by Frederick Mann
The Thieves Burn their Fingers
Earlier this year some terrocrats (terrorist bureaucrats) in South Florida stole the car of someone who, as "public servants," they're supposed to serve and protect.
The "victim" - hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff - being wise to the ways of terrocrats, had put all his assets out of harm's way, except his car. So the terrocrats, following their policy of terror and plunder, stole his car. They probably figured that was all they could steal from him.
But they chose the wrong plaintiff. He wrote a Criminal Complaint, swore the Affidavit below, and filed criminal charges against the thieves and their accomplices.
Very important in this saga is the attitude of the plaintiff. From his perspective, certain people had committed crimes against him and his property. And what do you do when people commit crimes against you? Well, you gather the available details, get all your facts straight, possibly do some legal research, and write a Criminal Complaint.
Most victims of terrocrat crime may automatically and unconsciously assume that they are worse off if crimes are committed against them by terrocrats, rather than "non-government" criminals. There are two important distinguishing factors here:
(1) "Non-government" criminals usually run away after committing their crimes and may be difficult to find, whereas terrocrat criminals tend to go back to their offices where they are relatively easy to locate. Also, if you ask terrocrat criminals for their names and serial numbers, they often oblige, whereas "non-government" criminals are seldom so "co-operative!"
(2) Terrocrat criminals tend to commit two types of crimes: (a) Crimes in accordance with their "law" - they just "do their jobs in accordance with the law" - making it difficult or impossible for the victim to get any recourse; (b) Crimes that clearly and unequivocally violate their own "law."
An example of a type (a) crime (committed by a policeman) would be if a policeman arrested a prostitute when the evidence that he or she engaged in sex for pay is indisputable - and the policeman's "law" prohibits sex for pay.
The theft of the plaintiff's car, described in the Affidavit below, is a type (b) crime. The terrocrats clearly violated their own "law" by not obtaining a court order before seizing the car.
STATE OF FLORIDA ) ) ss COUNTY OF PALM BEACH )
AFFIDAVIT OF PROBABLE CAUSE
FOR CRIMINAL TRESSPASS AND GRAND THEFT
COMES NOW, _____________ being duly sworn upon his oath deposes and sats as follows:
Affiant files this affidavit because he has probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed against the people of the state of Florida and particularly against ____________ by the following persons individually and acting in concert.
a). As to _____________, On or about ________ 1995, at approximately 8:00 A.M., an agent of the Internal Revenue Service known as Revenue Officer ___________ entered upon the property of affiant without permission of affiant, against his will, and over his objections, without a court order or other authority whatsoever, thereby comitting the crime of tresspass.
Once she unlawfully gained access to the property, __________ proceeded to commit the felony of Grand Theft and Conversion by removing from the premises the following described property: a __________ automobile, VIN No. ___________.
b). As to __________, Deputy Sheriff ___________ and Sgt. __________ on or about _______ 1995, at 8:00 A.M. at the direction of Internal Revenue Service Revenue Officer ____________ , together and individually, and at her request but without any court order and without permission of the affiant entered upon the property of affiant, against his will and over his objections, thereby comitting the crime of tresspass.
Once Deputy Sheriff _________ and Sgt. __________ gained access to the property, they individually and in concert with Revenue Officer ____________ proceeded to commit the felony of Grand Theft and Conversion by removing from the premises the automobile of affiant with particularity described as one __________ automobile, VIN No. _________________.
c). On _________ 1995, at about 8:00 A.M., an agent and employee of ________ Towing, Inc. (_______ Last name unknown) entered upon the property and individually, without affiant's permission, against his will, and over his objections, without a court order or other authority whatsoever, thereby committing the crime of tresspass.
Once he unlawfully gained access to the property, he proceeded to commit the felony of Grand Theft and Conversion by removing from the premises the following described property: a __________ automobile, VIN No. _________________.
d). On _______ 1995, at approximately 1:00 P.M. _________ Supervisor of _________ , refused to release my property and admitted that she authorized __________ 's actions when ______ entered upon the property of affiant without permission of affiant, against his will, and over his objections, without a court order or other authority whatsoever, thereby comitting the crime of tresspass and ______ was in agreement with them and a co-conspirator in the action. Further, when asked for her delegation of authority, she failed to properly display same.
Now, therefore, the Sheriffs of the State of Florida are directed to take the above named persons into custody forthwith.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT
Before me, the undersigned authority, did personally appear ____________, personally known to be the person described above who acknowledged that he did in fact prepare the foregoing document under his own free will this _______________ 1995.
Notary Public, State of Florida at Large
My Commission Expires: _____________
Return of the Vehicle
It took the plaintiff seven days to put together a 10-page Criminal Complaint as well as the above Affidavit, and to deliver the Affidavit to the various parties concerned, including the State Attorney, the Internal Security Division of the IRS, and the Captain of the Sheriff's Department. The car was returned in less than three days after the delivery of the Affidavit. (This would probably have happened sooner if the Affidavit had been delivered to the Criminal Investigation Division of the IRS, instead of the Internal Security Division.)
The plaintiff reports that the sheriffs routinely operated on the basis that they believed the IRS agents had obtained the necessary court orders before seizing or confiscating property. Because the plaintiff regards the sheriffs and towing company people as relatively innocent parties to the crimes, he decided to not proceed against them.
However, the plaintiff is awaiting an "Administrative Settlement" from the IRS. In the absence of a satisfactory settlement, he intends to insist that the IRS agents be arrested and prosecuted for their crimes. (In this case, if the sheriffs were to fail to arrest the IRS agents, a Criminal Complaint could be filed against them for failing to perform their duties.)
Other Possible Charges
Prior to the automobile theft, the plaintiff received some "threatening communications" from the IRS. Not being a "taxpayer subject to IRS jurisdiction," may constitute attempted extortion by the IRS which could be actionable.
The plaintiff could also file suit under Title 18 for "Deprivation of Rights" or under Title 42 for "Violation of Civil Rights."
Very interestingly, an IRS attorney called the towing company owner and asked him if the car had been taken from the driveway or street, or from the car port. The answer was, "From the car port." Then the attorney asked if the car port was attached to the plaintiff's house or under a common roof. The answer was, "Yes."
"Oh no!" said the attorney, apparently alarmed. The concern of the IRS attorney was probably because the action of the IRS agents could also be construed as 'breaking-and-entering'."
The significance of this is that the Affidavit could have been broadened to include the fact that the thieves and their accomplices committed or were parties to the felony of 'breaking-and-entering.' In any case, the plaintiff has the option to add 'breaking-and-entering' to the charges against the IRS terrocrats.
A further possibility is to ask IRS terrocrats whether they are representatives or employees of the U.S. Federal Govenment. If they say "yes," they could possibly be criminally charged for fraudulently impersonating government officials - see next article.
Steps to Consider
In America, right now, there are almost certainly more than 10,000 people - possibly more than 100,000 - who adopt the attitude of the above plaintiff and who take the kind of actions the plaintiff did, when being criminally victimized by terrocrats. This number is probably growing rapidly.
At the same time, the legal means to defend yourself, your earnings, your property and assets is improving all the time and becoming more accessible via Internet, computer bulletin boards, and from patriot organizations that specialize in this area.
It's for such reasons that the terrocrat tyranny is gradually losing its power. However, some creatures are most dangerous when experiencing their last death throes - so, beware!