Under article 144 A, B, C and D of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia, the first thing the judge must do is IDENTIFY the parties, that they are under contract (registered) and have 'board tokens' or legal personas identified by cedula (23 of this code). This cedula is the highest form of evidence that a contract exists stating that we have re-lieged and waived the rights enumerated in the preamble of the constitution. This is, of course, why the FIRST thing on Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda's agenda when he invaded our house was to ensure our 'abandoned and neglected' children were to be registered. The registration turns the codes into enforceable law. In that way, articles 5a), 10) and 11) of this code explain that those of this status are SUBJECTS to the obligations and duties of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia.
These terms, obligations and duties can be defined and are commercial in nature and found in the law of obligations which is an element of contract law. Prior to the existence of that contract (which is titled with a similar appellation as the child using capitis diminutio maxima to disclose the status and a number to facilitate the system's need for automated referencing. With this document in hand, the judge can identify the player as a minor persona and he can then apply the codes within his judicial discretion. Until that point, 144a), the judge cannot sit and determine ANYTHING because there is neither a crime, nor a breached contract. Obviously his goal was not to follow administrative due process, but instead operate on behalf of the United Nations and PANI. (Admittedly, they offer far better ladders to climb for cooperative judges and bigger threats to those who do not play than I do.)
However, I am curious Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, how could my wife mock you when you refused to see or hear her? You hid from her and she was not permitted your name or the case file. As well, PANI attorney, Patricia Mesen Arroyo, told Birgitte there were no charges and refused to answer or rebut any of Birgitte's quires, constructive notices or affidavits. Obviously, if Birgitte was the one Dr. Juan Miguel Chaccon Cerdas wanted, then Birgitte would receive the case file, simply because it is illegal and unlawful to refuse discovery to the individual charged. The only thing that was mocked on September 6, 2011 in Puriscal, Costa Rica was the preamble to the constitution, article 194 and my wife's honor. That mockery was conducted by you,Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, the trustee of those sacred principles.
Part B of article 144 of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia explains that once OUR children have been identified as Their minor personas under the principles of Parens patriae the minors will be explained the importance and meaning of the code and that they may have to be separated from their parents, if the judge deems it necessary (144b, cue to code 46). Imagine the utter density of this private tribunal reading my children their 'rights' when these codes are not rights, but contractual duties and that they must pay homage to the state (11a of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia). Reading children their 'rights' is a completely moot point because, quite simply, the registered minor persons HAVE NO CHOICE. They cannot waive their 'rights' because these are not rights. The code explains a series of OBLIGATIONS that prohibits the child from saying no to its new guardian, the state. So what would the point be in ensuring MY children know state codes that they cannot understand or articulate, after all you declared that you would have your way with my children, regardless of our desires. That is exactly how the code reads. However, due to the registration (13.3) issue and preambular exclusions in (8), its applicability on them is determined by me, their father, not Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, lest we re-liege that fundamental right in the preamble. That right is entrusted by Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda's oath in 194. These psychopsematic state social workers are possibly the sickest, most mentally defective people on the planet. The irony is that many of these 'child experts' have no children of their own and are licensed by an entity that cannot reproduce (the state). What does this indicate to you?
Even if registered children say no to the vaccines, they WILL receive them (43 of the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia) and they cannot annul the obligation. How can a right be forced? Simple, these entitlements enumerated here in the Código de Niñez y Adolescencia are not rights, they are obligations for the obligor (debtor) for the obligee (creditor). Civil law is all commerce. The problem these ambitious bureaucrats faced is that my children were never registered with the State of Costa Rica. You cannot be obliged to any man or group of men, be it government or any other civil artifice without consent. Anything else is tantamount to involuntary servitude which is unlawful as well as illegal.
With the court's intentions on hand that the purpose of the court hearing on the 25 of October, 2011 in Puriscal, Costa Rica was to expose our children to the state when in fact no discovery of a crime or civil breach was yet produced. Judge, Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, had for all intents and purposes taken over as representative of the affiant, the United Nations (PANI). We expected to see a continuation of this breach of jurisprudence and the purpose of our request for the hearing was to simply buy time. The case was fabricated, and the summary judgement was already made. All the judge needed was for us to succumb to their intimidating tactics, sacrifice our children and submit to their fraudulent authority for a measure of relief of their terrorism practices.
What is interesting is that despite the fact that everyone in the town knew where we were, the Judge did not act with the same fervor as he had when he raided our house on September 6, 2011. The local political backlash, if they had conducted a manhunt at our daughter's funeral or safe house, would have been horrific for the local authorities.
Unfortunately for them, that is exactly what would have been required IF INDEED we were culpable of endangering the lives of our children. SO IF WE WERE A THREAT to our children, then why, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, did you not prioritize a campaign to find us? If your charge against my wife is accurate, then your lack of action in locating and rescue 'endangered children' is a delict, as you would be negligent of your duty. Both YOU, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, and I know the answer. The answer is clear. You did not have the bravado to carry out your mission because, in your heart, you knew the truth and knew the entire town and fellow judiciary would eventually learn of your breach of your fiducial duty.
If indeed your claims are true and we are a danger (to the point of death by parental neglect) then you FAILED to protect YOUR ALLEGED STATE registered children. Instead, you allowed an opportunity for us to escape hoping the truth would not surface. Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, this tactical error eliminates your ability to maneuver, back or forward, because in your rear is the state and the United Nations whose laws you have violated. In the front is me, and the laws I represent. As well, you never had the ability to maneuver side to side because you neither had civil nor criminal jurisdiction because PANI could not present the claim which would establish that jurisdiction. The simple reality is that you had no ability to opine on this matter because you did not have the authority to sit and opine on a matter where the affiant could neither produce a civil claim nor a criminal act. As you trashed the law and administrative procedure you have destroyed my family. You are in a very fragile position.
PANI and the Ministry of Health were prepared to 'take whatever measure necessary' on October 25, 2011. Interesting to note that Gustavo was named as "non participatory" and PANI attorney Patricia Mesen Arroyo would represent my children. How nice. Of course, we did not appear to that hearing as their intentions of recognizing the jurisdictional failures were not going to matter to Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda. Gustavo informed the judge that we were delayed by bad weather, which we absolved him of with another letter to the court. As such, the judge delayed the hearing until the following day.
In his minutes he does mention the basic premise of the hearing that Ministry of Health has asked PANI to intervene in order to force us to present documents of vaccination and formal education that do not exist followed by the non sequitor that if the documents of our children do not exist, we are forced to obligate our children to pay homage to the state.
Director of health services adds that the purpose of the vaccines is to protect the community as a whole and protect the country from diseases such as meningitis and pneumonia amongst others.
Those are lofty ideals, but irrelevant in the matter of Law, Señora Valverde, because A)The country is an entity that cannot get sick from these things and B) Everyone in your herd who wants your solutions can voluntarily get it FOR FREE, (along with state schooling.) That is why your lofty ideals are OBLIGATORY, not compulsory or mandatory, isn't that correct, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda? Any obligation is set off by a voluntary action by a civil contract. Of course this kind of talk was previously ignored. Thus, they will impose their private will on us, because none of these civil codes or statutes are law until we consent to them because that would violate multiple ares of the constitution including the preamble.
The entire process is in assumpsit. Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda's real contempt for the LAW was revealed on September 6, 2011. There was no way we would go near these law breaking criminals.
Although Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda delayed the October 25, 2011 hearing until the 26th, he did not delay in carrying the sentencing with introductory comments seeking our children's status in Costa Rica, as well as information of formal education.
In his 'established facts', Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda states that Birgitte did not provide the required information the ministry of health needed to process our children. He fails to acknowledge that we had provided affidavits explaining that such information did not exist and WHY it did not exist.
Further, he adds that our child was killed crossing a river, implying this was somehow parental abuse or neglect. Of course, he fails to mention the fact that we were chased into exile by him due to his vandalism of law and due process on September 6, 2011 when he, as all the rest of the bureaucrats refused to hear our testimony, lied to police that my wife did not present herself, and raided our home with a search warrant which the judge himself solicited. Having honored the courts call to appear, we reacted to the judge's complete disregard of due process by seeking a safe places to hide,as would any other people persecuted in history by a government that begins to violate their own laws.
He also observes that our son was taken to CIMA hospital for a parasite. He The judge fails to add that we had suspected an appendicitis attack and taken our son in to run tests in order to address this potentially serious issue. We paid cash and the police found the receipt when they raided our house. The judge later concludes that this is evidence of parental abuse and neglect because we relied on "alternative medicine" to cure him. That is, in fact, a lie because when we suspected appendix issues we moved him in fast to the first class, private hospital. Afterward, when we discovered what the problem was, we remedied it with a simple medicine. (Parental abuse and neglect?)
His list of unproven facts include our condition in the country which we have already submitted a file to the court explaining our status or lack thereof. He also brings up the issue of formal education, which is something that none of these bureaucrats asked us about in the first place. Thus, this is a complaint presented by the judge, and judged by the same judge. A clear violation of article 23 and the rules of judicial impartiality where jurisdiction over the person has not been established by the affiant.
In his 'bottom line', he states that Birgitte "had plenty opportunity to defend herself." In reality, each of the bureaucrats who accosted us are in civil dishonor as they refused to rebut a single affidavit or notice. Ultimately it was Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda who completely denied my wife any opportunity to defend herself when he refused to acknowledge her presence in the court as she stood and said, "I am Birgitte Poulsen, the individual Dr. Cerdas sought out." What are the charges? You see, we are not, nor have ever been citizens or residents of Costa Rica, because that voluntary registration is the contract that ties individuals to the obligations the state sets out in their codes. Without that voluntary registration (13.3) there is no civil nexus, not obligations, no civil venue. Since there is no actual crime or victim, there is no criminal venue either.
Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda declares there is an abundance of evidence pointing to parental abuse and imposes a six month order to find us and our children at which point a decision will be made as to what actions to take next.
Under the principle of 'Lura Novit Curia', the judge claims the authority to know and exercise the law, but of course fails to recognize that his opinions are limited by due process and his constitutional oath and that his opinions are also limited to the affiant first establishing our status as contractees whereby the judge can then sit and adjudicate.
Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda continues with dissertation on United Nations human rights, Rights of the Child as well as more civil codes. Of course, these are all moot points as they are limited to registered children. Interestingly, he includes articles 13, 29 and 30 of the código de niños y adolecesencia implying that we are not looking after the physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual and social development of our children. This almost has a scriptural ring, but he does not dare actually say we are negligent in these matters. His entire work is written as a supposition because we are not there to actually defend ourselves. He also says the children have a right to "know their mother", but once again our affidavits and notices were never responded to and this issue never questioned or we could have shown them this, plus dozens of witnesses IF the assumption was that we kidnapped someone else's children.
Also interesting is that he claims article 115 as giving him the power to rule over minor personas with injunctions and international treaties, but fails to speak of his duty under the same article to "seek the REAL TRUTH". Which, of course, has nothing to do with anything except their jurisdictional failure and their attempt to kidnap our children.
His high ideals attempting to justify their mission to seize and assimilate our children into his religion (United Nations statism) so that they be not deprived of education, spirit of peace, personal dignity, tolerance, liberty, equality and ability to express their own unique personalities. Further, to be protected from physical, mental, sexual, or other maltreatment. However, he is not actually saying we are violating our children in these manners as there never were any of these issues originally raised. He is simply trying to create a distraction and cover his crime of September 6, 2011 which sent us into exile and accomplished nearly all of the above violations to our family and resulted in the death of our daughter. Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda's vandalism of the law is what created the genocidal attack of our family resulting in four violations of the United Nations declarations against genocide.
All of his 'law' that he discusses are obligations that registered children and parents have with the state in order to receive entitlements. Any other matter outside of civil law would necessarily be criminal and require a complaint. As our reactions to defend our children from constitutional violations and due process violations and lies of the judge resulted in the death of our beautiful girl, Nikoline, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda is desperate to cover his crime because he is responsible for the death of our child, NOT MY WIFE. My wife is innocent just as Jewish parents escaping Germany were. I imagine many children were killed in their exiled status. Do you really think they were going to submit themselves to the 'authorities'? Ironically, in point 8, he says it is the duty of parents to protect their children as per their contract with the state.
Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda uses his latin maxim earlier, and so here is another: Initio beneficicium non datur. (No one is OBLIGED to receive a benefit against his consent.)
In desperate attempt to include more specious and off point padding to justify his actions, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda digresses to Gustavo's use of the word 'cosmovision' which of course is incorrect. It is not our cosmovision, it is scriptural law which Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda is tied to by his oath and the preamble.
In point 10 he declares that the constitution is not 'absolute', which is of course correct IF indeed the children/parents have registered, as the constitution does not protect people from a commercial obligation, or quasi contractual obligation enforced by a court. Those registered 'voluntarily' entered the contract and the constitution cannot protect those people.
Possibly the most eye opening thing said by Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda in his dissertation is that these rights cannot be waived as my children are subject to these obligations. So, for those inside this contract, they cannot say no. However, no one may be forced into a contract backed by our foreign status, underwritten by the preamble and 194.
Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda then offers health director from Puriscal who opines that my children are obligated to take the vaccines to protect other people's health. Once again, this may be great religion, but it is bad science and bad law. You cannot be forced to take medicine for the benefit of another. That is a tort against a man's body for law cannot injure one to protect another and a law cannot force you to break another law.
Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda tails off his sentencing by stating that PANI is to take charge of our children and the Ministry of Health to commence a vaccination program that is "least detrimental" to them. Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez still fails to prove his jurisdiction over our children, yet decides to damage our children in the least detrimental way.
On October 26, 2011 we entered this document for the record to the court in Puriscal, Costa Rica. However, unlike our other affidavits and notices, this document was rejected because the clerk said that Birgitte must enter it in persona propria because Birgitte's signature may have been forged and as such the testimony is void. We initially gave the notice to Gustavo, a licensed lawyer, but he refused to deliver it because he said we would be 'going to war' with this statement. I submitted that the war had already been declared by the Judge, Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda and his United Nations masters. They launched their surprise attack on September 6, 2011 and struck us deep in our heart. They committed an act of genocide against protected people with a civil action that lacked subject matter jurisdiction and jurisdiction in persona. We had suspected that Gustavo would be reluctant to risk himself by delivering this, so we had a back up individual. Whether it was rejected or not, since we were rejected by every other bureaucrat, including Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, we submit this to the public record as our testimony which the court refused to let us enter.
October 26, 2011 Constructive Notice:
For the purpose to enter into the public record, this notice and subject matter shall serve as the instrument of intent for the purpose of lawful reconciliation to the parties involved to
EXP #11-400185-197-FA.
Functionaries involved: Juez MSC. Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda; Ministerio de Salud director Dr. Cerdas; Master Norma Fernandez; Lic. psicolaga PANI Christina Vidal Espinosa; Lic. Lorena Duran; Master Monica de la Fuenta Mora CCSS; Dra. Ana Gabriela Mora Rojas; MSC Patricia Mesen Arroyo de PANI and many other interested parties world wide.
This notice has been created to establish the following facts:
1) That the jurisdiction over the persona is absent because no persona has been created.
2) The cause of any grievance in this issue lacks habeas corpus, mens rea or a valid contract.
3) That several ministry officials listed above have stated that they are subservient to the constitution of Costa Rica.
4) That several officials listed above refuse to answer questions that have been made repeatedly in writing because of my lack of state identification.
5) That my lack of state identification in any way halted above listed officials from threatening and coercing me and my family in the flesh and blood.
6) According to law passed March 11, 2002, and Gazetted, that government officials, including autonomous entities such as PANI, must answer to inquiries within a reasonable time of two months or the law of tacit consent becomes the established fact.
7) That a time of 2 months has elapsed from the time of 2002 whereby the officials must have:
a) responded to or accepted our response as a lawful position.
b) observed a newly gazetted law that annuls their requirement to respond.
c) responded to or accepted our various declarations of truth to the ministry in 2005, 2008,
2011.
8) That the lack of responses and that Dr. Cerdas and PANI, to this date, have not responded to our requests of information can lead us to believe that:
a) PANI and ministry officials are not bound by the constitution.
b) The officials and PANI are bound to answer my questions, however, they have decided
personally to disregard the constitution and the rule of God.
9) That the judge's decision to allow police to break and enter my home through a locked gate to search for vaccine documents and state identification was unreasonable search and seizure since I had identified that to whom the plaintiffs made their threats. (Me, the flesh and blood with no cedula or valid state contracts.) I presented myself, in persona propria, as the same individual whom threats of child confiscation were issued to answer to any charges and complaints to be in honor of the court's request. Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda refused to see me and refused to give me the charges or case file in order to make full and complete answer. Instead, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda elected to sign an order to break into my property and confiscate family photos amongst other valuables. This order was for the purpose of ascertaining documents regarding the vaccination and giving orders to forcibly vaccinate with restraints if necessary. The judge made the determination that my children had been denied health care and education in his statements which we were able to obtain later.
10) That although, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda had been presented with all my previous affidavits and constructive notices regarding the status of me and my children in good faith that he would recognize the jurisdiction failures of any such claim or charge, Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda proceeded to empower himself above his restricted mandates created by the Uniform Commercial Code of contracts, the political constitution of Costa Rica and the rule of the God of the Holy Bible.
11) That Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda's refusal to hear me in the flesh, when the plaintiff in the flesh was present and could identify me as the tort feasor leads me to believe that he could not hear me as there was no civil nexus whereby he could prosecute me. Thus he refused to hear the flesh as no contract (cedula) existed as I have previously stated in other declarations.
12) That Dra. Ana Gabriela Mora Rojas claims that I refused to allow them to vaccinate my children, whereas in my affidavits, promptly and respectfully given to her officials, I am clear that we are not refusing vaccines, but that we are prohibited by the Law of God of the Bible. No requests or rebuttals have been made by Ebais #4 or previous officials.
13) That constitution of Costa Rica is a treaty between the authors of the treaty, the government officials it speaks of and those who are a party to the contract via consent. I recognize that random manipulation or exclusions of articles 11, 27, 25, 19, 75 because of international treaties under article 7 apply to applicants of the constitution through registration (cedula).
14) I do recognize that registration also waives all constitutional rights by virtue of article 7.
15) I do recognize that all 'free' health care and school programs are 'entitlement' programs given to those to register.
16) I do recognize that registration with the state jointly and severally contracts that individual with the state through a persona called a cedula, but that at this time no such contract exists between me and the state of Costa Rica.
17) I do recognize that the United Nations is likewise a legal artifice which requires adhesion contracts in order to assume jurisdiction over the subject matter.
18) That lacking such adhesion contract is not a violation of any law.
19) That the immigration contract forces a foreigner to waive his lawful, God given rights as stated in previous constructive notices.
20) That a contract that forces someone to waive the right to association by consent by the implication of forceful intervention is a contract that lacks proper consideration, as such is no contract, but the exercise of coercion.
21) That the Costa Rican Government does not own, nor has filed a UCC claim on my children as I have never given, registered, nor taken any benefits that would quasi contractually obligate me or my children to the state of Costa Rica or the United Nations PANI child 'protection' schemes.
22) That no cestui que trust instruments or other obscurities exist that would presume that my children are entrusted to a legal artifice or collective of men such as a governing body or group of elite.
23) That the presumption that my children are subject to United Nations edict, when they are not indebted, nor registered, nor have accepted benefits from other indentured subjects such as the government of Costa Rica, has been repeatedly quashed by my various declarations and notices.
24) That because I have reserved all of rights, (which Dr. Cerdas refused to allow me to do on video,) I have not waived my rights to NOT associate with vaccine companies and other man made legal corporations, trusts or artifices.
25) The use of force to register, vaccinate, confiscate and mentally manipulate my children is a clear expose of instability, lack of education and incorrigibility of the above stated individuals.
26) Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda states article 51 as the enabling article to enact all the sub adhesive codes involving United Nations rights of the child and state public health codes.
27) These rights stated in article 51 are 'entitlements' to those who subscribe to them. Rights cannot be forced upon anyone without consent.
28) If any officials claim that, I or my family has or have inadvertently entered such an adhesion contract, I object to any such allegation, assumption, opinion or implication as no evidence of this adhesion contract has been produced creating contractual obligation to the state of Costa Rica or the United Nations.
29) That the state of Costa Rica is a man made organization made by and for those who consent to be contracted with it in matters outside of civil and criminal disputes.
30) That any consent generated under duress is a contract that lacks proper consideration, and as such, totally invalid to establish bonafide civil nexus.
31) That if the state claims adhesion contracts are valid for the application of article 7, by virtue of jus solis, we have no such applications with the state in accordance with articles 13-18 including law #7514 that meets the requirements to create entitlements stated in article 51 into obligations.
32) That any claim of jus solis is also nullified by the fact that these children already have a nationality and are registered. My children are Israelites and they are registered in the family Holy Bible. The God of Israel (same God as the catholic church purports to follow.)
33) The God of Israel has already made claims to the earth and the land in psalm 24.
34) That the people of Costa Rica have been given the option to elect a body of men to govern them and that a body is capable of adjudicating in civil and criminal matters.
35) That all matters that mimic liability or transfer responsibility given by God must be consented to and that such consent is made by way of cestui que trust agreements consecrated by a contract identified by a number widely accepted as a 'cedula'.
36) That we practice strict liability and take full responsibility for our children and do not shift this burden to others or future generations.
37) That due to statements made by PANI officials and Dr. Cerdas, Sra. Fernandez and others, that they have no belief that the rule of God has any bearing on this matter.
38) That affirmation made by court official Sra. Charpentier and witnessed, her statement to us in 2002, that the government of Costa Rica and its laws were subservient to the God of the Bible.
39) That government services such as public school and vaccines are not 'free' as proclaimed by Dr. Cerdas and although the recipients may not be charged, the companies that produce this product, the doctors and nurses and technicians all get paid.
40) That if we were to receive such free 'entitlements', that we would be in violation of God's moral principles regarding theft and strict liability.
41) That the case file received by me contains decisions made by Judge Carlos Manuel Sanchez Miranda, that my children shall be forcibly vaccinated with restraints if necessary in order to:
A) force a private company's products into my children's body.
B) force association via registration with a legal artifice.
C) force my children and their parents to steal from other people by shifting the cost of the
vaccines and all the technicians and police required to other people via taxes and debt.
42) That on July 30, 2011, Dr. Cerdas used threats and coercion to send fear of official intention. This fear is real and established by witnesses and testimony of other officials named above.
43) That ministry officials responded to our questions and statements of fact with force and fiat edict, rather than intelligent evaluation of facts, evidence and law.
44) That such use of naked, lawless power and abuse of process of the Ministry of health and officials of PANI and the judiciary , force us into the only real logical conclusion that PANI, Ministry of Health and the Judiciary are not bound by the constitution by virtue of the same constitution articles 7 and 55. However, that even AUTONOMOUS entities MUST respond to requests.
45) That such lack of concern and ignorance for higher moral laws have been the basis of the lack of responses from these ministries.
46) That the disposal of constitutional articles 11, 19, 25, 75, 27 under the auspices that international treaties in article 7 enable article 55 and 51, insist that such international treaties include my children through adhesion contracts.
47) That I object that any such evidence of such a contract exists.
48) That we have no adhesive contracts or obligations to United Nations.
49) That I, to this day have never been presented with an actual charge, civil or criminal by which I could give the opportunity to remedy and cure.
50) That no valid contract exists between my family and the state of Costa Rica.
51) That no damaged party has presented themselves with claims of tort or trespass.
52) That we have no intent to damage any man past, present or future.
53) That we are not part of a religious cult.
54) That we do not practice religion nor establish ministries in our name.
55) That the etymological definition of religion means to:
re- (to make a new)
liege- (king to rule over)
56) That the word religion is a transitive verb and the important aspect is not the result, but the ACT of creating a new law maker to rule over the individual in question.
57) That we have not exercised that action in order to receive the bounty of free services of a different king or governing body.
58) That since no evidence of such re-lieging has been produced as evidence as our consent to shift the sovereignty from God to the state in matters of strict liability, that we have not consented to state entitlements.
59) That although we recognize the state of Costa Rica's lawful ability to adjudicate over us in matters, both civil and criminal, that in matters of insurance, limited liability, education, debt and general welfare, we remain under the rule of God where no such act of divorcing ourselves from that God can be produced.
60) That where no adhesion contract can be presented as evidence, there is no civil opportunity to litigate or adjudicate.
61) That where no habeas corpus and no mens rea is evidenced, that there is no criminal opportunity to litigate or adjudicate.
62) Article 2 of the constitution states that the sovereignty exists 'in the nation', not the state. The nation is a reference that historically refers to a people of similar persuasion, not idols of their creation.
63) That if the sovereignty of the nation resides in the people of that nation, and those people's moral beliefs are based on conformity with the laws of the God of Israel, that the system to rule over them that they erected must include consent of the governed when insurance, or limited liability schemes are created by the government.
64) That such consent is evidenced by a contract that is evidenced by a number entitled 'cedula'.
65) That no men or group of men can force us into a contract.
66) That if such a group of men claim that they can force us into a contract, or proven by action that they will force us into a contract, which violate the constitution and the law of God of the Holy Bible, that such actions are lawless, naked power without proper authority and only prescribed by the men who prescribe such actions.
67) That the action of forcing anyone to associate by contract is not by the authority of God, the people, the constitution, the government, therefore comes from personal edict of the men involved.
68) That such men operate not by the authority of law, but under the color of law.
69) That any man who has been reminded repeatedly the protocols of law through questions, affidavits and notices, yet chooses to ignore operates not out of lack of facts or law, but full and complete understanding of their actions.
70) That Such men or group of men who arbitrarily usurps the power of the sovereigns by making a petition in the name of the people by way of 3rd party association (PANI), are in violation of article 4 of the constitution.
71) That PANI lawyer, Patricia Mesen Arroyo has stated to me that she is subservient to the constitution of Costa Rica, Yet article 55 states that PANI is an autonomous entity. This incongruency has not been addressed.
72) That Patricia Mesen Arroyo, despite all of my information, still assumes my children belong to her master, the United Nations, by virtue of either:
a) adhesion contracts with the United Nations or the state of Costa Rica
b) incorrigible insanity.
In either case, the merits of civil contracts or criminal infraction lack the necessary elements to support a claim.
73) That the United Nations has NO consent to rule over me or my children.
74) That the government or officials therein cannot confer or take away my consent.
75) That if the Costa Rica government has made a UCC claim on my children in commercial equity law, then the following deficiencies are present:
a) identity of the collateral in question
b) a valid claim in equity
76) That for the record, my husband and I are the sole guardians of my children.
77) That we do not give consent for our children to be used as collateral for commercial debt relief.
78) That officials claiming to be operating under the purpose of child and family protection have made actions to destroy my family.
79) That PANI lawyer, Patricia Mesen Arroyo, would consider "allowing" my children to leave the country with the grandmother IF:
a) They were vaccinated
b) That PANI Official lawyer Patricia Mesen Arroyo was personally guaranteed that grandmother was not of the 'same religion' as the mother of the children.
80) That Dr. Cerdas response when I asked him if the Costa Rican government was subservient to the God of Israel, his answer was, "I don't see what this has to do with it." leads me to believe that Dr. Cerdas and the above named officials have no cognitive basis in Law of what he is empowered to do and that which he is confined to. Ignorance of such integral facts about the history of law and even the hypocratic oath leads me to believe that nothing confines these officials but their own decree.
81) That understanding the reason for law is to understand the intent of the Lawmaker. Article 51 clearly states that the family is a natural element and foundation of society and is 'entitled' to state protection as well as mothers, children and elderly, yet all actions by above names have resulted in the absolute obliteration of a family and in no way does this reflect the intent of the law maker (sovereign).
82)That I made all reasonable attempts to allow the above stated officials to recognize the fullness of the law, yet these same officials made choices in full cognitive awareness to refuse, ignore, lie, subvert, omit and deny opportunities of fact and law to produce an amiable and lawful reconciliation.
83) That if these above stated officials observed the Law, including the intent of article 51, then my family would not have been chased into exile where we were met with dangerous perils that resulted in the death of my daughter.
84) That these above stated officials act with complete knowledge and awareness of their actions and that the attitudes of these officials display complete and total mens rea and contempt for family in favor of state power.
85) The issuing of the search warrant for my place was based upon the PANI's claim that I never told them about the status of the children's vaccination.
86) That in 2002 I told the court that we were not going to vaccinate the children, and in several of the affidavits entered in 2011, I clearly state that we are prohibited from vaccinating the children.
87) That this notice stands as motion to quash all further inquiry and initiate actions against the above officials for malfeasance and sedition.
88) That the intent and subject matter of this notice is not degraded by lack of form, stationery or grammatical error.
89) That my children or I will not present our flesh to the court, as the court refused to hear from my flesh and that condition has not changed. Additionally, my trust of all above mentioned officials has left me truly believing that no such family protection has been intended, and we shall receive the same lawless treatment.
90) That once again, as always, we ask for the charges that have been made against us as none of these officials have offered to give us a valid charge in either criminal or civil venue.
91) To remain in honor of this court, I ask that the charges be presented to Gustavo Rojas as our representative.
