I had these forwarded to me. Check out this case and see if you agree with this guys stance on Land Patents and the original Washington state Constitution Vs. the one signed in 1889.

Man stops paying taxes citing 1878 state constitution

Clark Co. auctioned David Darby’s land after he refused to pay property taxes

By Tim Becker and KOIN 6 News Staff Published: September 16, 2014, 5:21 pm Updated: September 16, 2014, 5:39 pm

AMBOY, Wash. (KOIN 6) — Clark County auctioned David Darby’s land on Tuesday to cover back taxes for the property because Darby stopped paying them in 2009.

Darby has owned 4.7 acres of land in Amboy, Wash., for 35 years. Property, he said, he acquired a land patent for, meaning he doesn’t have to pay taxes for the land under Washington’s 1878 State Constitution.

Clark County auctioned David Darby’s land on Tuesday to cover back taxes for the property because Darby stopped paying them in 2009, Sept. 16, 2014. (KOIN 6)

He said he won’t be leaving the land anytime soon despite the recent auction.

“I have a legal and a lawful right to it,” Darby said.

The county sold his property for just over $63,000 in an online auction on Tuesday.

“He was paying taxes up until that time and then he stopped,” said Clark County Treasurer Doug Lasher.

Lasher said Darby‘s land is one of 52 properties in foreclosure right now.

Records indicated that Darby had not paid property taxes since 2009. He said he stopped paying because the county would not recognize the 1878 constitution.

“It’s all longhand. They didn’t have copiers then,” said Darby.

Darby produced a copy of Washington’s 1878 State Constitution, which prohibits the taxation of patented land. However, the state operates under a different constitution that was validated 11 years later in 1889 – one that Darby calls illegal.

The county said its work regarding the auction of the land is done. According to Lasher, it’s not the county’s responsibility to remove Darby from the property.

“That [land patent] is something that he will have to argue with the new owner,” Lasher said.

Lasher added the county will have its back taxes when the person who won the bidding war pays up, but Darby said he’s not done fighting.

“I feel sorry for the buyer,” Darby said.

He said he plans to pursue legal action and prove the older constitution is the true one.

 

Southern Poverty Law Center

The Hatewatch blog is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based civil rights organization.

Washington State ‘Sovereign Citizen’ Plans Showdown Over His Property – But Only in Court, He Says

By David Neiwert on September 9, 2014 - 1:34 pm, Posted in Antigovernment, Sovereign Citizens

Self-described “sovereign citizen” David Darby wants everyone to know that he has no intention of getting involved in any armed standoffs with any law enforcement officers from Clark County, Wash., where he lives. He says he just wants his day in court – even though, whenever he has had one of those, he has lost.

The Reflector

Most recently, the 69-year-old Darby – a longtime antigovernment “Patriot” movement activist, dating back to the 1990s, and political gadfly – was informed by a Superior Court judge that his 4.7-acre property in rural Amboy would be put up for auction, following foreclosure proceedings brought against him by Clark County for failure to pay his taxes.

“It’s all constitutional,” he insists. “Everything I’ve done is constitutional. If it’s not constitutional, then all they have to do is prove it. And I will stop this. I will pay the taxes. But because they have not done this, I would not pay the taxes. And I cannot get this into federal court until I am hurt. So once they actually sell my property, I’ve been hurt. Then I will file in federal court.”

Darby has only a few days left to wait. The auction of his property is scheduled to take place between 8 and 11 a.m. on Sept. 16.

Darby, claiming that he is a “citizen” exempt from such duties, stopped paying his taxes in 2008, beginning a long-running dispute with the Clark County Treasurer’s office that culminated in 2013 with foreclosure proceedings on his rural home – a mobile home on raised blocks — and its accompanying wooded acreage.

However, as Darby made clear back then, he purposely forced these proceedings as part of his strategy to get the issue of his claims to a “land patent” on the property heard in a federal court. “I’ve been setting up the strategy to do this because no one has ever gotten sovereign ownership of land in the courts,” Darby said. “The only way to set it up was to go into foreclosure. … This isn’t about my land; it’s about the [state] constitution.”

Indeed, Darby claims that the current Washington constitution, passed in 1889, is not valid – and that the state’s proper constitution is actually one that was drawn up in 1878, when statehood was first suggested. He also characterizes this document as explicitly creating sovereign citizenship for state residents, as well as outlawing property taxes and liens on property.

“We were already a state before they did the 1889 constitution,” he insists.

He claims he went through a complicated legal process of filing various affidavits and making public proclamations that resulted in him owning a “land patent” on his property.

“Anyone who buys my land has a big problem because I have a lawful title to my land,” he told a reporter.

Darby has been active in far-right circles in Washington state since the 1990s, when he was the Clark County representative of the U.S. Militia Association, a “constitutionalist” militia-organizing outfit directed by an Idaho man named Samuel Sherwood.

It was then, Darby told Hatewatch, that he first became interested in “common-law courts” and other sovereign citizenship theories. He says he was originally drawn to far-right “constitutionalist” legal theories by Sherwood and other far-right figures, but then became so thoroughly devoted to sovereign citizen theories.

“I found out about [sovereign citizenship] once I found out that the Constitution does not apply to U.S. citizens, it only applies to citizens of the United States of America, which ended in 1861 when martial law was instituted by Lincoln,” Darby says. “I've actually studied the law, the legislation, and I've been studying this now ever since those days, and I've figured it out for myself. It’s not that I’m listening to anybody else, I’ve figured it all out.”

Darby told reporter Tyler Graf of the Daily Columbian that anyone who buys the property will have to force him to leave. “We’ll have to see what happens,” Darby said. “I don’t plan on leaving. I don’t know what they’re going to try. … They know I am very serious about this. All I want is my constitutional rights protected, like every other citizen in Washington.”

That means the matter may eventually come down to a sheriff’s deputy arriving with an order to remove Darby. But Darby told Hatewatch that if matters get that far, he intends to leave peacefully.

“I’m not going to do anything radical or anything,” he avers. “I have no intention of anything like that.”

However, he said that things won’t get that far, because he intends to file a federal lawsuit against Clark County this week – as soon as they put his property up for auction: “I’m getting ready to file another suit, now that they've hurt me, in Superior Court,” he told Hatewatch.

Darby has written about his beliefs about sovereign citizenship at length and posted several lengthy exegeses on the Internet about them. According to a study published about his filings, Darby has claimed to have received financial backing from an anonymous East Coast organization.

Darby says he understands that people espousing sovereign citizen beliefs have gotten into armed standoffs and shootouts with law-enforcement officers over situations like his. Those people, he says, are not like him.

“The problem is that they don’t understand that the officers and all these are only doing what they’re told to do,” Darby says. “We understand that. We’re not going to have any armed confrontation. We don’t want anybody hurt. I would rather have my day in court. And that’s all I've ever wanted.”

Personally I think he's got a case. He is correct about his right to own his land outright according to the original Washington state Constitution. Property taxes are unconstitutional.

Comments?

Views: 485

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This is a good opportunity for Mr Darby to go and meet with the Sheriff and educate him about his oath of office and the power he has over the feds. 

Tis true for example that you could write a check say to the sheriff and judges and state on it that it's your contribution for their great job and protection for you as a citizen and for upholding the oath of office under the Constitution and so on.......

When trouble arises you could remind them of their oath duty and protection for you based on the contract implied of  cashed checks.    Hmmm??

Right Julian;

I helped a friend that was born with no iris' in his eyes.  He could see with the help of a MACHINEST Monocle (machine lathe people use to create exact products).  He had a heart attack and was in a large medical facility who force-managed patients. 

They enrolled him in their HEART Recovery program, which he advised that his insurance carrier would not pay, and they assured him all Insurance Companies Paid.  They ran up a 12,000 dollar bill on this service (otherwise they would not release him from their hospital) and he walked out.

Now comes the bills.  He paid his co-pay part yet they began to demand (and threaten bill collection suit) payment of all the bill.

Our pale blue contract on the back stated, "This is final payment for my part of the Co-Payment"  If you cash this check, you fully understand and accept the remaining charges as non-payable due to the fact you were officially notified that my insurance carrier had been contacted and advised that they did not cover the services provided. 

They cashed the check.

They continued to bill.

They sicked a bill collector on him

We made a copy of the back side of his check before mailing to the Hospital accounting.

We sent that to the bill collector and info copy to the Hospital Legal Department.

Never heard from them again.

What this entire discussion has brought to mind is the financial manner in which the United States Government has corralled all people.

Roosevelt pledged all people as collateral in 1933 to get out of a bankruptcy scenario.

He most probably did this through the United States, Inc which is Washington D.C. making it look like to the people that he was saving the baby.

Meanwhile, the greatest financial scam in the history of mankind has ensued.

As Congress has progressed in it's own right of the Legislative Division of our Constitutional Government, other branches have fallen in line with the criminal government managers.

A little history:  A 13th Amendment was written (No Title of Nobility) in 1810 and Monroe declared it not ratified in 1820 era.  However, the hold out state, Virginia, had published their own Constitution in the 1817 era in a book that is currently in their Department of State library.  That book shows the 13th Amendment (matter of fact, it includes the entire Federal Constitution with the 13th Amendment) of the US and the same wording as the an amendment to the State of Virginia Constitution.  A copy was mailed to Congress and to the President Monroe.

Why would Monroe not recognize Virginia as ratifying the constitution.  All protocol of the day was met.  Monroe was born of the noble  clan'age of Europe.  Judges wanted the title of nobility and so did the BAR people.  Trusting that after the Revolutionary War, no one would notice he made the ruling - not the Congress.

Fast Forward, Lincoln was in the final stages of the Civil War, and was ready to stop the Martial Law period.  He was killed to permit the usurpers of government to continue their scam.

The 13th Anti Slavery Amendment was passed (ratified) with the input and concurrence of the Southern States setting in Congress in 1865.  All ratified as required.  Yet, when the 14th was penned the POWERS and CULPABLE Congressmen would not permit the Southern States to be seated stating they were not members of the United States (or some other cockamamie routine).  Without the Southern Count, the Congress could pull enough states to claim to have ratified the 14th.  Now, you decide if Congress accepted the Southern States Vote on the 13th, then why in the hell did they not consider the Southern States Votes on the 14th two years later unless there was a GOVERNMENT CONSPIRACY in being - FRAUD on the NATION would be the charge.  FRAUD does not terminate on a exact period date.

Same for the 15th, and again, the 16th (tax) was not ratified correctly - SAME Scenario.

Then comes the Creation of the Birth Certificate as a method of creating a taxable seat, and putting every baby butt in the seat.  This permitted ROOSEVELT to place a borrowing amount on the living earning expectancy of every BABY.  (Ongoing today but falling apart).

This TAX issue was the beginning of the BUREAU of INTERNAL REVENUE as named and referenced in Congressional Record and Laws.  No change with exception of periodic RECONSTRUCTION and REORGANIZATION of GOVERNMENT through Exec Orders and Plans which were accepted by Congress.

In 1954 Eisenhower renamed the Bureau of Internal Revenue to the Internal Revenue Service.

Meanwhile, that same gang of USURPING FEDERAL EMPLOYEES including presidents managed to slowly change the meaning of the SERVICE word to that of a corporation.  Yet in the PURE Legislative Branch Documentation, it is still a department under the Secretary of Treasury to this date. 

In the Carter, Bush,  Clinton, Bush, and OBAMA reign of terror, trillions of dollars have been filtered away from the tax paying citizens through false banking and false government.

NOW:  Back to this contractual issue.

We should be able to pull off our own sly of hand trick when dealing with thieves.  Here is one that was published a few weeks ago that I saw and like.  FORM 1040.  Right above your signature and replacing the UNDER OF PENALTY OF PERJURY

Without Prejudice UCC 1-308,  we are Sovereigns, and we are volunteer tax payers that certify we fulfill all interpretative requirements  of Title 26 USC, as litigated pursuant to rulings under Title 28 USC.  (Size 6 font and enlarge the signature across this wording. - as litigated refers to Volunteer Tax payer which judicial has confirmed.)

My rule of thumb, if the government screws me, I screw them.  In another instance that I am aware of, a person travelling on I10 in Florida west bound was trapped behind two semi trucks travelling side by side on a two lane west bound length of road at 60 MPH.  A deputy dog from one county ticketed him for 86 MPH and the deputy had a hound dog in the car standing on the antenna, and slobbering and shedding fur.  (Was this fur flying speed, slobber speed, or Judicial Speed of ignorance).  The individual appealed to the Circuit court and was thrown out on the SLOBBER statement.  He then audited the state of Florida and found $350,000,000 missing from Trust Funds that were funded from traffic ticket revenue.  Florida spent over $10,000,000 to solve the problem he caused them (late 1990's) case.

Let us all take the examples of Helping the Person with a Hospital Bill; and this example of fighting city hall. 

It is all Contracts - we have a contract to pay our property tax, and the tax collector has a contract with us not to blow the money (Common Core, Agenda 21, etc).

Think of a way to bring the local people under control, go after their bonds and then get rid of them in order to vote honest people into office.

I think that is a conflict of interest. They can't take that. gratuity....

To David Darby:

You are wise NOT to confront Law enforcement. Instead, take names of every elected and appointed government servant connected to the foreclosure sale, purchase, and law enforcement concerning your property.

I hope that you can prove and win your case. You will own MORE than your property when you get done because when government servants operate outside of their authority (remember, ignorance of the Law is NO excuse), they become liable under Title 8 USC 242. If they abuse their power under "Color of Law" they are no longer protected by their office. This goes for judges, police, and county employees. You can sue them individually as well as their department or office.

Good Luck! May God bless.

Good one David,

But don't you mean Title 18 USC 241, 242? And you're right; you CAN sue the house out from under them. They ARE NOT protected by saying "I was just doing my job". They MUST be acting in a constitutional manor to "Protect and Serve".

The problem is I don't think they understand that what they're supposed to be protecting is the Constitution and the idea they should be serving is sovereignty of the individual and ALL of the protections in The Bill of Rights and not the corporate and very political agenda they currently serve.

RSS

© 2017   Created by Keith Broaders.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service