription was legal and the identification of the real owner of thee prescription, who was right there with her at the time the cop refused to listen. So when it went to court of couse it was immediately dismissed. The problem with that is her rap sheet so to say, was made to look even worse.
If anyone can look into this matter please set things right.


HERE is somthing else Secastian County should have to answer for:

And WHY when a case is already adjudicated and the Plantiff WON only to have case's has the monetary decision NOT be honorably paid??? Instead use a bogus excuse, (of if it were even close to the truth) the court would not have taken place nor the victory won for the Plantiff

Was it because there was a special meeting with Attorney J Shulan?
Isn't it amazing Atty J Shulan lived through that terrible 'accident' he had on his way to meet with his client in Ft. Smith who was the plaintiff who won the hard faught for case NO.66SCR-10-514
OR are we talking about further retaliation?


Ft. Smith remember there are a lot of good people looking into just what is really going on. USC Title 18 Section 4 is very important. If you know of illegal activity.

Does the above lack of payout have anything to do with what is below???


SCANTV77

And The Harassment Continues UNLESS?
Sat Sep 2, 2017 05:56

99.197.210.120
Follow up on the Ft Smith Arkansas situations:

1. Demands of the "Officials' of Ft. Smith are apparently trying to save the coffers from paying out for a Judgement against them. This case involved incarcerating a man for about 6 months for a so called $200 fine he could not pay. Because he was suddenly put in jail. A fine for the supposedly driving without a license, when he was lawfully and legally traveling with no need of a license.See referencse below for case adjudications.

2. Report was that the Pro Bono Attorney now suddenly wanted 30% of the disbursal of funds.­ Which was Okay with the person who was supposed to receive the payout.

3. Then the report was the Pro bono Attorney for some reason got as far as Eureka Springs and for some reason did not go any farther, though his appointment was last Monday August 28, 2017 to meet with the ft. Smith Prosecutor and or Officials.

4. Now to top this off the Attorney made excuse after excuse for not showing up in Ft. Smith.

5. And the person for whom the Attorney was working Pro Bono just happened to be extrememly beaten up.

6. The Prosecutor etc. to my knowledge refuses to go any further, with the payout of funds, owed the person who was beaten up. will not disburse without meeting with the Attorney.

7. Since the Attorney so far refuses to meet in Ft. Smith, more and more damage has been happening when the payment is not allowed by Ft. Smith Officials.

8. Though the amount was a rather large sum of money, it is not as much as it should be. Ft. Smith should be making arrangement to pay as court ordered, not just try to put off and whatever else they are up to.

Was the above the result of the the info below coming out???

scantv77
And The Harassment Continues UNLESS?
Sat Sep 2, 2017 05:56
99.197.210.120
Follow up on the Ft Smith Arkansas situations:

1. Demands of the "Officials' of Ft. Smith are apparently trying to save the coffers from paying out for a Judgement against them. This case involved incarcerating a man for about 6 months for a so called $200 fine he could not pay. Because he was suddenly put in jail. A fine for the supposedly driving without a license, when he was lawfully and legally traveling with no need of a license.See referencse below for case adjudications.

2. Report was that the Pro Bono Attorney now suddenly wanted 30% of the disbursal of funds.­ Which was Okay with the person who was supposed to receive the payout.

3. Then the report was the Pro bono Attorney for some reason got as far as Eureka Springs and for some reason did not go any farther, though his appointment was last Monday August 28, 2017 to meet with the ft. Smith Prosecutor and or Officials.

4. Now to top this off the Attorney made excuse after excuse for not showing up in Ft. Smith.

5. And the person for whom the Attorney was working Pro Bono just happened to be extrememly beaten up.

6. The Prosecutor etc. to my knowledge refuses to go any further, with the payout of funds, owed the person who was beaten up. will not disburse without meeting with the Attorney.

7. Since the Attorney so far refuses to meet in Ft. Smith, more and more damage has been happening when the payment is not allowed by Ft. Smith Officials.

8. Though the amount was a rather large sum of money, it is not as much as it should be. Ft. Smith should be making arrangement to pay as court ordered, not just try to put off and whatever else they are up to.

Was the above the result of the the info below coming out???


Solutions Exist even for the Judicial
Wed Aug 9, 2017 09:11
72.173.221.44

What would you think of a judge that does not all evidence in court?

What if that evidence was of a stabbing of an unarmed person trying to protect an unarmed 15 year old and was stabbed in the 15 year old's place, Oh yes and the stab wound was one inch from her heart?

Further evidence not allowed into court was the so called accused had a boken Matacarpal bone fracture, concussion, major bruises etc.from trying to protect himself and others. While the actual one doing the attacking had no injuries and was not even called to task? Multiple eyewitnesses could testify as to what happened but:- - -

What would you say to a cop who told eyewitnesses if they told what they saw they would be arrested? ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Location Ft Smith Arkansas
Regarding case # 17-50000512 (or what ever number the case is changed to like the last time)
incident number 170055756-00 reporting officer Hulsey #4159
'judge' Ben Beland residing set the hearing for 3rd of Augus 2017

Beland was this a retaliation for:
Rebuttal to Criminal Summons?

District Court of
Sebastian County, Arkansas
Fort Smith Division

Rebuttal to Criminal Summons:
17-01824 (and was obscured with another case #)


You lack Jurisdiction and if you proceed with this matter it will be taken to the International Court ITCCS. (See Attached list of some of the DeJure Common Law Courts that are being established or reestablished at this time. And refer to Supreme Court decision 14-1305)
“Generally, a plaintiff’s allegations of jurisdiction are sufficient, but when they are questioned, as in this case, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove jurisdiction. McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 1936, 298 U.S. 178, 56 S.Ct. 780, 80 L.Ed. 1135; Welsh v. American Surety Co., 5 Cir. 1951, 186 F.2d 16; 5 C. Wright & A. Miller, supra Sec. 1363 at 653. . . .” Rosemound Sand and Gravel Co. v. Lambert Sand and Gravel Co., 469 F.2d 416 (1972).
Being a member of the BAR Association is alliance if not outright FRAUD on the De Jure Courts and the People. Whether BAR calls itself the British Accredited Registry, the BAR has through the Treaty of 1947 made all American BAR association members foreign agents. And under: Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) is a United States law (22 U.S.C. § 611 et seq.) passed in 1938 you must declare yourself as foreign agent.
18 U.S.C. § 219 is not a registration statute, but is a conflict of interest statute which makes it a criminal offense for a "public official" of the United States in the executive, legislative, or judicial branches to be or to act as an agent of a foreign principal required to register under FARA. This does not apply to special government employees who register under FARA and obtain certification from the head of the employing agency that such employment is required in the national interest.

Furthermore due to the Court decision U.S. Supreme Court 14:1305 decision: you must present DeJure Credentials to proceed in any manner.

Since all members of the American BAR Association are under the Treaty of 1947 putting the ABA under the United Nationa. It has been found that the ABA members including Judges are foreign agents and are requited to notify parties interacted with. Which means every person going into a court room or dealing with an ABA member, should be notified ra\Judge and any BAR Association member is a foreign Agent.

Article I of ABA treaty with the UN 1947

ABA is the acronym for American BAR Association

BAR the meaning of BAR is British Accredited Registry

So far on this case:
1. Failure of timely Notification and thereby denial of Due Process. Notification for March 3, 2017 hearing not sent out until March 7, 2017 by certified letter #7014 2120 0001 2623 4883
This is called lying by omission.
It is also constructive fraud.

2. This action has no Jurisdiction in any BAR Association court.

3. This action is being taken against Virginia Charters etc. 1606, 1609, 1612 and the U.S. Constitution

Article VI

All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Keeping in mind that the President has the power to make treaties with the sufficient approval of the Senate. Also remembering the original 13th amendment the BAR has no right to proceed to make a treaty with foreign entities of the United Nations. Or to allow its members to violate the original 13th amendment.

The Original Thirteenth Article of Amendment
To The Constitution For The United States
"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." [Journal of the Senate]
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding

3. The mandate of actual Law under the Charters is "Do NO Harm"
As per Article VI previous:
Charters of 1606, 1609, 1612 are among the key elements meant be the 'All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.'
Main elements of these Charters are:
A. Due to being written by King James VI and I the direct Heir still must see to it that the points expressed in the Charters are adhered to.
B. These requirements include as the only real LAW of the land 'Do NO harm!
C. Certain financial mandates have been coopted with the help of the BAR to use the funds for
wrong purposes. These financial interests should be directed back to the rightful location
and that is the House of Stuart Estate which, is centered at this time in the USA.


“. . . If then the courts are to regard the constitution; and he [sic] constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature; the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 177-178 (1803).

Article VI, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution, as such species of oath or affirmation is expressly prohibited by the provisions of said article and clause, supra, and therefore, for purposes of accession to “The judicial Power of the United States,” Constitution, Art. III, § 1, void; to wit:

“. . . Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.

The religious test required as a qualification to the office of justice of the Supreme Court or district judge in the oath or affirmation at Section 8 of the Judiciary Act taken by every such judicial officer means that no such justice or judge is authorized to exercise “The judicial Power of the United States,” Constitution, Art. III, § 1, anywhere within the Union for failure to have taken an oath or affirmation that conforms to the provisions of Article VI, Clause 3 of the Constitution.

September 24, 1789, requires a religious test as a qualification
most modern of which is 28 U.S.C. § 453 Oath of justices and judges of the United States, December 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5124,

Federal, Territorial, and Municipal
Municipal: courts of general jurisdiction created by Congress under implied authority of Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution following incorporation of the District of Columbia February 21, 1

Click here to receive daily updates