Peace officers, including sheriffs, take an oath to uphold the Constitution—but when they exceed their lawful authority, they operate under color of law. Even without malicious intent, incompetence or inadequate training can result in serious civil rights violations. Under 18 U.S.C. § 242, depriving someone of their rights—whether knowingly or through ignorance—is a federal offense. The law is clear: ignorance is no excuse, especially for those entrusted to enforce it.
Discover how loan servicers exploit non-judicial foreclosure to force unauthorized sales—even during active administrative procedures. Learn why a Trustee’s Deed of Sale issued without proper authority is void ab initio, and how it merely transfers a lien, not lawful title. This article explains how placing your home in a private trust protects your property, and how fraud—having no statute of limitations—can render any sale legally null.
A foreign trust can lawfully serve as the foundation of a nation, meeting the core criteria for statehood established by the Montevideo Convention. Possessing legal personality, defined territory, a permanent population, and a governing structure, it functions as a sovereign entity under both contract and treaty law. This article explores how foreign trusts establish legitimate nations with the authority to govern, enter into agreements, and assert independence on the global stage.
Fraudulent and unsigned charges brought against Kevin Lewis Walker—just days after filing his federal civil rights lawsuit—have been exposed as a retaliatory and criminal act of extortion. Lacking a signature, verified complaint, or injured party, the prosecution itself now stands as prima facie evidence of RICO violations, mail fraud, and abuse of process. The individuals involved—including a newly licensed attorney and the Riverside County DA—are fully liable and accountable under the law.
Uncover how the principle of full faith and credit positions you as the true creditor behind the financial system. Dive into essential legal foundations such as the U.S. Constitution, 18 U.S.C. § 8, 31 U.S.C. § 5118, and the Gold Reserve Act of 1934, exposing how your trust and credit back all public obligations. Understand how the U.S. operates as a commercial entity under the Clearfield Doctrine, and how debts are lawfully discharged through the U.S. Treasury. Empower yourself with this knowledge and reclaim your rightful position within the system.
Sworn affidavits reveal a massive real estate fraud scheme, exposing Naji Doumit, Barry Lee O’Connor & Associates, and MARINAJ PROPERTIES for RICO violations, fraudulent foreclosures, and property theft. Discover how fake Trustee’s Deeds and unlawful court filings were used to seize properties illegally.
The Kevin Walker Estate has taken decisive legal action against what it describes as judicial fraud, conspiracy, and obstruction of justice within the United States District Court, Central District of California, Eastern Division. Despite filing a Verified Notice of Judicial Fraud, the court has failed to acknowledge it, further solidifying allegations of intentional misconduct and procedural bad faith.
The Kevin Walker Estate, et al., has intensified its legal fight for rights, accountability, and justice by filing a Writ of Mandamus and an Order Granting Default and Summary Judgment, demanding the court enforce Defendants’ binding default and immediate liability for $1.1 billion. The court has already identified PHH Mortgage Services’ Motion to Dismiss as procedurally defective and subject to striking, further evidencing Defendants’ dishonor. With Chevron deference overturned, the court is bound to rule strictly on constitutional and statutory law, without arbitrary dismissal. Should the court fail to act, Plaintiffs are prepared to escalate the matter through appellate relief, federal enforcement, and sanctions for obstruction of justice. This case has the potential to establish a landmark precedent in ensuring financial institutions and courts adhere to the rule of law.
The Kevin Walker Estate, et al., has intensified its legal fight for rights, accountability, and justice by filing a Writ of Mandamus and an Order Granting Default and Summary Judgment, demanding the court enforce Defendants’ binding default and immediate liability for $1.1 billion. The court has already identified PHH Mortgage Services’ Motion to Dismiss as procedurally defective and subject to striking, further evidencing Defendants’ dishonor. With Chevron deference overturned, the court is bound to rule strictly on constitutional and statutory law, without arbitrary dismissal. Should the court fail to act, Plaintiffs are prepared to escalate the matter through appellate relief, federal enforcement, and sanctions for obstruction of justice. This case has the potential to establish a landmark precedent in ensuring financial institutions and courts adhere to the rule of law.
The authority to represent a trust as an attorney-in-fact is firmly established under federal law, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), and longstanding legal precedent. Contrary to common misconceptions, a trust operates as a contractual entity, granting it the ability to be lawfully represented by an authorized agent, including an attorney-in-fact. This article explores the legal framework affirming this right, highlights key statutory provisions, and provides strategies for enforcing it against courts and financial institutions that unlawfully challenge or deny such authority.
The authority to represent a trust as an attorney-in-fact is firmly established under federal law, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), and longstanding legal precedent. Contrary to common misconceptions, a trust operates as a contractual entity, granting it the ability to be lawfully represented by an authorized agent, including an attorney-in-fact. This article explores the legal framework affirming this right, highlights key statutory provisions, and provides strategies for enforcing it against courts and financial institutions that unlawfully challenge or deny such authority.
PHH Mortgage Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss in Kevin Walker Estate, et al. v. PHH Mortgage Corporation, et al. is a glaring example of procedural misconduct, constitutional violations, and a deliberate attempt to obstruct justice. The Plaintiffs have conditionally accepted PHH Mortgage’s non-compliant filing, thereby tendering a binding counteroffer that PHH must now rebut. PHH’s continued silence and failure to rebut the conditional acceptance further compounds their non-performance and dishonor. Additionally, the Defendants’ filing, prepared by Neil J. Cooper of HOUSER LLP, violates multiple-defendant court rules, misrepresents the law, displays incompetence and a war against the Constitution, and constitutes blatant obstruction of justice.
Further exacerbating this obstruction, critical documents remain missing from the court docket and record, preventing a full and fair adjudication of the Plaintiffs’ claims. This deliberate suppression of filings by the court and Defendants undermines due process, conceals key evidence, and constitutes judicial misconduct. The failure to properly record and acknowledge Plaintiffs’ filings further demonstrates systematic efforts to manipulate the proceedings in PHH Mortgage’s favor, reinforcing the need for immediate judicial correction, sanctions, and enforcement of Plaintiffs’ default judgment demands.
The United States District Court, Central District of California (Riverside), stands accused of obstructing justice, tampering with records, and violating due process by unlawfully refusing to file and docket legitimate pleadings. Plaintiffs KEVIN WALKER ESTATE, et al., hav presented irrefutable evidence of judicial misconduct, calling for criminal prosecution, sanctions, and immediate enforcement. Despite proof of receipt, court officials have concealed filings, manipulated records, and obstructed legal proceedings, in direct violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505, 1512, 1519, and 2071. With Pam Bondi CC’d on the correspondence, high-level authorities have been alerted to this grave constitutional violation that threatens judicial integrity and fundamental rights.
A verified complaint submitted to the court functions not only as a legal pleading but also as a negotiable debt instrument and a special deposit, as established under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2041, 2042, and 2045. Additionally, it is classified as a financial asset governed by 12 U.S.C. § 1813(l)(1), 31 U.S.C. § 1321(a)(62), and 31 U.S.C. § 3302. Courts operate as depository institutions, responsible for receiving, managing, and investing funds, with all case-related deposits held in trust by the U.S. Treasury. Furthermore, under 26 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1275, a verified complaint qualifies as an Original Issue Discount (OID) security, mandating proper financial reporting. Every legal case is effectively a commercial transaction, in which funds, securities, and judgments are recorded and managed within the court’s custodial accounts. Understanding a verified complaint as a financial obligation allows for proper accounting and the reclamation of funds through the use of IRS Forms 1099-A and 1099-OID, thereby ensuring transparency and compliance with federal financial regulations.