If you are savvy with the courts, specific to the Judge actually getting up and leaving the court, then you need to fully understand what the Judge is actually doing when he leaves the court and returns. What the Judge is doing is changing Jurisdiction. (Authority)
There are two ways to respond to such a change of Jurisdiction, you can either stop the Judge from leaving and take over the court with the Judge in the position of Fiduciary in which they are then Honour bound and Duty bound.
The second method of response is to respond to each Jurisdiction in the correct manner.
It is essential you understand how you keep out of each respective Jurisdiction, this is determined by your response. As a caution you must fully understand the entirety of what you are doing or you will fail as the hearing moves forward. You need to remain outside of each Jurisdiction the Judge invokes, to defeat the action against you, you must establish your standing.
The Iteration Method
Establishing the Jurisdiction
When at court and you are asked to “state your name” respond only with your first name — “sean” for example, or “your first name followed by your middle name” but never offer a Surname —
Then you declare or admit that “I am here to address the court “in this matter”— this tells the Judge you are here, in your flesh and blood body, you are a Man/Woman. (Never be in court always be at)
This must be done at the very outset of any court case, criminal or civil, and you must avoid the whole issue of the “name game” entirely.
The jurisdiction changes and is signalled when the judge gets up from the bench and leaves the courtroom. When he returns, they have “ratcheted up” into another and more serious jurisdiction.
They always follow the same order and begin in the maritime (commercial) jurisdiction where the answer is to “wish for” remedy.
The second more serious jurisdiction is admiralty (martial law) jurisdiction where the answer is to “wish for” cure and relief.
If the judge dares to leave and come back again, you are both playing for High Stakes, and are now in ecclesiastical court (cannon law) jurisdiction….. Where the answer is to identify your self in connection with the Creator. A Judge who violates your sovereignty in this jurisdiction loses his job permanently.
This is the “iteration” method when facing any action in one of their courts. You make these three “iterations” as you’re only replies :
“Your Honour, for and on the record of this court, I am a living man, the blood flows and the flesh lives and I wish for remedy…..”
He will have to get up and leave the courtroom. When he comes back.
“Your Honour, just to reiterate, for and on the record of this court, I am a living man, the blood flows and the flesh lives and I wish for cure and relief.”
He will have to exit again or dismiss outright. Most judges will dismiss at this point rather than risk the consequences of a final confrontation, but if he comes back a third time, you reiterate.
“Your Honour, to reiterate, for and on the record of this court, I am a living man, the blood flows and the flesh lives, and we are autonomous. Nothing stands between my self and the Divine Creator of All That Is.”
And there is the final end of the nightmare. He has no further recourse, no other jurisdiction to exercise, and he has to exit — permanently. That is Estoppel, through either concealment or silence, which means its time for the best bit :
You then hand the Clerk your Bill of Particulars which presents your fees with bank details….
Update. It is all important as to ‘whom’, not a ‘what’,… you charge your fees against, you must hit the Man/Woman ‘Who’ is ‘Acting’ in the capacity of a ‘what’, as a Clerk of the Court, Judge-Prosecutor or whomever, just make sure it’s a living flesh and blood Man/Woman.
The CPS may try to set up another case and the Clerk may attempt to assign another Judge, but running afoul in canon law leaves them liable for all they do. See Moto ProprioApostolic Letter Issued Motu Proprio On the Jurisdiction of Judicial Authorities of Vatican City Sta