Transcriber's NOTES and INSTRUCTION:

1. This text is the resulting effort of a team of transcribers.

2. Words appearing within square brackets have been added by the transcriber's discretion.
3. A ' .. ' (one space, followed by two periods, followed by one space) denotes one or more missing words.
4. In the Q-&-A portion of this transcription, a single initial represents a speaker's first name.
5. In the Q-&-A portion of this transcription, the symbols '?' or '#' or '>' represent a speaker whose name hasn't
been stated.
6. In the Q-&-A portion of this transcription, a period ('.') preceding the speaker's initial(s) indicates that there
is one or more ' .. ' places in the present transcription of the current speaker's turn.
7. As soon as you fill in the missing ' .. ' parts of a speaker's turn, remove the period ('.') appearing just before
the initial of the active speaker to indicate that the current speaker's turn has been transcribed fully.

2010 05 08 Money, Banking and Trusts NTT Nature of Deposits. (start at 00:00:40)

Welcome everyone, to this Saturday, May 8th 2010 edition of Money, Banking and Trusts by Moving Titles in
Commerce. Welcome to NTT as New Trust Technology, and tonights show is entitled, NTT and the Nature of
Deposits. NTT and the Nature of Deposits. but first

Take NOTICE and ACKNOWLEDGEMENT with agreement that this show and/or documents is PRIVATE, and not
to be construed or relied upon as being legal advice for any individual legal situation or employed for making legal
decisions, and you will not use any of this information for making a legal decision or performing a legal procedure,
and is not a substitute for legal advice and/or guidance by a licensed attorney. This private show and/or documents
are for academic, informational purposes only to be used at your own risk, without liability to Christian Walters. By
accessing or reviewing this show, or using the documents therein, you understand with agreement that, with all
rights reserved, without prejudice, Christian Walters is not an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of
Florida, or any other State, and has not given legal advice, or accepted fees for legal advice, provided no assistance,
advising, or guidance of any kind, for use by non-attorneys or pro se parties in the preparation or use of the therein
reference, and has no interest in any issue referenced to it therein, and is not a party to this, or any action arising
from, and is only acting as an authorized capacity as liaisons to communications between the parties. By reading
and/or using this information you acquire knowledge, and agree that you are not a client of Christian Walters. These
documents and show recordings are incomplete and void without this NOTICE AGREEMENT being attached
herein by reference, and a breach of this agreement. Upon breach of this agreement, the breaching party becomes
liable for ADMIRALTY COMMERCIAL DAMAGES of $100 million dollars per stultification or impairment per
Christian Walters discretion. Thank you for your under-standing.(00:02:34)

So again, the title of this show is NTT and Nature of Deposits. Lets maybe, define the purpose of this show.
Theres several different purposes, and one is the court, say how not to be a defendant, and be in commerce, or
how to be a beneficiary with all beneficial rights, all beneficial title, and all beneficial interest through the executing
of a trust, a special deposit by claiming and expressing a trust, and the last one, which is probably the biggest its
probably everybodys the most interested in is the claiming of the Strawman Trust Account. The claiming of the
Strawman Trust Account. Well, Im here to burst some bubbles and to set some things straight, and I know Im
gonna cause some controversy, but the truth of the matter rests on the facts. And the fact is that none of us have a
Strawman Account. None of us have a Cestui que trust. None of us have a Foreign Situs trust, or the Birth
Certificate. What we have is all debtor/creditor relationship. I keep on harping on, you know pay particular
attention to the relationships that youre forming on a day by day basis moment by moment basis especially
when you are signing your name. Because its the type of relationship thats gonna establish your status and your
position in life and how youre holding your estates. There is no Cestui que Trust Social Security Account Trust
there is no foreign Situs Trust, or Birth Certificate Trust. Everything thats being formed today is all under
debtor/creditor. Now that may burst some bubbles, but thats the fact. But, on the flip-side, there is a remedy to this.
The fact that there is no Foreign Situs Trust, or any Social Security Account Cestui que Trust is the fact that you
never expressed the trust; therefore it is not a trust. It is not a trust. And that brings us into the title of this show, NTT
as New Trust Technology, and the Nature of Deposits, because its what you are doing in commerce is and
everything that is happening today in the public realm is commerce and all is banking. We keep on saying that all
the time, but we never really understood what that meant, because you are making deposits every day. And its the
type of the deposits or the nature of the deposits that is causing you to be under a debtor/creditor relationship. So
lets get some definitions here, because the two keys to the Nature of Deposits and NTT is the definitions of what a
Deposit is, and the definition of Relationship. So, lets go to Blacks Law and get a definition on Relationships.
Relationships Blacks Law 8th edition Relationships Blacks Law Relationship: the nature of the association
between two or more people, especially a legally recognized association that makes a difference in the participants
legal rights and duties of care. You better be watching the relationships you are forming. Are you forming a
debtor/creditor relationship? Are you forming an Agency relationship? Are you forming any kind of commercial
relationship that has the association with an executor, administrator, or anything or anything typed under commerce,
because its all debtor/creditor relationship. I dont care what you call it. Theres only one exception, and that
exception is Trust. Thats the trust relationship vs. commerce, and all the other subsequent relationships that come
under it. But what Relationship are you starting? Is it gonna be trust, or is it gonna be debtor/creditor - one of the
two. Now lets go to the definition of Deposit. Blacks Law definition 8th edition. Well lay some groundwork
here so we know what were talking about as to way of terms. Deposit: the act of giving money or other property
other property to another who promises to preserve it or use it and return it in kind, especially the act of placing
money in a bank for safety and convenience. Now, there are two types of deposits that we wanna really talk about,
and this is gonna set the path whether or not youre going one direction like in the Wizard of Oz, or the other
direction like the Scarecrow was pointing to. General deposits now, under deposits: definition of a general
deposit is, a bank deposit of money that is co-mingled with other depositors money. 2 a bank deposit that is to
the depositors credit, thus giving the depositor a right to the money and creating a debtor/creditor relationship
between the bank and the depositor. Now, definition of Special deposit Special deposit under Blacks Law 8th
edition a bank deposit that is made for a specific purpose that is kept separately, and that is to be returned to the
depositor. The bank serves as Bailee or Trustee for a special deposit. Also termed Specific deposit, and is also
known as aka a Trust deposit. So Special deposit vs. General deposit General deposit is co-mingled
with other depositors money; Special deposit is kept separately and is to be returned to the depositor, and it has a
trustee over. So those are the two keys to the Nature of the Deposits. Now were going to the book Corpus Juris
Secundum. Were going to book number 9, and this is a publication of 1996. Under section 12 - its the Deposits
section. I wanna start in section 269, which is General Considerations Im switching books around here
alright section 12 Deposits in General; section 269 General Considerations. Some sections Im gonna read
verbatim; some places Im gonna skip around a bit, so Ill try to distinguish between the two. It says that, The term
Deposit has a well accepted meaning in the banking business. Banking business were doing deposits in just
about everything were doing today; we dont realize it. Were making deposits under doing banking. Im gonna skip
down. The term Deposit Account has been defined as credit maintained by a bank in favor of a depositor. So if
you are making some kind of deposit, youve made it your deposit is a deposit account. Next paragraph - this is
BINGO! A deposit may be made the cloak for some other transaction. A deposit may be the cloak for some other
transaction such as a payment - say, as credit or the giving of security, and in such case equity Equity
looking through form to substance, will treat the transaction according to its real nature. Let me read that again.
A deposit may be made the cloak for some other transaction such as a payment or the giving of security, and in
such case equity, looking through form to substance, will treat the transaction according to its real nature. So whats
that mean? This deposit is the cloak for another type of transaction. Could be a payment of your private credit, say,
or the giving and remember when we made a definition of giving? Giving was the transfer of property to another
without compensation. And remember giving was one of the ways it was synonymous with grant. And were
talking in to trust terms now. So the giving of a security and in such case equity and remember equity was where
trusts lie solely and its going to look through the form dont you fill out forms because everything in the public
side is form, procedure and process? So the forms that you fill out for these deposits, whether it be lets see a
checking account, signature card or deposit slips, or whatever forms youre filling out, its gonna look through the
forms to the substance. And remember, the substance is where the real man is. Thats the equitable, right title in
interest in equity. Its gonna look through the form to the substance, and will treat the transaction according to its
real nature. Remember the title of the show NTT and the Nature of Deposits. What is the real nature of the
deposit? Is it a General deposit or is it a Special deposit, because thats going to determine the type of relationship
youre in moment by moment, especially when you sign your signature. The primary division of deposits is into
General and Special deposits. The same deposit cannot be both a General and a Special deposit. Do you hear
that? The same deposit cannot be both a General and a Special deposit. It has to be one or the other. It cant be
both. And you get to determine which one it is, but were all determining the General deposit and were all under
debtor/creditor, and we have no trust because trust is through the Special deposits and youre not expressing any
trusts. And you have no Cestui que trust and no Foreign Situs trust because youve never expressed it. Nobodys
ever done it. You set up every stick of evidence under debtor/creditor, and youre classified a defendant and a
debtor. Continuing on: A General deposit which is an ordinary form is the payment of money into a bank
to be repaid on demand, in whole or in part, as called for in any current money, and has been defined as a deposit
generally to the credit of the depositor, to be drawn upon by the depositor in the usual course of business banking
business. Ordinarily ORDINARILY a general deposit consists of money which is mingled with other money
of a bank, the entire amount forming a single fund from which depositors are paid. Now Im gonna jump down to
section 270 next section which is Relationships. Relationships between bank and depositor in general, so now
these are General deposits and this is the general relationship thats set up, and this is per your General deposits.
It says that, A General relationship, in general, is the relation between a bank and a depositor; therein is that of
debtor and creditor, at least in the case of General deposits. If youre making a general deposit, you got a
debtor/creditor relationship no ifs, ands or buts and you are the debtor, period. It says, The relationship between
the bank and the depositor therein is that of a debtor/creditor, Thats the BINGO - another one at least in the
case of General deposits, thus the bank acquires title to the money deposited, - now remember under trust law, the
possessory title is the legal title, and the bank has the legal title, or the possession of the money, and they had to say
so but they also have liability. Continuing on: and because the depositor is the debtor for the amount deposited so
that the excuse me the bank acquires the title to the money deposited and becomes the depositors debtor for
the amount deposited so that the depositor has a mere chose in action. And a chose in action is an equitable interest,
and that is property interest, which remains vested in the depositor. And that could be your Special deposit, if it
wasnt General. And its following the deposit of money in a bank is in the nature of a chose in action, which is an
equitable interest. And equitys always got to do with rights, titles and interest. It has nothing to do with the actual
possession legal title. So the bank is the debtor to the depositor, but the bank acquires the titles. And you, as the
depositor, have a beneficial interest, and thats equity a beneficial interest is equity, and that gives you a chose in
action. So, continuing on: In making payments on the depositors order, the bank pays its own money to as a debtor
and not its depositors money as an agent, and pays its own money rather than specific money of the maker. The
banks obligation is merely to repay the amount due out of its general funds - which you made by General deposit
and it is not contemplated that the identical bills or money deposited shall be returned to the customer. Now we,
in Gilberts, were studying the debtor/creditor relationship, but it said there was an exception to the debtor/creditor
relationship and it gave an example there, when a specific set of money say $500 in twenties was given to
somebody for deposit, and the specific bills the specific twenty dollar bills were never asked back. It was just
that they were supposed to give you back $500 and any bill denomination would satisfy that return. That would have
been a debtor/creditor relationship if you didnt ask for specific bills back, but if you ask for the exact same bills
back, that would be a Special deposit; that would be a trust that was formed, and it would not be debtor/creditor.
So, Out of the general funds, it is not contemplated that the identical bills or money deposited shall be returned to
the customer. A deposit, or account, is therefore not actual cash, but a debt or a chose in action and constitutes
personal property, an incorporeal movable and general intangible. There is, however, a difference between the
liability of banks to their depositors, and that of the ordinary debtors as their creditors. And the bank can go beyond
the ordinary debtor and creditor relationship and submit to the court any controversy over the ownership of the
deposit. A deposit differs from an ordinary debt in that, from its very nature, it is consistently subject to the check of
the depositor, and is always payable on demand. Big Deal! So, if you make a General deposit, now the bank is
owner of your funds, and now they can loan it as their money, and thats what theyre doing because they have title
to it, and they put it in their books as they own it. And they can do what they want with it. They can loan it back out
again. All because you didnt make a Special deposit you made a General deposit. Continuing on: Since
deposits are debtor obligations of the bank incurred to be performed in the state where the bank is located, they are
subject to states dominion. The relationship between the bank and the depositor therein is generally not that of an
agent and principal, although it has been said that the bank discharges its obligation as a debtor subject to the rule
obtained between Principal and Agent, and that a banks authority to receive money on behalf of a customer derives
from its authority to act as the customers agent. The relationship is not that of bailee and bailor, nor that of trustee
and beneficiary. Generally, there is no fiduciary or relationship giving rise to a fiduciary or similar duty between the
bank and its depositors as discussed supra in section 248, which is under Special Duty, which was before which we
didnt talk about here, but we could go to there and but Im really not gonna go onto that. So, to sum that up on
section 270 there the relationship is the debtor/creditor with a General deposit, and you give title to a bank under
a General deposit, and the bank now holds the title to the money. Now were gonna jump into a section - 271 -
which is Contract. Contract and remember, this is the relationship that is by contract, but it states Colorable
contracts. It says, The relationship between a bank and a depositor is contractual in nature, and is governed by their
contract. So again, the relationship between the bank and its depositor is contractual in nature, and is frequently in
the nature of an implied contract. The relation of the depositor and banker arises only out of contract, express or
implied. And to create the relationship of depositor and depositee, between a bank and the owner of money
deposited by another, such deposit must have been made with the consent of the owner, or ratified by the
owner.And ratified means the intention is confirmed. The intention is confirmed ratified. A deposit creates a
contract. A signature card constitutes a contract. The contract arising from the transaction evidenced by the bank
account is solely between the depositor and the bank, and no privity is created thereby as between the bank and a
third person beneficially interested in the funds on deposit. The relationship between the parties is governed by their
contract. Let me say that again: The relationship between the parties is governed by their contract.
Remember to watch out for the relationships youre forming moment by moment. And they can be implied
contracts, especially at the time of signing. The relationship between the parties governs their contract, and
everything today is colorable contracts. Forming a relationship what type of relationship are you forming,
debtor/creditor or trust? The contractual rights of the parties are derived by implication from the banking
relationship, unless unless such rights are modified by the parties. The relationship may be subject of an
express or implied contract. An express agreement as to the particular matter will supersede an obligation which
would, in the absence of agreement, be implied with respect to such matter. A private agreement between the parties
is enforceable. A private agreement between the parties is enforceable, so that the parties have the right to make their
own contract. A private agreement between the parties is enforceable, so that the parties have the right to make their
own contract - is that like a contract within a contract? and their relationship may be made subject to any legal
agreement which the parties make, provided the contract is not contrary to Public Policy or to law Now, Public
Policy is really one type of debtor/creditor, since 1933, without money, and the law is really statutes and codes.
Continuing on: and it does not injuriously affect the rights of innocent 3rd parties. Now let me back up a little bit
again: And their relationship may be subject to any legal agreement which the parties make, provided the contract
is not contrary to Public Policy or to law, and does not injuriously affect the rights of innocent 3rd parties. Who are
those innocent 3rd parties? Those would be the beneficial interests party beneficiaries and if theyre
beneficiaries, theyre on a trust. If its injuriously affecting the rights of this innocent 3 rd party, that supersedes Public
Policy or law. So the relationship may be made subject to legal agreement which the parties make, provided the
contract is not contrary to Public Policy or law. But Public Policy or law can be superseded in the fiction realm by
equity, which is the equitable interest of the beneficial interest the beneficial right and the beneficial title which
takes precedence over Public Policy or statutes-and-code law, and does not injuriously affect the right of the
innocent 3rd party. So as beneficiaries, and voiding Public Policy and the law is what happens. Continuing on, next
paragraph: Absent a contrary agreement, and remember your contrary agreement is gonna be your Special
deposit agreement absent a contrary agreement between the parties, the provisions of article 4 of the UCC govern
the contract and are made part of the contract. So rules and regulations adopted by the bank generally are, or
become, a part of the contract. Generally, a written agreement is conclusive of the relationship between the parties.
A deposit agreement should be construed against the bank as the preparer of the agreement, and in a case of
questionable or doubtful construction, an account agreement should be interpreted in such a way as to make the
promises mutually binding on all parties, unless such a construction is wholly negated by the language used. A bank
may be held responsible for breach of its contract with a depositor. And then theres the next section is Adhesion
Contract theres one small paragraph. A deposit agreement may constitute a contract of adhesion, and such a
contract is therefore subject to Judicial Review for unconscionability, which may be found if one of the parties
lacked a meaningful choice, and the terms of the contract are unreasonably favorable to the other party. So lets
sum up Section 271 Contract, here, which is; the relationship between the bank and its depositor is contractual in
nature, and is frequently in the nature of an Implied Contract. And this Implied Contract is subject to one thats
expressed, but if there is no expressed contract you could make a private agreement between the parties, that the
parties have a right to make their own contract. And that contract, or that relationship that is established, can be
superseding Public Policy and Statutory Code law, and thus it is injuriously affecting the rights of an innocent 3 rd
party held on a Special deposit for the beneficial interest of that 3rd party. But absent a contrary agreement - your
Special deposit agreement UCC or debtor/creditor, because UCC is all debtor/creditor, and thats whats
governing Commerce today under Public Policy anyway, and thats whats governing Statutes and Codes, because
today Public Policy is for the embetterment or the speeding up of Commerce; so that more Commerce can be done;
so that more debt could be made; so that more debt is made for the purpose of money, because debt today is money.
Welcome to the National Debt, which never seems to get diminished, and now you understand why. So now we want
to see, maybe, Section 284 Determination of Character of Deposits page 276Section 284 Determination of
Character of Deposits: The character of a deposit is General or Special. Let me say that again. The character
of a deposit is General or Special, and is a question or fact to be determined by the intention of the parties as
revealed by their agreement in all circumstances of the particular case involved. And pay particular attention to the
word circumstances - important term, because circumstances. we have Special Circumstances as real people.
The bank deposit is ordinarily a General deposit. There is a rebuttable presumption that a deposit is General, and
the burden of proof is on the party claiming that a deposit is Special. You gotta be claiming trust. You gotta be
claiming Special deposit. If you dont, you got a General deposit and you got a debtor/creditor relationship. We
have never claimed the Cestui que trust; we have never claimed the Foreign Situs trust. Theyve all been General
deposits, which created a debtor/creditor relationship. We have no evidence anywhere in existence of any kind of a
trust. Youll never find it. It does not exist because we never created its up to us to create the evidence that shows
and can prove that we have a trust. Whether it be Foreign Situs or whether it be Cestui que, none of us has ever done
that. Continuing on: In the absence of a specific direction or agreement to the contrary, a deposit is General. In
the absence of special direction special direction; thats your special instruction. Special direction thats your
special deposit instruction. In the absence of special direction or agreement to the contrary. Its one or the other.
An agreement can be superseded by a special direction. Its one or the other. Special direction or agreement to the
contrary. I dont need an agreement. The agreement is the special direction instruction. Keep that in mind. In the
absence of a special direction or agreement to the contrary, a deposit is General. A deposit is Special only if the
money is placed in the bank for the purpose of safekeeping, or on the understanding that the bank shall act as bailee,
or if it is made for a specific purpose with special instructions - Special instructions? Thats my agreement. Thats
my contract with special instructions. Continuing on: or an agreement between the bank and the depositor to use
the funds for a special purpose. Keep in mind; this may be a court setting. Think about that while were reading
this. An agreement may be manifested by the banks acceptance of a conditional deposit. If the agreement of the
bank to a Special deposit is to be implied by its acceptance of a deposit accompanied by written instructions, the
writing should set forth, by clear direction, what the bank is required to do. You want a release? Make a Special
deposit with instructions as your contract. Continuing on; next paragraph: The General or Special character of
the account is a question of fact, - fact! to be determined by the purpose for which the deposit was made: the
relationship the relationship existing between the depositor and the bank and the intention of the parties as
expressed in their contract. Notice those facts there. And those facts are determined for the purpose - aha! Are we
talking about elements of a trust? Purpose; parties; intent? - purpose for which a deposit is made, the relationship
existing between the depositor and the bank, and the intention of the parties as expressed in their contract and as
revealed by the facts and the circumstances of the case, such as the words and acts of the parties and their course of
business. Their course of businessbut remember, I said circumstances. Next paragraph ah, no, Im on the last
sentence here. The mere size of the deposit standing alone is not an indication that the account is Special. Next
paragraph: The fact that a deposit is marked Special or bears some particular designation is not controlling; nor is
the lack of such a designation conclusive. The banks failure to maintain the segregation of the deposited funds is an
indication that the deposit is General. An individual retirement account, established with a bank in accordance with
federal tax law, constitutes a Special deposit. And now, a section on accounts subject to check. An account
subject to check is ordinarily regarded as a General deposit, although the single fact that funds were placed in a
checking account is not conclusive of their character as a General deposit. Deposits may, of course, be General,
although not carried in a checking account. And now, Interest. Crediting of interest on a deposit is an indication
that it is General in character, although this factor is not necessarily controlling. The fact that a deposit draws
interest, and also is subject to withdrawal, does not make it a Special deposit. So, lets sum up this section on 284
- the determination of character of the deposit being an agreement that is a Special deposit instruction. And
remember, were gonna talk about circumstances, so we wanna go back now to section 280, which is Ownership of
an Account. Section 280 Ownership of Account: The right to return of a deposit, or its equivalent, presumably
belongs to the person in whose name it is made, although the form of the deposit is not conclusive. The owner of the
bank deposit is determined under Contract Law. The fact that the funds are deposited in a persons name is prima
facie evidence that the funds belong to such person. The law presumes that a deposit, or the right to reclaim it,
belongs to the person in whose name it is entered, and the bank cannot question such persons right thereto. The
bank cannot question such persons right thereto, however such presumption is rebuttable. The credit given on the
banks books is only prima facie evidence of the rights of the person to whom the deposit was credited. Money
deposited to the credit of one person lets say Strawman/Bank one person may be shown by the
circumstances circumstances again to belong to another. Let me read it again. The money deposited to the
credit of one person may be shown by the circumstances to belong to another. Let me read it again a different way.
The money deposited to the credit of the Strawman/Bank may be shown by the circumstances to belong to
the Real Man/Beneficiary. Continuing on: The form of the deposit is not controlling - the form of the deposit is
not controlling on the issue of ownership. The form of the contract the signatory card does not prove
ownership. The form of the deposit is not controlling on the issue of ownership. But lets put it another way. But
equity the substance is. The form of the deposit is not controlling on the issue of ownership, nor is claimants
failure to sign a deposit slip conclusive on the question of a title to the fund. The ownership or the Real
Man/Beneficiary the ownership of the bank deposit may be shown to be different from the apparent owner the
Strawman/Bank who had title the ownership of the bank deposit may be shown to be different from the apparent
ownership imported by the bank book. The purpose of a deposit account card is not the establishment of ownership
- right out of Corpus Juris Secundum. The account card is not a contract of ownership; its a contract of title.
Ownership has to do with rights. Rights are in equity. Title is in the bank - but only to guard against payment to an
unauthorized person. The purpose of a depository card is not to establish ownership, but only to guard against
payment to an unauthorized person. A little earlier they said that the deposit card was a contract. How can that be?
Because a contract does not establish ownership - beneficial rights do, or interest or title. Next paragraph: When the
issue of the equitable ownership of a bank account arises, relevant factors include the facts surrounding the creation
and history of the account, and the source of the fund, and the intent of the depositor, and the nature of the bank
transaction with the parties. So we have the facts: creation, history, source, intent and nature. The mere
technicalities of the named owner of the account and the formal organization of that entry are not the focus. The
bank does not have a duty to inquire as to the origin of funds deposited into accounts. Remember, this is a 2001
edition here of oh no, this is 1996 here Corpus Juris Secundum. The ownership of a bank deposit for the
purpose of garnishment is considered Corpus Juris Secundum under Garnishments, section 80. The escheat of
unclaimed bank deposit is considered under Corpus Juris Secundum, under escheats section6. Next section
Notice to Bank of Interest of 3rd Party a third person. That would be the beneficial interest. Persons having title to
funds are not divested thereof by anothers deposit of the money in a bank having notice of true ownership of the
funds, where a 3rd person has a claim in funds held by a bank, or where the funds are deposited as security for the
claims of a 3rd person. Remember that 3rd person is beneficial interest. The banks knowledge of the arrangement
alters when there is a claim on the 3rd party. Where the claims of a 3rd person the banks knowledge of the
arrangement alters to the extent the claim or the security, the debtor/creditor relationship normally exists between the
bank and its depositor. Normally youve got a debtor/creditor relationship under a General deposit, but if youve
got a 3rd person in here with a beneficial interest, youve got a trust account. You have a Trust deposit, and that
debtor/creditor relationship goes bye-bye. It alters it. It alters the arrangement between you and the bank, because
now the bank is trustee. Theyre not title holder. Or, excuse me theyre not interest holder, excuse me theyre not
interest holder. Im gonna skip the Depositor sectionand that would end that section. So, summing up section 280
Ownership of Account which is: money deposited to the credit of one person may be shown by the
circumstances now, the circumstances are really Special circumstances to belong to another. The form of the
deposit is not controlling the form is not controlling on the issue of ownership. The ownership of the bank
account may be shown to be different from the apparent ownership imported by the bank. The ownership of the bank
account may be shown to be different from the apparent ownership imported by the bank. Now we wanna go to
Blacks Law, and we wanna go to the definition of Special. Blacks Law 8th edition definition of Special: #1
of, or relating to, or designating a species, kind or individual thing. And remember, thing is the res. Some thing. #2
of a statute, rule, etc. Et cetera hmmm takes in a lot of things there then- et cetera. Designed for a
particular purpose. Designed for a particular purpose. Well, I got lots of purposes, under trust. Usually
extraordinary, or extra ordinary. Usually extraordinary, or extra ordinary. Now I want to talk about, say, Special
deposit Special circumstances. So we have Special this, and Special that as real men and women, and
now it says Special circumstances see exigent circumstances under Circumstances, so we will jump to
Circumstances now. Blacks Law 8th edition circumstances. Circumstance: an accompanying or accessory fact,
event or condition, such as a piece of evidence that indicates the probability of an event. So thats the general
description or meaning of Circumstance. Now were gonna look under Exigent circumstances. Exigent
Circumstances: #1- a situation that demands demands unusual or immediate action, and that may allow people
that may allow People to circumvent usual procedures. BINGO! This is one of the very few People that youre
gonna finduh..times in Blacks Law youre going to find that they use the word People. This defines a right, for
We The People. Real live, flesh and blood people, not persons. Its a situation that demands unusual or immediate
action, and that may allow People to circumvent usual procedures. Circumvent usual procedures. Now down,
skipping down, #3- evidence is about to be removed or destroyed is one of the examples, and it also says, see
Special circumstances. So these are circumstances, but theyre circumstances which are Special. Theyre
Exigent circumstances that demand immediate action of the People to circumvent the usual procedures of their
form and their contract under Public Policy and Statute and Code Law. That is the right of We The People. Thats
Circumstances. So, section 280 was the ownership ownership of the account, where money deposited to the
credit of another person may be shown by the circumstances - in other words, the Special circumstances, or the
Exigent circumstances - to belong to another. The form of the deposit is not controlling on the issue of ownership.
The ownership of the bank account may be shown to be different from the apparent ownership imported by the
bank. So we went through the definition of Special, and Special circumstances is also aka Special deposit, also
Trust deposit. Theyre synonymous, so the BINGO is the definition of Exigent circumstances is the situation that
demands unusual or immediate action, and may and remember, may means must in legal terms must allow
People, not persons, to circumvent usual procedures. Now I wanna go to section 283, which is Special deposits.
Now, weve covered General deposits. Were going to 283 were gonna cover Special deposits. And you might
want to check out section 213 on page 206, which also talks about Special deposits. If we have some time, maybe
we might do that. But I dont know if well have enough time tonight. Special deposits: A Special deposit may be
defined broadly as a delivery of money, or other property, to a bank for safekeeping and return in kind. Title to the
thing deposited remains in the depositor Title to the thing remains in the depositor and the bank becomes the
depositors agent, bailee or trustee. So you might as well skip agent or bailee, because its trustee. Bank becomes
the depositors trustee, because we dont want an agency relationship. We dont want a bailee relationship. We want
a trustee relationship a different kind of agency, because agent and bailee is nothing more than debtor/creditor. We
want a trustee relationship, which is trust relationship by Special deposit. Now theres gonna find out theres two
kinds of Special deposits. Special deposit breaks down into two things. Im gonna jump to another book: book
26B Depositaries Corpus Juris Secundum, copyright 2001. Section 6 it says Special and General deposits.
These are Special vs. General deposits. Remember, we just got done with General deposits. Were talking about
Special deposits, now. This is a comparison of them both. A Special deposit is one in which the
identical subject matter deposited must be kept and re-delivered. A General deposit, now is
one in which the identical subject matter need not be returned. Notice it talks about subject matter. Subject
matter jurisdiction over the property. You are nothing more than property in Commerce, and they take jurisdiction
over you by the fact that youre under the debtor/creditor relationship. If you get out of the debtor/creditor
relationship by Special deposit, they dont have subject matter jurisdiction over you. That would be how you get
out of court to be the defendant, and thats how you get out of being operating in Commerce as being a debtor,
because you are beneficiary with beneficiary interest on a trust. And this also explains why the claiming of the
Strawman Trust Account was a fallacy, because there was no trust account. We never set one up. We never expressed
it to be a trust; therefore it is not. And all the evidence that we create is just debtor/creditor relationship. Now, lets
continue on with Special deposits, back into book 9. Definition: a Special deposit is a delivery of property, and
that property is really equitable assets. Its a securities, or even money, to the bank for the purpose of having the
same safely kept, and the identical thing deposited returned to the depositor - thats one type of Special deposit - or
for the same specific purpose - thats the second kind of Special deposit such as a deposit discussed-infra in
section 286. Not contemplating a credit on a General account. So in other words, its not a General deposit. Its
not debtor/creditor relationship. Its a Special deposit. Its either for a return in kind, or its a specific purpose
Special deposit. One of the two, but its not General in nature, and it is not subject to debtor/creditor relationship.
Its in equity. Continuing on: and may also be defined as one held for a particular purpose, in identical or equivalent
form as when deposited, subject to return at any time, and not commingled by the depositary with other funds or
assets of the bank. A Special deposit is a delivery of either money or chattel to a bank under Special agreement
remember, Special agreement is your instruction Special agreements are, under circumstances, sufficient to
create a trust Let me read that again. under circumstances theres that word again-circumstances
sufficient to create a trust What would these circumstances be? Special deposit! Continuing on: or a deposit
accompanied by an agreement that the identical deposit will be returned or paid out for a specific purpose, or a
bailment, agency or trust, whereby a bank keeps or transmits the identical property or funds entrusted to it. And now,
Creation. A Special deposit becomes such by specific directions, or agreement, or through circumstances sufficient
to create a trust... - remember Exigent circumstances here. Exigent circumstances: a situation that demands
unusual or immediate action, and must allow people to circumvent usual procedure General deposit procedures.
Back-office banking is what were doing, under Special deposit. Everybody wants to know, Where is the private,
back-office banking at? Well, its in trust, and its by Special deposit. Continuing on: or through wrongful
deposit, and rests upon a contract, express or implied. The depositors consent is usually essential to creation of a
Special deposit. The banks consent is also required. But, there is a caveat in there, which we went over earlier.
And that caveat was by agreement, and that agreement was the Special deposit instruction. That is
their consent. They cant do otherwise. Now, Relationship between Bank and Depositor. Now, keep in mind,
the bank is also a court aka the Court. Relationship between the Court and the Depositor, or
defendant. This is a BINGO! There is no debtor and creditor relationship between the bank in
which a Special deposit is made. Read it again: There is no debtor/creditor relationship between the
bank in which a Special deposit is made - BINGO! BINGO, BINGO, BINGO!!!! - and its Special depositor,
their status or relation being that of principal and agent, bailee and bailor, or trustee and cestui que trust. Well skip
the bailor/bailee and the agent/principal one; well focus in on the trustee and cestui que trust, because thats the one
we want. Its special. Next paragraph: Title to the thing deposited does not pass to the bank contrary to General
deposit, which it does - Title to the thing deposited does not pass to the bank, but remains in the depositor, the latter
retaining the right of control and the right of disposition. Thus, the depositor retains title to the thing deposited, and
the bank acts as bailee. But in this case it would be trustee. So, make a Special deposit under claim and
proof of a trust and into the court, which is a bank, then there is no debtor/creditor
relationship and you are not the debtor/defendant. Get the picture? The courts are banks
and youre the defendant the debtor under a General deposit. Next section Segregation: It
is ordinarily contemplated that he bank will preserve the identity of the thing deposited by the segregation thereof
from other like kinds of money or property or property and that the bank shall have no authority to use its
business money placed with it on Special deposits, and that the bank must, upon demand, return the identical thing
deposited. However, it has been held that a deposit of money may still be regarded as Special, even though the
funds have been mingled with other funds of the bank, so that it is no longer possible to identify the particular bills
or coins deposited. As where a sum equivalent to the deposit is to be kept intact for the use of the depositor, and that
where money is made subject of a pledge, trust or Special deposit, the identity of the particular money delivered
need not be preserved in specie as by setting it aside as marked bag or package. If a bank has agreed to segregate
funds, and has not done so, then the depositors recourse is a claim for conversion. So, identity is really the
essential thing. Identity of the thing is really essential to the thing. And a name is only one of the methods of
identifying, or pinning the identity of the essential thing. Its only one name is only an identifier. But its not the
name that is the essential thing; it is the identity - the identity of the thing or the person. And there are other methods
of identifying the identity of the person or the thing, for they are descriptions of persons. And that is one of the
other methods is boundaries, and one of the other ones is Public vs. Private. Public vs. Private. Public would be a
General deposit, and Private would be a Special deposit. And a Special vs. General is going to determine your
status is the identity that it is identifying who is what. What is the thing? The estate. Next section 284:
Determination of Character of Deposit the character of the deposit. The character of a deposit as General or
Special is a question or fact to be determined by the intention of the parties as revealed by their agreement, and all
the circumstances of the particular theres that word circumstances again. Ok, Im going to jump ahead because
thats a section we did already. Alright, well jump to 285. Were gonna jump to Change in Character of Deposit,
and keep in mind that the change in character of deposit deposit could be the - aka prison. So, Change in Character
of Deposit, now. The General or Special character of a deposit may be changed by mutual agreement of the
parties, but not by unilateral action. To change a General deposit into one of Special character requires a contract.
Remember, a contract is agreement, and agreement is really nothing more than your Special instruction on a
Special deposit. So to change a General deposit, which everybodys been making, so the strawman account has
been made under a General deposit. Therefore it is a debtor account. Its not a Special deposit; its not a cestui
que trust or a foreign situs trust. To change it from a General deposit into a Special deposit is gonna require a
contract, which is an agreement, and its gonna require a Special deposit instruction. To continue on: Such a change
is dependent on the intent of the parties. The fund, at least in legal contemplation, must be written excuse me
withdrawn. Such a change is dependent on the intent of the parties. The fund, at least in legal contemplation, must
be withdrawn and that withdrawn is your release must be withdrawn from the General deposit and re-
deposited with or put back into the Private now; taking it out of the Public and putting it into the Private. Were
gonna move the titles-were gonna merge the titles, so were gonna be the fund, at least in legal contemplation -
must be withdrawn from the General deposit and re-deposited with, and accepted by, the bank under a new
arrangement. So there must be some acts, and were gonna do the act. There must be some act to segregate the funds
for a particular purpose, because the act were gonna do is were gonna put the order in. The banks issuance to its
depositor of cashiers check, to the extent of its deposit, does not change their relationship of debtor or creditor, nor
make the transaction a Special deposit. By agreement between the parties, a deposit, Special when made,
becomes General in character. A Special character of a deposit cannot be changed by factors which fail clearly to
show the intent of the parties to treat the deposit as General. If the deposit is made as Special, the bank cannot
change its character by carrying the account on its books as a General one, and by wrongfully placing into the
depositors credit in a General checking account - you dont want a General checking account nor will the
deposit of a personal item in the fiduciary account change the Special character of the latter, nor will the banks
conversion of a Special deposit transmute it into a General deposit. The trustees unauthorized diversion of funds
in a Special deposit will not alter the character. It is also been held that co-mingling of funds by the depositor may
destroy the Special status of an account. So you dont ever want to co-mingle your funds as a depositor, because
you will breach your trust, and youll be back into the debtor/creditor relationship. Next section 286: Deposits for
Specific Purposes now. Special deposit for depositing and getting it back was one type of Special deposit. Now
were talking about the second kind of Special deposit; is the type were gonna be using, which is for the Specific
Purpose. In general, a deposit of money for a particular purpose may, at least in some circumstances, constitute a
Special deposit or, according to some authorities, a deposit which is neither General nor wholly Special. It is not
ultra vires for a bank to receive and hold money to be applied to a specific purpose. Now, what does that word ultra
vires mean? That means beyond the authority. Beyond the authority so, lets read that again. It is not beyond the
authority for a bank to receive and hold money to be applied to a specific purpose. So because its per the granted
authority of the depositor under Special deposit. Continuing on: A specific deposit, or a deposit for a specific
purpose, consists in the delivery of money or property to a bank for application to a designated object or a defined
purpose, and in the case of money deposited to meet a maturing obligation, or a note delivered for collection. It has
been held that when money is placed in an account for a specific or particular purpose, or to be paid to a particular
person, a Special deposit exists, at least where the special purpose is made known to the bank. However, it has
been held that such a deposit is not necessarily Special, and may be General; that such a deposit is Special only
if the bank knew and look up UCC 1-202 is it? Notice? If you mail something out by green card, and they got it
and they have a signature card on it, theyve had notice Such a deposit is Special only if the bank knew, or should
have known, of the purpose; that in the absence of an agreement, such a deposit is General, even if the purpose is
known to the bank; that such a deposit becomes trust fund, only if deposited with the understanding that it should be
set apart for a particular purpose, and not mingled with other money of the bank; and that, while the acceptance of
funds to be held for a specific purpose gives rise to a Special deposit, specific purpose connotes that, in holding the
funds, the bank itself acts as an agent directly on behalf of the beneficial owner. The intent of the parties is ordinarily
determinative of the question of whether or not a deposit constitutes a trust fund. The parties may, by agreement,
give to the deposits, which would otherwise be General with Special character of trust funds. Mere designation of
the bank deposit by a certain name is insufficient of itself to characterize the deposit as a trust fund, or to put the
bank on notice that the deposit so designated, but without any agreement or conditions attached as to withdrawal,
may be withdrawn only for a specific purpose, although such designation may, in combination with other facts, be
sufficient to show a deposit for a Special purpose. The mere form of the bank account, as adopted by the owner, is
not sufficient to establish a trust. Facts, rather than book entries, or terminology, are controlling - Terminology
debtor/creditor control, or contract? Terminology on a contract is not controlling here - Facts, rather than book
entries, or terminology, are controlling on the issue of whether a bank deposit is impressed with a trust. No particular
form of words is necessary to create trust relationship between bank and depositor. And that sounds exactly like we
talked in section 67 in Gilberts. Weve been talking about that for months. No party in a trust needs to know that a
trust is being formed, and thats what this is saying right here in Corpus Juris Secundum. No particular form of
words is necessary to create a trust relationship between the bank and the depositor. So really, its the facts that are
controlling; not where its deposited or the terminology of the security agreement slash debtor/creditor contract.
BINGO! Continuing on: Whether any particular fund is to be considered as held in trust for a specific purpose or
treated merely as a deposit creating a relationship of debtor and creditor will depend upon the circumstances
theres that word again: circumstances of each particular case. Well, Ive got Exigent circumstances. How about
that, Mr. Banker? Continuing on: If a deposit is made as a General deposit, the fact it is made for the purpose of
providing a credit which is to be used hereafter for Special purpose, does not give it the status of a trust fund in the
hands of the bank. Now, next section: Nature of Non General Deposit for a Specific Purpose A deposit for a
Special purpose not constituting a General deposit has been referred to as Special. It has also been held that
such a deposit is neither General nor wholly Special and that such deposits constitute a distinct class of deposits.
Next section: Particular Deposits It has been held that an escrow account is a Special deposit. However, it has
been held that an escrow deposit presumptively creates a debt rather than a trust. An account in which funds are
deposited only for the purpose of payment of the business payroll, which purpose is made known to a bank, is
Special. And now, under Distinction a little note here says, Distinctions exist between Special deposit, and
deposit for specific purposes. Since a Special deposit creates a relation of bailor/bailee, and entitles bailor to
receive back the exact thing deposited, while deposit for specific purposes creates a fiduciary relationship
BINGO! and purpose must be fulfilled according to the terms of the agreement of the deposit. Youve got them
dead-down if youve got a Special deposit for a specific purpose, and they must do as per the agreement. And you
can always get them in agreement because you dont need a contract, because your contract is the Special deposit
instruction. That is the agreement. That is what they agreed to. They cannot do otherwise. Next section:
Consequences of Treatment as Special Deposit Where a deposit for a specific purpose is treated is treated as a
Special deposit rather than a General deposit, title to the thing remains in the depositor and the bank becomes the
skipping trustee rather than the debtor. Where a deposit is made for a specific purpose is treated as Special deposit,
the deposit partakes of the nature of Special deposits to the extent that the title to the thing deposited remains in the
depositor and does not pass to the bank, unless and until applied to the specific purpose; that no relationship of
debtor and creditor is created between the bank and depositor; and that the bank becomes the depositors trustee. In
using deposits made for purposes of having them applied to the particular purpose, if the bank, acting as the agent
for the depositor, should fail to apply the deposit at all, or should misapply it, it can be recovered as a trust deposit.
The agency which is a relationship the agency created by the deposit is revocable by the depositor, and at any
time before the purpose of the deposit has been accomplished. A deposit made for a specific purpose, and for the
benefit of a 3rd person, creates a trust relationship in favor of such 3rd person. And that 3rd person becomes a
beneficial interest, or the beneficiary. However, it has also been held that the creation of the Special account alone
does not create a fiduciary trust relationship between the bank and the 3rd party for whose benefit the account was
established. The money or the other property deposited for a Special purpose remains the property of the depositor
or of the beneficiary of the deposit and, as the case may be, until compliance with the terms of the deposit or
modifications thereof by the interested parties, and may not properly be applied by the bank to any purpose other
than that designated. The bank must not co-mingle the funds. Upon failure to devote the deposit to the specified
purpose, it should be returned to the depositor. If a depositary bank itself uses the money deposited for the Special
purpose, the bank must, on the happening of the event agreed upon, pay the equivalent of such deposit to the person
entitled thereto. A bank receiving a deposit for a specified purpose, and using or permitting its use for a different
purpose, is liable therefore, and where it uses it for its own benefit, that which should have been kept for the
depositor. Next section- 287: Deposits by Fiduciaries, or aka trustees. The fact that a deposit is one of a trust funds
made by a fiduciary does not render it presumptively Special in character, and where such deposits are unrestricted,
they are ordinarily regarded as General. In such cases, title passes to the bank, and the relationship between the
parties is that of debtor and creditor. Skipping down here to diversions: A depositor has a right to tender a deposit for
a specific purpose, and if the bank receives such a deposit, the officers of the bank have no right to divert the deposit
for other purposes. And now, No Merger with General Funds: When a customer indicates that a deposit is made for
special purpose, the bank, by accepting deposit, agrees to devote the fund to that purpose, and it does not become
merged with General funds of the bank, and upon banks failure to devote such fund to designated purpose, it must
be returned to the depositor. So, an unrestricted deposit of funds for a fiduciary is ordinarily regarded as a General
character, at least where the bank has no knowledge of a trust character of the funds, and ordinarily creates a
debtor/creditor relationship between the bank and the depositor. When the trust funds are deposited, it is ordinarily
the trustee and not the beneficiary who is the banks creditor, and the fact that a deposit is made by a fiduciary is not
is not of itself sufficient to render such deposit a trust fund with the bank as trustee, or to raise presumption that the
deposit is Special. So when a trustee properly deposits known trust funds in a bank, they are not necessarily
impressed with a trust so as to create a new trust relation between the bank and its depositor. Skipping down: Where
a fiduciary deposit is regarded as General, title of the funds passes to the bank and the relation of debtor/creditor
and not that of trustee and cestui que trust is created between bank and depositor. The bank is not required to
supervise the subsequent distribution of the funds deposited by a fiduciary. Next section- Effect of Deposit on
Character of Trust Funds. Skipping down: While a deposit of trust funds creates a relation of debtor and creditor
between the bank and the depositor, such deposit does not change the trust character of the fund. Right of cestui que
trust to follow trust funds which have been deposited in the bank is discussed in Corpus Juris Secundum under
trusts, sections 437 and 438. Next section- 288: Tort Liability of Bank for Receiving Deposits A bank is not liable
in tort for allowing a fiduciary to deposit known trust funds to the fiduciarys individual account, but may be liable
where the bank is chargeable with knowledge that the transaction may involve a conversion. Skipping down: The
fact that the bank permits a fiduciary to deposit known trust funds to the fiduciarys individual account does not of
itself impose liability on the bank for conversion, nor constitute a participation by the bank, in a subsequent
misappropriation of funds by the fiduciary. Skipping down: To charge the bank with knowledge of the trust character
of the funds, but also with the knowledge that the transaction does or may involve a conversion, the bank may be
held responsible for permitting for a fiduciary to deposit trust funds into the fiduciarys individual account. The
UCC provision stating that a purchaser for notice of ( 01:02:49 ?? ) has notice of a claim against an
instrument when the purchaser has knowledge that a fiduciary has negotiated the instrument in breach of duty, and
has been held rendered into a depositary bank, taking taking. and remember, the only one who has the right to
take is the beneficiary the depositary bank taking an instrument with such notice liable to the owner of the
instrument for negligence. Lets go over the next section- 289: Public Deposits Where a deposit of Public funds
in the same of an agent is authorized, the deposit is ordinarily regarded as a General deposit and title passes to the
bank, but where the deposit is unauthorized, the deposit is Special and title remains in the political subdivision or
its representative. Did they ever make any unauthorized deposits for us? Skipping down: Where parties so agree, the
deposit may be Special in character unless otherwise by agreement which UCC says all the time. The relation of
debtor/creditor arises, the account being regarded as a General deposit, and the fact that the account is carried on a
particular designation showing the Public character of the fund does not make it Special since the bank's
knowledge of the source and the purpose of the Public funds is insufficient to establish a Special deposit. In this
case of a known or authorized deposit of Public funds, the bank is not a fiduciary, and the funds are no more
impressed with a trust than any other General deposit. Where, however, Public funds are deposited in violation of
the law, the deposit may be treated as a Special deposit, although made as a General one. Now that could be used
in this particular way. In a violation of the law lets say Statutes and Codes a deposit may be treated as a
Special deposit, although made as a General one. Now, how could we apply that to different situations?
Continuing on: The relationship of debtor and creditor does not arise between the parties, but the funds are
impressed with a trust. Skipping. The bank is regarded as trustee or quasi-trustee of the funds. Remember, the bank
can be the court. Next paragraph: The bank may also be held a trustee of Public funds deposited where it has
received the funds for a Special purpose. Ok, so lets kinda summarize this. Really, it comes down to how not to be
the debtor in any circumstance, because we always want to be the Secured Party Creditor, but you cant be Secured
Party Creditor under debtor/creditor relationship. All the rules and regulations are going against you. Thats why the
success rate is so low under debtor/creditor relationship, because really, trust is running the whole thing. In the court,
really, how not to be the defendant is really, not to go into the General deposit and create all these deposits with all
our instruments and whatever were signing our signatures to, which are instruments, and make General deposits
with our unrestricted signatures. And under Commerce, how to be the beneficiary with all the right, the title and the
interest is the same thing as what is in the Declaration of Independence; that God has given us unalienable rights -
all the rights. All right, title and interest. Duty and execution of a trust by Special deposit, by claiming and
expressing the trust. And the last one; the more important one; the one were all shooting for the claiming of the
Strawman trust account. But its really not claiming it at all. Weve never expressed it. It doesnt even exist. We
dont even have a Cestui que trust or a Foreign Situs trust because weve never expressed it to be a trust. And there
is no information for it, nor will there ever be, until we create it. Its up to us to do everything, and weve done
nothing. Weve created the debtor/creditor relationship by our own signatures and only us, through withdrawal of
that General deposit, can we change it into a Cestui que/Foreign Situs trust. You cant get to Kansas Dorothy
directly. Only by and through an express trust; by Exigent circumstances by Special deposit for a specific
purpose. And now, next Tuesday, the next Tuesday call topic will be the title of the show will be NTT and Equity
the Power of Trust. So the Special deposit vs. the General deposit under 26B of Corpus Juris Secundum, 2006,
section 6, under Depositories again. A Special deposit is one in which the identical subject matter deposited
must be kept and redelivered, where that versus the General deposit where A General deposit is one in which
the identical subject matter need not be returned. Thats because theyve got the title to it because you gave it to
them. So, the Subject Matter Jurisdiction everybodys complaining about the subject matter jurisdiction the
subject matter jurisdiction you grant them by giving them a General deposit. If you want to be under the subject
matter jurisdiction of the courts, or in the Public realm, you must, because of the General deposit, give the title to
the bank, and the Public realm has subject matter jurisdiction over that title. But to get away from that subject matter
jurisdiction, you have to make a Special deposit for a specific purpose.

So I thank you all for listening to me carrying on and spouting on about this topic, but weve been doing it all wrong
all this time and we need to wake up to the facts. We have the keys in our hands, and now if we use it, and we mold
it into it, we can gain the remedy. Because there is no remedy at law; your remedy is in equity. Corpus Juris
Secundum, Book 90 This is the one on Trusts. It says, As the general rule, the rule of equity that once a trust is
created, it is thereafter to be treated as a trust. When have we ever treated any of this stuff as a trust? Therefore,
there has been no trust created. So with that, well open it up for questions. Press *6; state your name; where youre
from.

[ @ 1 hr : 08 mins : 25 secs ]

JC :: Hey Christian, JC here.

CW :: Hey JC.

JC :: Good evening.

CW :: Hey, how are you tonight?

JC :: Good, thanks. Happy Saturday. So on that Special deposit making it into the court; lets talk about response
and pleadings. Whether you are the petitioner, respondent, plaintiff, defendantIf youre gonna be. If youre
coming in as a native? defendant, for your first response of pleading, you wanna probably have some language in
there that says, rather than, you know, presenting to the court, you would rather probably say something like,
Making Special deposit into this court, and then, of course, with your restricted signature and such.

CW :: Right.

JC :: So, the matter though, is youre still putting that into the Public, but its colorable enough that its not going to
breach any trusts.

CW :: Uh, probably not as long as you can come up with some colorable verbiage that it wouldnt give away the
real, true nature; because that way equity is gonna look through the form to the substance and reveal the true nature,
the real nature behind it. So we have to maintain at least enough colorable semblance, and you can use words that
are similar that have portable effect into trust terminology, as well as in the debtor/creditor realm.

JC :: Like, Special appearance; making Special deposit?

CW :: Yeah yeah, because those words, Special connotates a privacy and that, in, of itself, is a manifested act of
your intent that youre intending to keep it Private.

JC :: Even though youre depositing that onto the record and into the courts and it's a potluck?

CW :: Yes, and who is probably the bank teller on the court?

JC :: The clerk, probably

CW :: Probably so so the Special deposit would have to be tendered to her.

JC :: I would guess that once you deposit that, and you need to deposit that with her, because if she takes that shell
reroute that to the judge; so the judge is like a banker who will be able to look at your deposit Special deposit,
and make heads or tails of it.

CW :: Well, then the judge notices now he would have to order her to ledger the thing properly, but its already
been tendered to her, unless we can come up with a better thought

F :: Uh, Christian?

CW :: Yeah JC you done?

(Garbled)

CW :: Its Floyd go ahead you got something to add?

F :: I was just gonna say along that line, when you say, tendered to the court, does that mean you have to put her
name in there or can you just put the court in there?

CW :: Depends who the trustee is. If she is the trustee then its gonna have to be tendered to the trustee.

F :: Lets say, when you start a case, you havent made an appearance yet

CW :: Lets not get off topic here. Lets give JC time to finish. Save your thought.

JC :: Its relevant. Save that thought. We can come back to that, because the real issue thats coming in, is just sort of
generally, how you go in to plead from here forth, and whether thats just a general responsive pleading, or whether
youre going to actually try to move the court and direct the court to do something, and that maybe thats based on
Private documents you submitted, so it becomes a fairly complex matter of operating colorably in the Public and
moving the court in the Private, and getting that court an out in the Public while they can make the determination
based on what you submit in the Private, sobut I like Special deposit; Special appearance concept so lets go
back to that in a minute. The other question I had was, moving forward, I mean our main goal has always been to
chop the root out, which is gonna be your, you know correcting your IMF file essentially, bringing you back to
Beneficiary status and freezing the record so it seems that, the first thing that were gonna have to do is maybe we
can talk some technical specifics of this. Is first claim our Cestui que trust? Whether and thats probably gonna be
by taking and claiming your Birth Certificate and doing all the NTT things that we want to do with it. Now, thats
the first step, and that brings the other question is, we only want to move that title to whoever were going to move
that to; whoever the holder of that legal title is if we want to terminate that trust, so its possible that we might want
to just claim it, and then send an order and a directive to the trustee to do something with that. Whether thats just
distribute a portion of the funds, or make payment on all the debts, or you know, whatever we want her to do, but not
only acknowledging some of the pieces of the work that we talked about. We give those options and it opens a line
of communication with that trustee and Id like to know if you think thats still (rios?) if, once we do claim our BC,
if thats the way we probably still want to send things to in the Private, to transfer the units over to the Public side?

CW :: Well, I think our model has to be modified from what weve had in the past, because, I agree with what you
said to start out with there in forward, except I think we need to back up. So were missing, like, an underlayment
from what you said. And if we back up, everything that weve created has not been a trust, but there are no trusts in
existence. There are documents to support a debtor/creditor relationship. Now those documents they must be
withdrawn from the General deposit, so I believe that the first step we need to do is the withdrawal of the General
deposit debtor/creditor documents, and to change the General deposit into one of a Special deposit, because it
says under section 285 Change in Character of Deposit. Thats what we want to do. We want to change a General
deposit into one of Special character requires a contract. Such a change is dependent on the intent of the parties.
The fund, at least in legal contemplation, must be withdrawn from the General deposit and redeposited
redeposited with, and accepted by, the bank under a new arrangement. There must be some act to segregate the funds
for that particular purpose. So I think thats what were missing our step. We must withdraw the Special charact.
or change the General deposit into the Special character Special deposit by this contract, and that contract is
really the Special instruction. Then we can do the redeposit. Then we can claim, or we will claim it as we do the
redeposit, really.

[ @ 1 hr : 14 mins : 31 secs ]

JC :: Well, in my situation, we could do that with what occurred with me, because Ive already claimed the trust. All
I have to do is instruct the Sheriff to make that into a Special deposit. Then I can bring in the trust res and
everything else, and the Cestui que trust and everything.

CW :: Yeah, but we still need to do a withdrawal. We need to do a withdrawal from the General deposit
debtor/creditor relationship. I think well be actually taking it from the Public and putting it into the Private. Were
merging the titles.

JC :: We have 30 or 40 years of General deposit history out there?

CW :: Yes.

JC :: So how do you propose in one fell swoop to draw out all the General deposits?

[ @ 1 hr : 15 mins : 14 secs ]

CW :: The IMF. The IMF file. All the history is in the IMF file.

JC :: So, technically, you think the first step is to make a directive order to change the IMF file?

CW :: Yes. Withdraw all the General deposits in the IMF and re-deposit them under Special trust. That will merge
everything and change everything all in one swoop. Its a lot simpler than what we thought. And that will gain you
access to the accounts.
[ @ 1 hrs : 15 mins : 46 secs ]

JC :: Then what youre saying is that we dont have to pay off the War Debt or anything else; were just going for
the General fund and switching it over to a Special deposit.

CW :: Well, changing it from one side that would be all the General deposits; that would be all the debts.
Everything on that General deposit side - under that liability side of the ledger will be pulled outta there and put
in on the other side. And when it goes over to the other side, its gonna meet the assets and youve merged the titles.

JC :: Yeah, but we dont have the authority to do it for everybody. We can only do it for ourselves.

CW :: For ourselves, yes. Right.

JC :: So, technically then, Christian, do you think that, that is just a single letter of direction to the Chief Technology
Officer of the IRS, who holds the records as the sole member of the DIB the Data Integrity Board directing him
or her to make the modification to do withdrawal?

Voice :: Wouldnt it be the commissioner?

JC :: Well, let Christian answer, please

CW :: Well you know, I havent really thought about, you know, whats the steps gonna be to take? But it looks like
its gonna be a whole lot simpler, maybe, than we had on the board before. It looks like we were missing the
withdrawal step first with the IMF.

JC :: Who is the holder of all the Legal titles?

CW :: Yeah, yeah. I think basically

JC :: Who holds those titles right now?

CW :: Pardon?

JC :: Who holds those titles right now?

CW :: I dont really care. Theyre probably scattered all over the place, because everybody that we granted title to
was one that we gave it to. Just think of all the signatures that youve signed. Where are they? Well, theyre in the
hands, and they could have been assigned to who knows who. I dont know where those titles are, but I dont really
care. The IRS does. Let them do their job. Does the King worry about going out into the kitchen and preparing his
meal step by step by step? No; he just gives the duty to the cook Alright, cook. Youre the master record-keeper
on these files here. Heres what I want done. Go do it.

Voice :: So its just a matter of asking the right question?

JC :: Not asking telling.

CW :: Yeah.

Voice :: Well, a King could ask if he just wanted the information if he was asking..

CW :: Yeah, yeah. But then he would give an order, and it would be a non-precatory order.

Voice :: Then you could order after that.

CW :: Right.
Voice :: Christian, could I ask a question?

CW :: Who was that, again?

JC :: Hey, Christianthanks.

P :: One thing I noticed there, one thing Michael claims, and I just (?) it, is that we can only do it for ourselves, you
know. I wholly disagree that because its about what we claim and establish by proving, so we cant only do it for
ourselves. We can do it for every, each and every one of us if we wish if we can make that claim and substantiate
that claim.

Voice :: But youd just want to learn how to do it for yourself first probably, eh?

P :: Well, thats only probably, but lets not work with probables, and lets work with definites. And so anyone can
claim on anyones behalf, and we can establish and prove it.

S :: Yeah, but then...

<<garbled>>

Voice :: Actually...actually...actually, Pete...I was operating on both levels. And it goes without saying.

P :: It doesnt go without saying at all. It goes with saying, and thats the whole expression.

S :: Maybe you didn't understand me, then. Ill just <garbled> how to do it yourself. Its only common sense, man.

[ @ 1 hrs : 18 mins : 38 secs ]

P :: Which is? Which is common sense?

S :: That you have to know how to do it yourself.

.P :: On behalf of someone else..

.S :: I thought it was simple. Anyways, but yeah...You just have to do it ..

.P :: It may not be technically to someone else .. co-beneficiary with them.

<< garbled >>

> :: Come on. Let, let, let Pete talk, please. I can't hear him. You keep breaking.

S :: I just want to save some time. Maybe we're on a different track, so this may not be productive conversation, so
nothing personal.

P :: It, it, it may be a productive conversation, though.

S :: I'm not sure I'm understanding then what you're saying.

.P :: Well, what I'm saying is anyone can make a claim. And anyone can establish a substantiation that claim .. You
can do it on behalf of someone else. That's what I'm saying, or together with someone else.

<<garbled>>
CW :: They might be able to do it, people, but here's the thing. Uh, they could go out and commingle the funds and
destroy the whole thing again.

.? :: ..self responsibility is gonna be a central core issue.

.? :: ..The issue here is who can do it?

.? ::

.S :: Exaclty .. in two different tracks. I was just making the observation.

.P :: .. is mute .. That's what happened .. That is what's happening and what we're trying to change .. to make things
happen is by claiming and establishing our claim. And we don't have to necessarily do it for ourselves now. That
party commingles the funds, you know.

S :: Are you asking if somebody can do it for us, or are you talking in the context of us doing it for somebody else?
I, and I understand the general idea of, the idea of doing it for somebody else.

.P :: .. in the realm of claims, whatever we can claim and prove is a trust then its trust.

S :: So now we're talking about claims then.

.P :: Yeah, because, for one, professor of, professor of something. I can't remember which, but his name is Rupert
Sheldrake and he's proven that we're all one, so... that we are all one.

S :: Ok, that was longer than I thought. Do you, do you know what I was trying to say?

P :: Yeah, you we're saying that probably things can't happen.

S :: Probably things can happen.

P :: Can't happen

S :: Can't happen? So...

P :: Yeah, that was the substance of what you were saying, that things can't happen.

.S :: ..before you can do a process for someone else, it's just, it goes without saying that you have to know to do it for
yourself.

.CW :: Let's get back to topic..yeah..let's get back to..

P :: If it goes without saying though, why say it?

.S :: I was just speaking on two levels .. just practice. I don't know.

.CW :: Whether we do it for somebody or whether we don't do it for somebody is not the issue. It is what .. and what
direction are we gonna use it in, and how are we gonna get there?

.S :: So, Christian, are you saying in general as far as this account is conerned .. that ..saying you can put in a
declaration of intent or do you need to close the account and start a new one? So I was just... Are you saying that
specifically? That was my question.

CW :: Whether we're gonna do that specifically as a declaration and close the account? Is that what you mean?
.S :: Yeah, because you were talking earlier .. what did you say now? Uh, it was to the effect of, regarding the
account, that there has got to be a complete withdrawal, and then, uh, for me to deposit, by special deposit, or
something to that effect.

.CW :: Yeah, all these account, .. there no trusts in existence until we create them. So, nobody's created .. there's no
trust.

S :: Ok.

CW :: All those accounts are debtor/creditor accounts.

.S ::

CW :: All these accounts are debtor/creditor accounts. We gotta change them, withdraw them out of that public
realm and put them under special deposit.

.S :: So, like, like on a practical example..an existing account. Do you think that declaration of intent is going to
work, or are you looking at having to shut down that account down and open the account completely new, or is the
declaration of intent .. in effect and basically giving them the instructions to maintain all other non-changed
information, for example.

CW :: Well, I think we're kinda jumping ahead too far, based on the information that we've got.

.S :: Ok, I just thought maybe that would be, uh, a principle that you'd apply .. and how, how you..

CW :: In effect, we're terminating the debtor/creditor relationships with all these debtor/creditor accounts.

S :: Ahah.

CW :: And we're withdrawing them. We're, we're terminating them, so to speak, by withdrawing them.

? :: Christian?

.CW :: So that would be like, that would be like debtor titles under debtor/creditor..We're pulling out those titles
and really we're merging them again back again with the assets.

S :: So it all could be done with notices, and...?

CW :: Notices. It's basically the same thing we've been talking about all along, except it's a little more clarification.
It becomes a little more clearer, exactly what has happened and what we've been doing in the past that we've been
doing wrong. And with that knowledge we can say Oh. Aha. I see. We gotta do a withdrawal first, which is really
the... pulling out of the debt titles and merging them with the asset side, and putting them back in under special
deposit, which is no more than what we've been talking about all along, except we got a better crystal clear, eh, uh,
view of what's going on, what, what, what has been happening all along. It's like there are no trusts out there until
we create them. There are no debtor/creditor relationships out there either until we create them. But what types of
relationships have we create? We, we're are doing it all, so we have to do it. We have to redo it. We have to
withdraw, which would be merging the titles, really, and making it a special deposit. Special deposit for a specific
purpose.

> :: Yeah, Christian. Uh, could I make a suggestion?

CW :: Yeah, go ahead.

> :: Ah, it'd be like going back and correcting a mistake.

CW :: Yeah, yeah, which is basically what we've been talking about. We have the right to go back and, uh, correct
the trust, but really we're not correcting any trust, because there's no trust in existence to correct. << laughing >>
That'sthat's the problem. We're all looking for evidence of the Cestui Que Trust. We're all looking for evidence of
the Birth Certificate Trustthe Foreign Situs Trust. There is no evidence. None of us has ever found any. That's
because there is none. We never created it.

.P :: At the same time. At the same time it's full of evidence .. that we have been ..

.CW :: .. you kind of broke up.

.P :: I'm saying that at the same time .. it's full of evidence of Cestui Qui, that we are the Cestui Que Trust and we
never claimed it.

CW :: True, right.

.P :: ..everything now. It's all about the claim and the establishments of that claim.

CW :: Right.

.P :: .. everything now is all about the claim and the establishment of that claim .. be recognized.

.CW :: Right, right, but now we have to ..

P :: ..

.CW :: Right .. and we want to. You know, really, to trust, because trust is special deposit. But we also have to take
into account we've got debtor/creditor relationship that we've established. We have to terminate or withdraw those
debtor/creditor relationships and merge them with trust relationship.

.S :: So we definitely can't operate both, then, on any one account. ..

.CW :: Sure, you're in control of everything. You're creating them all ... debtor/creditor or trust.

S :: Can you do it back and forth? Or do you just wanna completely be, like do you wanna use...?

CW :: Can you do what?

.S :: Can you back and forth?..

.CW :: ..ever again. You know, I don't have to.

S :: Could you not use it to just use debtor/creditor as part of the colorful interpretation? And just get away from
that?

CW :: Well, depends on how you're gonna operate, say, debtor/creditor. You know, I don't want to be effectively
connected with a United States trade or business. With special deposits, I will never be effectively connected with a
trade or business in the United States.

.S :: So really, it's a state of mind .. when you are in a debtor/creditor setup, now you come to that realization that
you don't have to be, it goes beyond the terms of the contract, but.

CW :: Yes, like Wizard of OZ, when, uh, Dorothy came into that realm, she was in, she killed the witch and was
imputed with a debt. There was a charge against her. And it wasn't until later on in the movie, when she liquidated
the witch, that she eliminated the charge. She discharged the charge. Now, now that took care of the debt that was on
the public side and then she could believe, which is trusts, that she had that power all along and then she realized
that, and she could click her heels three times, which was the manifestation of the belief, and then she could go
home.

.P :: How about this .. whatever debtor/creditor relationship that .. created the relationship that we got..and you've
expressed this before, but all we do is reclaim is is claim it as a trust..withdrawal..and now we're in equity.

CW :: General deposits are in debtor/creditor and in the land of Oz.

.P ::

CW :: Trustsspecial deposits in equity in Kansas.

P :: Along comes the claim.

.CW :: ..getting into the position where it's gonna. Let me pull up where it talks about that.

P :: Is it in Gilbert's?

CW :: Gilberts? No, no. I'm thinking of...

P :: Corpus Juris Secundum?

CW :: Yeah, Corpus Juris was at the beginning when I just started. It said that A deposit may be made the cloak of
some other transaction, such as a payment or the giving of security and, in such case, equity, looking through form,
the substance will treat the transaction according to its real nature. I think that that's beautiful. I couldn't say it more
eloquently. That, that really explained everything that's happening. All of these deposits can be the cloak for another
type of transactiona payment for a debt, but only in equity because only equity can look through the
debtor/creditor form to the substance in equity and then treat that transaction as the real nature.

.P :: So if we say that equity .. trust, and therefore without making the claim, equity's like a tiger on the grass and we
need to bring that tiger on the grass out on our behalf.

CW :: Equity is where the real power of the trust comes in; it's a 900-lbs. Gorilla.

P :: Yeah.

.CW :: And equity is I have a right, I have a title, and I have an interest .. because that's what equity is gonna
enforce. That's where I get my remedy. In equity. There is no adequate remedy at law. And at law is the public side
of the court. I had to go into equity to get a remedy, and that's where my...

.P :: I was talking to a guy that was in and out of the court in .. and just getting bounced around the court system;
been going on for ten years. And at one point he ended up in the court of chancery and Shell got out of there within
two days and he never knew why at the time, and I spoke to him, and I was telling him about the, you know, NTT
and, and he understood why they wanted him out of there.

CW :: Mm-hm...

P :: Well, now he's gone back in there.

CW :: It's all about the relationship you're establishing. Are you establishing a debtor/creditor relationship through
commerce, or are you establishing an equitable relationship under trusts?

P :: Well, now..

.CW :: It's all about .. through commerce, or are you establishing an

P :: Trusts all the way.

.CW :: You can be in Kansas under trusts or you can be..under Ozdebtor/creditor..or commerce. I don't ever want
to do commerce ever again. Commerce gets you..is gonna get you under debtor/creditor.

.P :: I was reading a part in one of the trust books .... can't remember which one .. and one part said that equity will
see the true sort of relationship of what's going on, whereas law, you know, will miss other parts.

CW :: Right. It has to.

M :: CW?

CW :: Yes.

.M :: This is Michael. With my situation, Michael Tobin made a trust, ok? Now I can't go back into the court system,
but what I was .. is with the Sheriff, is write him a letter telling him that the third party, which was my wife bringing
in the money to get me out, was an interest, and then make that a special deposit and tell him to return the same, and
then with the beneficiary being a WCL, which is the beneficiary of that, is my daughter. So I've got two people here
that, that are third parties, that are interested parties.

CW :: Right, right.

.M :: Because she came on my behalf to pay the money..the thing is when I wrote the, uh, like the return the trust
res. They didn't return the trust property and I wrote that down .. and initially when I wrote that down .. judge in
there and, of course it was on the public side, I told them that it was a special deposit, so they know all this stuff. I
just have to continue expressing it. Now, should I just still continue doing the, uh, the UCC? And it's already at the
county level.

CW :: Yeah. I would say it .. This is expressing it more crystal clear understanding, uh, as to the, you know, the
picture, you know, of what has actually been happening .. and we can simplify it.

CW :: We can simplify it a little bit better.

.M :: One thing .. Then I .. basically write him an instruction letter..Trustee, because he took the money, and
basically instruct him on what to do, and if he doesn't do it in that point in time then basically he is in breach of trust
and commingling the funds.

.CW :: Right. That would be the, the agreement of the contract that says that they have to do this .. because the
instruction for the special deposit would be that contract or agreement.

M :: But I don't show him the special deposit, uh, instruction, or do I? Because that's basically the contract. That's
what you're saying?

.CW :: Well they don't have to have .. as actually the contract, because that is the contract. They still have instruction
.. because you want to specify for specific purpose, because special deposit has two characteristics. One was just a
regular special deposit, which would be whatever I put it, I get back out, but then the one for the specific purpose. I
wanna apply it toward a debt. That's the one that establishes the trustee of fiduciary trustee duty. That actually turns
it into a special deposit trust and makes them actually liable, so that contains the contractthe agreementand
what to apply it to.

.M :: .. because what they did is they applied it to the bail and I want my money back and I also want my trust
property back, which is the finger prints, everything.

.CW :: So here's .. a notice to the bank of interest of a third party .. It says where a third party has a claim in funds ..
or, say, a court, or the Sheriff or whoever, or where funds are deposited .. for a claim of a third person..the bank's
knowledge of the arrangement alters to the extent that the claim or security the debtor/creditor to the extent .. so
that that debtor/creditor relationship has been altered. It now changes to a trust for a special deposit for the
specific purpose.

M :: What about damages?

CW :: Yeah. I mean, certify a tort action against them or possibly another equity action against him for breaching
trust, then. ...You've got at law remedy you could go after, which are colorable ... and they you'd go for the equity
route for breaching the trust.

M :: Which is all in court.

CW :: Yeah.

.M :: ..the only problem with that, is, because I'm not a resident anywhere, I can't file, uh...

CW :: Strawman suit.

M :: But the strawman has no residence in the state.

.M :: .. Please don't interrupt me. I'm talking to CW ... What I was thinking of doing .. I've created a WCL trust and I
was the Grantor of that trust, or my real name was the Grantor of that trust, and I was thinking I'm making Michael
Tobin the Beneficiary of the trust, but who is the managing director of the trust is my wife.. reconstrue that where I'd
be the Trustee of the trust and then go after and file suit on behalf of WCL, on behalf of the beneficiary of Michael
Tobin.

CW :: Alright. Say that setup again. Whose the trustee on the account?

.M :: Well, the beneficiary of the pure banking trust is my daughter, ok? The managing director of that Trust is my
wife. I was the creator of that trust, ok? So, what, you know, my real name. Now, what I was thinking of doing is in
bringing Michael Tobin in, putting him down as a Beneficiary and then possibly bringing me in, um, and my real
name. The thing is, see, this is where it's going to get real sticky because they know me as Michael Tobin, not in my
real name .. court action. And this is what I'm trying to figure out now, how to get around that, because my wife does
not have knowledge to do this.

CW :: Keep in mind that the Beneficiary does not have to be revealed by the Trustee. Never has to be revealed,
whoever that party is.

M :: Mm-hm.

CW :: Now you can be Beneficiary on the private. You can be the Trustee on the public side. A Trustee on the public
side can't be forced to reveal who the beneficiary is.

.M :: Ok.. I see what you're saying. So, in other words .. myself .. board meeting and appoint Michael Tobin, because
that's who they know me by the identifications as a Trustee, and then at that point in time, uh, I can go in because
WCL would be the beneficiary of this whole thing.

CW :: Right. I mean you might not have the beneficiaries on the private side anyway.

M :: Mm-hm.

CW :: You could change the Trustee on the, on the public side.

M :: Yeah, because...

.CW ::
M :: So my first thing is to instruct the Sheriff what he needs to do. If he doesn't do it then I go ahead and do the next
step, which is to file the, uh, the civil suit.

CW :: Well, the instruction would have to be to the Sheriff from who? Which party?

M :: From, would be from, it would be from Michael Tobinthe one that was arrested and incarcerated.

CW :: And what is his office?

M :: Grantor.

.CW :: Alright. Was there a trust formed already, is that, or .. trustee would be able to .

M :: Well, the trust res was originally formed through qualified signatures during the arrest.

CW :: Ok, well I'm thinking that you probably have to set up a Trustee change first, and then that new Trustee would
be able to give an order as Trustee to the, say, the Sheriff.

M :: So I would be Grantor/Trustee, or just Trustee.

CW :: Yeah, if that's how you want to play it. But in order to issue an order as trustee you'd have to be trustee first.
Change, change the position.

S :: Can you appoint yourself Trustee?

M :: I can appoint anybody as Trustee. I'm Grantor. Remember. You can play all three positions.

.S :: Sorry, I cut out, say .. Did you say you can?

M :: Yes.

.S :: Cool. So that would be .. the first move..

.M :: Yes .. I don't want to confuse CW. I'm dealing with two trust .. Now, there is no formation was a trust when I
was arrested, so I have two trusts here. There's a trust being a Beneficiary, and then a trust that was created through
my signature.

CW :: Why don't you operate through the one trust that, that, that was formed in the court?

M :: Ok, and make myself. Of course I don't have to tell them who the beneficiary is.

CW :: Right, right.

M :: Because I can just tell them at that point in time You need to pay to this individual, or whoever the case may
be.

CW :: Yeah.

M :: And whoever, yeah, ok. I see what you're saying. Don't confuse the whole thing. So I go ahead and do the UCC,
move the, move the titles, and bring that in and, and have that ready for evidence, but at this point in time, I, when I
write to the Sheriff I'm saying that Michael Tobin, being Trustee, is instructing you to do this. And if you don't do
this then you could be, it could be construed that you're commingling funds and in breach of trust.

CW :: Right, right.

M :: And also damages. I can apply damages at that point in time too.
CW :: Yeah.

.M :: Ok. I'll let you know what occurs. I'm done with. .. I hand it over.

S :: Good question.

CW :: Hello. I hear somebody in the background there.

A :: Hi, this is Albert.

CW :: Hey Albert..

A :: How you doing, Christian?

CW :: Long time no see.

.A :: No, I've been listening .. for the last month.

CW :: Good, what's your question tonight? Glad to have you on.

.A :: You know, this is a good show today, but, uh, you know .. ask questions. Uh, I know my brother's in Ireland,
my Levite bretheren, Shalom. Anyways. Oh, yeah .. and ..

CW :: <<laughing>>

.A :: Now, I have a question dealing with people I know that want to, uh, divorce and what they want to do is to
write in their property, placing trust of ... and I was wondering..something like that..open up trust to the public?

CW :: Doesn't have to, no.

.A :: Ok. .. uh, a constructive trust, you know, the .. to cure wrongdoing or to prevent unjust enrichment, uh, I'd ask
for about, you know, moving the titles and signatures. Uh, what I was wondering about that .. what would be
considered special trust deposit?

CW :: Whatever their assets are. That would be the special trust deposit.

A :: Whose assets?

CW :: Well, you're saying that this couple want to form a trust. I don't know what their assets are.

.A :: Well, the first question we're dealing with is .. they're putting property in trust, you know You just gave me the
answer.

.CW :: Yeah, I don't think ... really.

A ::

.CW :: I mean .. What kind of property do you have? you say .. say We don't have any property.

A :: You, you, you have spoken about trust, trust property where, uh, it is sold or, uh, to another person, and a
constructive trust, uh, envelope and, eh, stated something about when it's a family member, that the courts might
consider it a gift, or at least not even state that .. but there's a certain way that it can be expressed, like, for instance,
when there is consideration given and, eh, consideration can be oral, so, uh, is that, would that be a bona fide trust
between family members?
.CW :: Uh, yeah .. to split up their assets so they're going to put it as trust jointly. They're going to have to agree to
that.

.A :: Then, of course, .. brought up .. tonight you brought up another one. You were talking about special deposit
and, uh.

CW :: Yeah, for a specific purpose. That's what I was going to mention next.

.A :: Ok. Now, the special deposit that I'm getting a rough time and so, um, would for this one person that I
have..go..Would a special deposit be considered as someone, uh, paying into for either security or for consideration.
Would that be considered a special trust deposit, when they have ..?

CW :: Well, if the elements are there and the method of the formation of a trust, and that was trust, yes.

A :: Ok.

CW :: If there was intent, purpose, parties, and specific trust res and one of the methods of formation, yeah, that
would be a trust , that would be a special deposit.

.A :: And .. question .. When these two people, uh, they're just trying, uh, to move all contract .. contract off of
themselves..but at the same time, uh, their intent is, uh, not have any relation to property other than possibly trust for
the duration of their lives and then, uh, the beneficiary or beneficial owner the same person. Does sound, uh, like
Trustee?

.CW :: Yeah, that trustee is going to have to own the whole thing..He'll have possession..but he'll have to do what's
set up in the indenture.

A :: Right. The indenture, you know, it doesn't have to be elaborate, uh, uh, type of work, does it?

CW :: No. It sounds like what you're trying to create is just some kind of asset protection device, like what Carlos
was talking aboutan inter-vivos trust for the purpose of taking the, taking the assets and putting them into trust,
and so that nobody knows where they are, so they're private.

A :: When you were speaking about a bank, you know, and, and forming a trust. At the very beginning, before you
open up an account, what wording can you possibly put on their document, have a trust formation, but without them
knowing?

CW :: Ah, that's a little harder. Yeah, let's come up with with tricky verbiage that establishes you have a trust, you
know. I give you my pen, but I want my pen, say, within two weeks. That was a trust. No trust verbiage was in
there even as a trust was being administered, but now if I got a problem with what happened to enforce it, now
someone's gonna have to know that there's trust.

A :: Well, I guess that one is for the books ..

.CW :: Yeah .. actually the administration of the trust is going to be a lot of people's problems. They think they're just
going to write some indenture and just forget about it, it's going to take care of itself, and I'm afraid no. You gotta
know what you can't do .. mingle .. your own trust.

.P :: ..with the bank and the banker come back and openly said that they are the beneficiary.

.A :: Yeah, that's really what ..

CW :: Uh, yeah, because they're, under a general deposit they have title, and under the debtor/creditor
relationship, yeah.

A :: Well, we gotta get into special deposit in such a way that they don't know it, right?
S :: They don't know it?

.CW :: Yeah, you probably could. It's not like they don't do special deposits. It's just we're not knocking on the right
doors when they say .. I never heard of that. It's all over the place..you guys never heard of special deposit. Get
lost. What the heck's going on here?

S :: Is that that public private thing?

.CW :: .. deposit .. as back-office banking..through the front door of the bank and asking them to do a special deposit
through the general deposit side.

S :: And that's why got..denied ..because they can't talking that in the public, right?

CW :: Right.

S :: Is that separate?

CW :: Right.

.S :: Just a quick question .. the guy with the divorce .. I guess it goes without saying that, that it's an uncontested
divorce, right?

> :: Correct.

.S :: They're .. completely .. in cooperation with each other ..

> :: Absolutely.

S :: Then are you asking how they do it or can they do it?

.A :: Well no, I didn't was to ask Chris this question. .. What the question really points to is, to have..you
know..there's property where both are going to agree as to where it goes and I didn't want, uh, them to say something
that would open them up, you know. Christian spoke about not putting the trust public.

S :: Ok. Oh, I see what you're getting at. Right. How do you do it privately is what you're asking.

A :: Yeah.

.S :: .. That's addressing to chambers, uh, I think. I don't know .. Is that what he's asking, Christian, basically? How
to do the private thing? What kind of procedure should they be partaking .. and that should be communication
something like private for judge .. that?

CW :: Well, well is Carlos on tonight?

S :: Carlos. Who is that masked bandit?

CW :: He, he speaks of inter-vivos trusts and how to use those.

.A :: I don't think there is such a thing as, you know, getting divorce, uh, private, you know, other than having ..

.CW :: .. The divorce would be a public thing, but you could hold your assets in private because prior to the
divorce .. that your assets would be handled a specific way, privately.

S :: And the record of divorce has to be public, right?

CW :: Uh, only... I don't think so, no. When it comes down to the question Do you own anything?, uh, We don't
own a thing.

? :: You're saying if people get divorced they could do something the titles jointly?

CW :: Sure. Whatever assets that they hold as, jointly, they, if they're in agreement they could put it in trust.

.? :: What about the, uh, the original contract of the marriage in the first place, which is a public, eh, registered
record .. the whole goal is to get rid of that paperwork, so that's a public document .. Is there a way to do that .. some
kind of .. ?

CW :: So that's gonna have to be publicly adjudicated.

S :: Yeah, at least it's gonna have to be publicly adjudicated, right?

CW :: Right.

A :: I suppose that they should do preventive care and then possibly, uh, do the trust thing first and, you know, and
when they go up and cancel the contract they could state in public that We don't own any property. It's all in trust
under so and so and we're holding beneficial title, the equitable title. and, uh, they could say that there's a trust,
right?

CW :: Yeah. They could probably do that.

.A :: .. agreement.

.S :: Are they, uh, is there any intention .. in maintaining a relationship .. afterwards, on any level?

A :: I didn't ask that.

S :: Do you know?

A :: No <<laughing>>, I didn't want to ask whether or not they're gonna to have relations. But, you since they do
have children, relationship is a given. You know what I mean?

.S :: Interesting, yeah, yeah, yeah. .. may be two totally rational intelligent people trying to make the best of the
situation.

CW :: Yeah. You check into an inter-vivos trust and, maybe, you know, talk privately with Carlos, and he can give
you some clues as to how to set that up.

A :: Ok, you know, You think Carlos has been down that road already, ah?

CW :: Yeah, yes, he has, yeah.

A :: I'll talk to Carlos, mi amigo. We're all trying to get to the same place, you know. And it starts with the letter 'f',
unfortunate[ly]. And, uh, you know, we, we, we must work together, and even though, eh, there's probably [a]
thousand ways to skin this cat. This trust that you're teaching, Christian, is absolute until we get to the level where
we can get out of corporation and in republic, and that's, uh, that's really, you know, our goal.

CW :: Well, I think the first step is to identify what we've done, and that we've done it all wrong, and then we have
to reverse everything that we've done, in, in exact reversal!

S :: Wow. Oh, you're kidding. You could do...? That makes perfect sense.

A :: Yeah, backwards.
.CW :: And you do .. a withdrawal and you .. with a special deposit. It's that simple.

.S :: You just go back to every contract and get a hold of the people involved with that and .. and start
communicating essentially.

CW :: No, I don't have to go back to every contract If we go to the Individual Master File, we can get them all in one
fell swoop.

S :: Yeah, but where is that, though?

CW :: It's in the IRS. The IRS got the IMF.

.S :: Oh, oh, oh, the IMF. Ok, that one specifically. Ok, I was thinking something .. Birth Certificate ..

M :: Have you even been listening? You know, you spend most of your time talking and talking over other people
and you don't listen to what CW said. He said that earlier when he was talking.

S :: Whose this?

.M :: .. I'd really appreciate it if you'd start listening....

S :: That's a very interesting opinion there, Michael.

M :: .. This is Michael.

.? :: I gotcha, Michal. ..

.A :: .. We're all in the same road and there are no cars driving by. Just ourselves walking ...We gotta make all the
time constructive, especially Christian, who is sticking his neck out for us. You know, I'd like to know how to
change the IMF code myself. Uh, I've got special programs that can code a lot of that stuff, but .. really show me
how to change myself from public to private, and, uh, I would really love to learn that.

CW :: We're just on the verge of implementing that, so hang in there.

A :: What's that, Christian?

CW :: I said we're just on the verge of implementing that, so hang in there.

.A :: Yeah, I'm hanging, yeah.You know, all ten toes. You know, there's been a lot of documents out there talking
about, uh, the IMF and, you know, I, I have my own special life that I have, and I can tell you. A lot of it is ..
disinformation. And I know that there is good information out there and when, when you say that .. in baby steps ..
at crossroads, what road are we really on, you know?

A :: So that's...

CW :: Right, right.

.A :: So that's. Everyone of us has a, a specific trial that they're going through, and some of us have really a lot of the
same things at the same time. You know, we got this and we got homes, we got cars, we got children. You know,
those things we all have in common, and another thing, the most...the best of all, that we are freedom-minded and,
you know, because of that we must work together, and, uh, you know, .. we love .. and, uh, you know .. for instance,
you guys are doing real good. You're allowing me to .. without knocking me down and I'm glad. We need to work
together.

S :: It should be mutual.
.A :: You know, we all need to calm down .. times .. and it's just gonna work.

.CW :: Well, we all created this life that we have, however many years we've been living. We created a life all based
on debtor/creditor, and that's a lot to unwind for a lot of people. And people have no concept of what they've
created, how they've created it, but yet it can be all simplified and unwound, all in one fell swoop. And now, if we
and now if we understand how we've created this mess..we can stay away from how we've created it and .. and we
can stick on the private side and we don't need to do this commerce thing again. We can interface in, stay out of
commerce.

S :: Christian, are you saying, uh, there's a Gordian knot there?

.CW :: ..one fell swoop, one motion; you can eliminate the whole thing. It's a lot simpler than .. as much depth as
I've gone into tonight, because they're looking for something more complex. It's not complex at all. The secret of the
hiding it is that it is hidden in simple plain view and you can't see it because you're looking for something more
difficult.

S :: <<Laughing>> So, what exactly are we looking at? <<Laughing>>

CW :: General deposit versus special deposit. It's that simple, and you kill the one by withdrawing it out of the
general deposit realm and put it in special deposit, into the trust realm, all in one fell swoop.

S :: And I don't mean to sound cliched, but I take it that could be done by special instruction?

CW :: Yeah, right.

S :: Interesting.

A :: Let the class go on, then.

CW :: Transfer $250,000,000 over to an LLC and then get on with your life.

S :: Amen.

A :: Now, it's, it's that special deposit that has several, uh, definitions, um, to me, I mean, so far as what I've learned
from you, uh, because there's so many different contracts, and each one has a special deposit definitions in it, but I
suppose, you know, generally, it has one definition, but, uh, pertaining area, or, or, uh, contract you got into, uh,
would have to implement different[ly], correct?

CW :: Well, special deposit breaks down into, there's only two typesthere's the special deposit that what you put in
you get back out, and then there's the other one that's specifically allocated for specific purpose. And the specific
purpose would be for, say, for the payment of any debts or obligations owed under the, say, 1776 law form, for any
lawful purpose, under 1776 law form, and for the payment of any debtor obligation of the party, whoever it's meant
forthat's [the] Beneficiary.

.A :: What kind of success rate on this, Christian? .... successful doing this, you know?

CW :: Nobody, nobody's done it under trust yet. Absolutely no one.

A :: Wow.

S :: We're developing it, creating the concepts, process.

.CW :: See, all along we thought that we were accessing the Cestui Que Trust, but the Cestui Que Trust does not
exist. It does not exist until you bring it into existence. Nobody's brought it into existence. Therefore it does not
exist. That's why we can't find any evidence for it in existence. And that's why they can say Hey, I don't see a trust
here. They're right. There is no trust. You never created, you never created a trust, manifested it as a trust, a Cestui
Que Trust, therefore there is none. You never created a Foreign Situs Trust. Therefore there is none. And we're all
looking for the access to get into this thing or trying to write instruments against it? It doesn't exist. It doesn't mean it
can't exist. You gotta create it. Once we create it, then it exists .. All we've done is created a debtor/creditor
relationship, by general deposit and everything we've been doing in our life, we've been doing under general
deposit and we've been creating a debtor/creditor relationship and we all debtors because of it.

.A :: Who's the swoop office? .. in one fell swoop do this..one fell swoop. Who would be the office that we would
work with that would wipe it all out.

CW :: The IRS.

A :: Ok, the IMF codes, right?

CW :: Yes, uhm.

A :: Ok, I get you now. That certainly changes your status and that's what it's all about. It's status.

CW :: Yeah, they're the record keepers. They know where all those debt titles are, where all that debtor/creditor stuff
is. You guys are the accountants. I'm just giving you an order to take all those titles, withdraw them out of the
debtor/creditor realm and put them in the other realmthe private realmby special deposit, and therefore I
merge the titles and pay the debt. Bingo.

S :: In the act of doing that.

CW :: All at once.

S :: That causes that to happen like that?

CW :: What was that? You kind of garbled.

S :: You said, um, when you move it in from the public into private, that causes the merging right there, or payment
of all the debt?

CW :: Yes, yes.

A :: They count all the beans that, the, get into our pockets, so they would know every contract, every signature
dealing with, uh, their, eh, Federal Reserve Notes, definitely.

.CW :: Yes .. get that account terminated, do the disbursement on it. Put the disbursement into a fund that I'm going
to designate.

S :: And would that zero out the whole public side? By definition?

CW :: Yes, yes. All past, present and future debtsgone.

S :: Because it goes from public to private.

CW :: Yes.

.S :: It gets completely removed .. completely remove it from public.

CW :: Yes.

M :: Yes, you collapse the trust. You collapse it and then there's no more debt, and then at that point in time, more
than likely, if I'm right, we go to REOS(?) and instruct her what to do.
S :: So, Michael, we don't use the word collapse anymore, right?

.M :: ..

.S :: You don't ...collapse anymore ..

M :: Terminate.

CW :: Terminate.

.S :: Or extinguish? ..

CW :: Extinguish the debts. Terminate the trust.

A :: Well, Christian. I'd love to hear that call, where we just focus on that one particular thing. I know you, you've
taught us a lot of trust and it's good for a lot of us because, uh, you know, we've got these different things going on,
everybody, but when you focus, the sight puts a laser beam on it. That's what it is. That is what...

** There are 27 participants in this conference.

CW :: Oh, we'll keep on working on it.

A :: I was wondering if our brothers, our brothers over there in Ireland and, uh, do they have same, uh, situation
going on too?

CW :: Uh, it's worldwide. It's not just here and over there. It's everywhere.

A :: IMF has tentacles that go that far?

CW :: Worldwide, yeah, yeah.

A :: Unbelievable!

S :: Interesting.

.A :: Well, you know, guys. You know, this, this, this is a huge work for us to do, you know. I, I, I see it like this,
Chistian's call, handful of people, you know, whatever, eighty..It's still a handful of people compared to popular,
ok? .. handful of people learn this stuff, teach this stuff and maybe the next generation will have hope.

CW :: Yeah.

? :: Do you think this is similar to a pardon process, in terms of documentation and stuff?

CW :: Similar to a what now?

.S :: Well .. I know a pardon process would be like a request..be similar, basically asking people in the record
department to get a hold of some records and then you want to give them, uh, whatever documents you gotta create,
which can be some kinds of statements and stuff .. that are ..it's similar. It reminds me of some kind of statements
and stuff .. it's similar .. reminds me of the pardon process .. and it's like it's gotta be with the government, or in this
case you're saying the IRS.

CW :: Yeah, but it boils down to the, uh, I forget where it's at now.

S :: Financial records.
.CW :: Under Bills and Notes .. The documents that are created by the issuer, whoever signed the instruments. That
is the owner of the document, and the ownership never ceases.

S :: So that's where we gotta focus our study, then... the concept of whose the ownership is.

CW :: If those documents are always yours, all you have to do is withdraw them from the general deposit you've
madethat's the public.

S :: So, so it is true. Anything with your signature on it, you are entitled to get, uh, the original copy of.

CW :: Absolutely. Don't let them tell you any different .. you're the sole owner of them.

S :: That's, there's no exception to that?

.CW :: No exception, nope .. You are the issuer, you are the owner of the document.

.S :: That's why they get all fancy pansy when you start talking about...

CW :: You give it to them and give means that you transfer title to them without compensation.

S :: And we're even short-changing yourself when, when, when we're asking for copies or certified copies. You
should just be saying Give me the original.

CW :: Yes, they're the debtor to you, because you made the deposit to them. You gave it to them.

S :: Oh, man, and then after I get it in my hands I can say Here, I'll tell you what, I'll give it back to you.

CW :: But see, you created the..., you created the general deposit. Under the general deposit, you created the
debtor/creditor relationship and you're the debtor, and they keep on saying Hey, we don't have to do this,
because you're the debtor. You gave us the document. No. Come under equity.

S :: Oh, right. Ok. Right.

CW :: Come under equity and tell them I want that back because that's mine. Let equity...

S :: That's all posturing. That's all postured context and intent. Is that right?

CW :: It's subject-matter jurisdiction. They don't have subject-matter jurisdiction over it.

S :: Jurisdiction is definitely posturing and intent.

CW :: Yeah, a special versus general deposits here. A special deposit is one in which the identical subject matter
deposited must be kept and re-delivered. A general deposit is one in which the identical subject matter need not be
returned. It's subject-matter. It's jurisdiction. You gave them jurisdiction by making a general deposit. Get rid of it
as a general deposit by re-expressing it basically as a special deposit. Withdraw it out of the general deposit.

S :: Ok, so, just to clarify, just to see if I got this right. There's a huge focus intense psychological party; gotta really
keep your focus on this thing. How you're standing and what you're trying to say and communicate to them, because
that's what's differentiating it, to make sure you don't keep jumping back and forth and using sloppy language and
stuff.

CW :: Yes, right. The special is, the special deposit is trust. It's on the private side. The general deposit is the
debtor/creditor and it's on the public side, and we put everything into the public under a general deposit and they
have subject-matter jurisdiction over it, but we can pull it out of that subject-matter jurisdiction by withdrawing
it and making a special deposit, putting it back into the private.
S :: And doing it in a real clear unequivocal straight-forward manner, so there's no, uh, possibility to
misinterpretation on their part.

[ @ 2 hrs : 02 mins : 18 secs ]

CW :: Yes. They're, they're all depositaries, and under Depositaries under Corpus Juris, under Book 26-B, Section
6, is talking about special and general deposits. And it's that definition I just read. A special deposit is one in
which the identical subject matter deposited must be kept and re-delivered, whereas general deposit is one in which
the identical subject matter need not be returned. Why does it need to be returned? Because you never asked for it
back. You never ordered it back. Because it was yours all along.

S :: Ok, so this is really important, to have our logic clear, so that our communication of what we're doing is very
clear because that's how the argument's always going to be. They're going to say now, See, you're
debtor/creditor., and then you try to go No, no.. I'm, I'm trying to be private in public here. So it gets to that
logic and really understanding and seeing.

CW :: I don't to sit there and argue with the guys that are sitting on the front there under the general deposit. I'm
gonna go up higher and tell them Hey, if, if you're going to breach the trust, I'll be glad to put you into court and
settle the matter.

S :: Right, so it's a matter like, like generally speaking, they're going to try and say Now you're debtor/creditor.
You'll just have to hold your ground and say Excuse me, uh, You know there's a definite misunderstanding here
because I'm operating in trust., like that, sign it? You know what I mean? Because that's what they're going to be
coming from?

CW :: Say again.

S :: Are you saying that, in general, the argument is going to be something to the effect of we're going to come at
you.., Sorry you're debtor/creditor, so all the, you know, all terminology of the contract applies. And you're going
to come out and say No, I think there's a misunderstanding. I'm coming from trust position. and then...

CW :: Right.

S :: ...you really have to understand it, truly understand it.

CW :: Yes, because I made a general deposit, I'm debtor, but I can make a withdrawal.

[ @ 2 hrs : 04 mins : 07 secs ]

CW :: Because even under debtor/creditor, the ownership... I still am the owner of the document because my name
is on it.

.S :: Right, there you go. Ok, so that's why that's the key concept there. You still have that right of withdrawal, no
matter, either way. .. is that affirmative there, or, or?

CW :: Say again, Shane.

S :: The, the, the principle, the principlethe underlying principle that, that you always have the right of withdrawal
uh, debtor/creditor or, or the trustee, because that's fundamental.

CW :: Yeah. The fundamental is the ownership never changes hands. You always are the owner.

S :: Ok.
CW :: Which really ties in with everything. They're just, they're just, they're sending you some flunky who doesn't
know their butt from the hole in the ground, and naturally they're just doing what they're told to do, which is totally
wrong. They don't know the law.

S :: So, so the final thing that when it gets to when push comes to shove, which invariably at some level has to. You
just gotta put your foot down, and, and...

CW :: Yeah.

.S :: Alright .. in the ground..someone has to put your foot down..

CW :: Yeah. No use arguing with people because there's only one way. That's all they know until they're taught a
lesson. You gotta take these kids to the woodshed and start beating their butts once in a while and maybe they'll start
doing what their supposed to be doing.

S :: So, it would be, would it be, would it be, uh, a document that would be something like, say, a notice of
withdrawal?

CW :: Yes.

.S :: To start it, yeah, that would get things started, wouldn't it? ..

CW :: Alright. This is under, uh, Corpus Juris Secondum, Book 10, page 166. This is out of, uh, Bills and Notes, I
believe it was. It says A piece of paper never ceases to be the property of the issuer.

S :: That's what? Corpus, uh, Juris, uh, Secundum?

CW :: Yeah, Corpus Juris Secundum, Book 10. That's under Bills and Notes and everything today is really a bill or
a note. It's really doing commerce. Everything you put your paper to, assign a signature to becomes a negotiable
instrument, under debtor/creditor. So everything you ever signed is a piece of paper that never ceases to be the
property of, or never, never leaves, never ceases to be the property of the issuer.

A :: Well, the issuer would be IRS in this case, wouldn't it?

CW :: No, no. Whoever signed the document is the issuer. UCC 3-105

A :: Ok. Now the promissorthe transfereeis the IRS and they stand in a fiduciary confidential relation to us and
we would be the, I guess, party.

.CW :: Yeah, but in order for them .. confidential fiduciary relationship it's gotta be expressed and we have never
expressed it.

.CW :: None of us know how to express it .. confidential ..express..none of us know how to express it..we don't
know how to do special deposit. It says here under signatures, under Corpus Juris Secundum. It says Generally, a
signature may be made for a person by the hand of another, acting the presence of such person and at his direction or
request, or with his acquiescence, unless the statute provides otherwise. A signature of this type becomes the
signature of the person [of] whom it is made, and it has the same validity as though written by him. This mode of
signing is sufficient for a sealed instrument, and even though the party affixing the signature does not have authority
to do so, under, so under seal.

.A :: So, you, you know, right there we stated it that basically what .. right? Signed for us.

CW :: Yes, right. And every document that they got that they signed for him. Same thing, is also still yours.

A :: Now you know that, uh, uh, the IRS has the rule regulation where they think they can sign for us too.
CW :: They, they've got all the power because under a general deposit title gets transferred to them.

A :: I see. That, that's what's giving them the power to...

CW :: Yes. Withdraw the titlesthe papers that gave them the power, they have no power, and then redeposit it
under special deposit and put yourself on the private side and then you will never reveal your identity by name,
boundary, because you're private.

A :: What would be an instrument to do something like that?

CW :: Ah, well, it's really simple. It's, it's. But the problem is that nobody has enough basis of knowledge that they
can say Oh, man. This ain't hard at all.

S :: People always thinking it's a simple document, but it's more of a process, right?

CW :: Uh, yeah, it's a process, but it's really a simple document, yes.

S :: A series of documents. It's more than one, isn't it?

CW :: Well, it could be. I could make it more as complex or as easy as I want it.

S :: And then you still have to operate it though. It's like I guess what you're getting at.

.CW :: Yeah, you gotta to rebut it. He who fails to introduce any other evidence to rebut the presumption of
authenticity, which attaches to a signature, then the party claiming under the signature will prevail. However, if a
party denying a signature's validity introduces evidence sufficient to overcome the rebuttal presumption of the
validity, then the case will be tried upon all the evidence introduced at trial. So, anyway, this establishes .. affecting
this by a preponderance of evidence.

A :: So, it falls under, you know, how to state claims, then.

CW :: Yes, that's under Corpus Juris Secundum, under Signatures, section 16, Burden of Proof.

A :: All these classes are well worth their time and effort, Christian.

CW :: Yeah. It's all about the identity. That's the essential thing, It's not the name. The name, the boundary, the
publicity, which is is the public, or the privacy, which is the private, establishes, oh, is one method of establishing
the identity. So it's name, boundaries, and public. Those are the three that are going to establish the identity.

A :: You know, this process that you're talking aboutthe IMF, you know, that is a big block in another process
where go for whatever, I guess our, what [is] our endeavour, and that is private. Uh, this is, this is it right here. This
is the block.

CW :: Yeah, but nobody know how to be private. Nobody knows how to operate in private. If you were just handed
documentation that says File this and now you're private, I'll guarantee you, when you when you walk out on the
street the next day, you're gonna make yourself public.

S :: Sure.

A :: Yes.

CW :: You're going to crash everything that was done for you, because you do not know how to implement it. You
don't know how to administer a trust. There is no use me giving this stuff to anybody, unless they understand it. You
will trash it in thirty seconds. Can't give the keys to a Ferrari to a thirteen-year-old. He's not competent to drive it.
He'll wreck it.
S :: For lack of understanding.

CW :: Yes. We're in this mess all together, because we've been foolish. We've been dumb. We keep on thinking
Doing the same thing tomorrow will achieve something different than we've done yesterday. We're all fools. We
keep on going down the debtor/creditor rabbit hole, achieving something different tomorrow, which never happens,
by doing what we did yesterday. It'll never work. We're perishing for lack of knowledge, and it's until everybody
gets the knowledge... Most people don't want to handle this stuff. They, they're better off being slaves.

A :: Yeah, well, you know, the children of Israel, when they left Egypt.

CW :: Yeah, they like their leeks and onions better. They wanted to go back.

A :: Yeah.

CW :: Like a dog to it's vomit.

S :: It's, it's a balance between people getting, I find, confused between assertiveness and aggressiveness and, uh, I
always tried to differentiate it, because it helped me, um, when I go into a court or any other kind of a challenge, and
to know that very clear line between asserting yourself and aggression, because that's one of the games a court plays.
As soon as you get past the level of assertiveness and you touch on something aggressive, then that's your
controversy and, uh, uh, contempt, and so on, right, because they're always trying to get that track.

CW :: Right.

.S :: That's part of that .. in public.

A :: Just to, you know, just to add to argue what I stated earlier is that, once these, uh, particular people, uh, left
Egypt they wanted to go back, but the reason they didn't [was] because the water was there. They didn't know how
to cross that, so it's like, you know, once you go to the private, [you] better stay there.

CW :: Yeah, God had to block their way of going back, or else they would've gone back.

A :: Yes.

S :: That's an interesting logic that would hold.

A :: But we've just been brain-washed, guys, you know, and now were just, uh, putting back our pieces together.

S :: I wouldn't say brainwashed, but conditioned. You know, it's funny when you got bad habit and then you know
you're trying to break it. Uh, that's a more accurate kinda way of looking at it, like it's just because of conditioning.
Uh, brainwashing is like when you have no cluetwo separate states of consciousness their conditioning, it's just a
bad habit. You gotta break it. Uh, it takes effort, will and concentration, and, you know, you gotta, uh, focus your
whole, like a diet or quitting smoking, or something like that, just because that's what people are doing. They're,
they're so conditioned. They got so much of one habit and so little of, starving for the other, and so that they can
only do that, so you can't change a habit until you replace it with another one. That's one of the principles of it, by
the way. So it applies here too.

CW :: Well, we all have special drawing rights and special drawing rights are special deposit. Everything we
have is special, but unless you express it to be special, you don't have any rights. He who sleeps on his rights has
no rights, so wake up, sleepers. We've got all the right, unalienable by God, given to us by the Declaration of
Independence, through, or the notification of it. I mean God gave it to us, but we just needed to wake up and, uh,
start asserting those rights and, and we can. It's simpler than we thought.

.A :: Since we have our Declaration, what does Ireland have?

.CW :: I don't know. Uh, they're like. Uh, Canada has their Claim of Right, and I think it's kinda based on.
.A :: Constitutional, is a coronation of .. oath ....

.S :: I was just wondering, you know, what, what foundation .... Every country that's involved with the IMF has to
have a, a foundation somewhere and I...

CW :: Well, that declaration was just what it was. It was a declaration saying that we had those rights. Everybody's
gotta have something. If they don't have it, they can still declare it.

<<garbled>>

CW :: Go ahead.

.A :: .. a real trust or .. right .. you know .. the ancient .. live man. So, I suppose, you know, if they don't have a
declaration and they don't have a claim of right, they'll have that one book.

CW :: That brings up the... When the train run the freest? When it's crashing down through into somebody's house,
or when it's running on the track?

A :: On the track.

CW :: Yeah, on the track. And the Bible is that track.

A:: When it's running on the track.

CW :: It's restricted to the track, but that's what makes the train run the freest.

.A:: .. ancient writings. I believe the term The Bible has been trashed around so much that even young folks don't
even have a clue what it is. You know, where did it comes from and start referring to ancient writings .. a little bit of
a picture that, uh, they're old, very old. You know, I'm not trying to correct no one. That's just what I do with
young... may do for others.

CW :: Yeah. Ah, there was a lady coming on there [who] wanted to ask question?

.L :: Oh, hi, thanks ... I recorded most of it..my recorder ran out about twenty minutes ago, but you guys .. the whole,
um, Declaration of Independence thing. I've got like seven certified copies. I know .. a gal .. was able to get hers
apostilled by Hilary or somebody in that .. Does anybody have an address .. I can go on the internet, search out ..
further apostilled .. copy of it ..

S :: I just got a question. You got it apostilled?

L :: I'm looking to get it apostilled.

S :: Which specific document? The natural Constitution or something?

L :: Yeah, the actual Declaration of Independence.

S :: That you got a certified copy of. Ok.

.L ::

.S :: Actually, to touch on that .. If it's a Canadian Bill of Rights, a friend of mine was saying .. NTT and he asked for
one of these. I think it was the Canadian Bill of Rights if that's the corresponding one. And he said, it was very
interesting, because he got it on, um, what do you call that paper .. Birth Certificate..

? :: Bond paper.
S :: Yeah, uh, bond paper. He said it was on bond paper, so I guess that's just confirmation for what Christian's
saying, and you're saying. Is that considered, is that a trust instrument, Christian?

CW :: No, that's a debtor/creditor instrument.

S :: Ok.

.CW :: Bond ..

S :: Sorry, I didn't mean to cut you off there.

CW :: A bond is a creditor/debtor instrument.

.S :: Right. Are we trying to do something .. Well, how does a bond tie in with .. apostille, so I guess I'm asking
what's the purpose?

.CW :: .. a declaration, and we're like signing onto it and declaring that we have the unalienable rights given to us by
God and since it's a recognized document already, we're just adding ourselves onto that declaration.

.L :: Right, because we're not a party to it. We're trying to make ourselves a party to it .. inquiring on that .. like
getting Hilary Clinton .. authenticated .. like .. on the internet ..

CW :: Ah, Secretary of State. Uh, I don't know what their address is.

L :: Ok.

S :: Hilary Clinton? Secretary of State?

CW :: Yes.

.L ::

.A :: You know .. many have posted a, a, a website where, you know, .. I thought I'd bring that out.

S :: That's interesting.

.A :: Yeah. 4shared.comUm, put in apostille .. and .. from all over the world..

.L :: 4shared.com ..

.S :: So .. the lady who's trying to get .. apostilled ..

.L :: .. call ..

.S :: .. Are you trying to rebut the presumption of the citizenship?

.L :: Well, .. when I got them I could not get them authenticated further from being from where I got them ..

.S :: Is that what you're trying to do .. ? Or where you trying to rebut the presumption of the, uh, um, citizenship,
then?

.L :: Oh, ..

S :: By apostilling the Constitution? Is that right?

L :: I just want to get it further apostilled by Hilary Clinton.

S :: That puts you, that puts you out of the public, into the private, right?

L :: Right, right.

S :: And then you keep that document privately.

.L :: Right. I know, years ago, when I .. my daughter .. the IRS simply asked years ago Is it a trust? not knowing
back then, I said No. <<Laughter>>

S :: Oh, oh. <<Laughing>>

.L :: .. this to this document ..

.S :: Mind you, if you said yes to the trust, I'm sure you have a whole bunch of other questions, right?

.L :: .. gamut .. them apostilled and then bring them back and have them notaried.

.S :: Those apostille guys.. Come on, there's gonna be more than one person who knows ..

.L :: .. I totally enjoyed ..

.S :: So you're gonna do a search on Hilary Clinton, SoS mail address, or something.?

.L :: There you go. .. totally into it .. .. judgment .. so .. It'd be fun .. really bad copies, whatever.

S :: We just want a correspodence address.

L :: Yeah

.S :: Put that in, Hilary Clinton, SoS .. or something.

.L :: night .. most of it .. have a .. and .. look forward .. so there's .. I just wanted to ... they were all: .. It'll be fun ..
whatever.

.S :: I think you'll find it very quickly. I don't know if anybody has it ..

.CW ::

.L :: .. very good call tonight ..

S :: I'm sure you'll find it. I'm sure you'll find it. It can't be that hard. She's gotta have a mailing address.

.L :: .. special deposit versus the general

.S :: Try mail .. correspondents, uh, contacts, you know. Just go through all your searches .. common sense .. sees
you ..

.L :: .. off then. Thanks for a wonderful tonight, call, Christian ..

CW :: Alright, you guys. Thank you.

.L :: .. thanks for the wonderful call tonight, Christian ... Tammy in Minnesota here ..
signing off. Goodnight, you guys.

CW :: Anyone else have a question?

.## :: .. on special deposit .. from one realmgeneral..

CW :: Ok, if you press *6 to you'll unmute yourself.

.A :: I muted it, sorry..do a special deposit to have all your, uh, special deposit taken out from one realmgeneral
and then deposit .. the IMF, for the IMF.

CW :: So you want a specific IMF one there. How about so I give you my name in confidence with reliance to be
returned in the future along with the proceeds therefrom with my interest. That was a special deposit.

.S :: So that .. that's back to your .. that's back to your classic phrase .. You just went full circle, didn't ya?

CW :: Ahah.Yeah.

S :: Thanks.

.A :: I was going to say, are you going to stay on this topic for a bit .. for the next days?

.CW :: .. I'll be expand on this next week, but Tuesday I'm going to talk about equity

A :: Equity?

.CW :: Yes. I'll be expanding again on this probably next week... I think many of us really don't understand equity ..
special deposit, you know, which brings in special circumstances, so under that special, or trust deposit, it was
Corpus Juris again, Section 213, under Book 9 again. In the absence of sufficient special circumstances. However,
a deposit of public funds, (but, say we can say eliminate it) like a deposit of other monies creates merely a general
deposit, giving rise to the relation of debtor and creditor. (That's our whole problem This, this is the general
deposit) So under section 283 .. Relationship between a bank and depositor There is no debtor and creditor relation
between the banks in which .. its special depositor. Their status or relation being that of Agent and Principal, Bailee
and Bailor, or Trustee and Cestui Que Trust. So it's Trustee and Cestui Que Trust.

A :: Grantor and Trustee.

.S :: Sorry, what is Trustee and Grantor? .. how does ..

.CW :: Well, they give an example of other agency stuff, but that of Agency and Principal .. Bailee and Bailor or
Trustee and Cestui Que Trust. You know, you got the option to choose which, which you're doing here.

S :: You're talking about, that special deposit.

CW :: Well, that special deposit is only Trustee and Cestui Que Trust.

S :: And you always gotta bring it up yourself.

CW :: Yes. You're the one who has to express it. They're giving you the option. They're giving you either special
deposit option or general deposit option, and you choose, and that's....

S :: Sounds...

.CW :: .. you didn't have knowledge because they really didn't coerce you. They just made you dumb so you didn't
understand what you doing, and then they provided a way for you to pick, and you picked the benefit, and the
benefitit was what got you into the trap. It was bait, and you sold all that you owned for a bowl of beans.

.S :: Well they were playing that game where they gave you three options .. that you pick one. Their hands are clean,
in their mind.
CW :: Yeah.

A :: The special deposit. Uh, would that fall under a transfer amendment?

CW :: Yes, you're transferring properties to them, yes.

A :: And the only problems I, I see is that one of the, uh, subparts is the operation of law, right?

S :: What kind of law?

.CW :: .. of the methods of formation of the trust .. I always use transfer along with, maybe, declaration.

.>> :: I'm just thinking that, that term operation of law, really much bigger than what I think it is. The courts love to
do a determination .. do this and you try and get yourself off the IMF by doing this process.

.S :: I think you're losing the context there and you, there's ..., that's what they're doing .. , .. from the
debtor/creditor thing and you're getting sucked into it again.

CW :: Well, there is no remedy at law, so why would I go by operation of law?

A :: It, it's them making you, or taking you there. That's what I'm saying.

.S :: Well... Yeah. Yeah. I see what you mean there.

CW :: If I understand what is really going on, then really I'm in the bank and I am making a deposit, so I'm making a
transaction. And if I'm making a special deposit, I'm ok. But if I'm making it generally then we got debtor/creditor
and I'm going to be the debtor.

A :: Yeah, I see where special deposit holds a lot of weight.

.CW :: That's where your adequate remedy is ..

.S :: .. that reminds me that biblical thing .. making it generally, .. I'm ..

CW :: The remedy is in chancery and equity. The remedy is not in debtor/creditor at law.

.S :: Equity in chancery .. referring to the trust.

CW :: Equity, chancery is Trust. At law is debtor/creditorpublic.

S :: Right

CW :: At law is debtor/creditorpublic.

.S .. note ..When you say equity in chancery. Now, I'm just starting to touch on this as well. It sounds to me like it, it
has, uh, similarities to like some kind of, uh... It's almost like the customer service aspect of the, uh, court system.

CW :: It's the equitable side of the court.

.S :: Does it operate along principles similar to customer service, like it's trying to serve you through, uh .. service by
definition.

CW :: It only operates on rights and interests, which are all equitable, equitable title.

.S :: How do parties, how do parties come into that .. call them, clients or customers or ..
CW :: Yeah. They're either coming in there with, with a breach of something or they're trying to prevent something.

S :: And then they're trying to serve them, clearly, and, and obviously because it's like two parties, right?

.CW :: .. an equitable remedy, a temporary restraining order, an order of preliminary injunction, permanent
injunction. Those are all equitable remedies.

.S :: Ok. So it's like, eh, customer service where there's two parties coming forward to the customer service agent
Well, we need you to, uh, to, uh, there's some kind of a problem here. Uh, there's someone else's product on my, my
account. for example. We really need you to fix this .. we know how to do this..after these accounts. We're
bringing this to your attention. Please get this fixed. That kind of thing. In that case.

CW :: Yeah. It represents a breach on my equitable interests.

.S :: And then, you know, .. there could be a situation where there's two parties and they're arguing, uh, you know,
uh.

CW :: But they're arguing under debtor/creditor, the creditor is always going to win. If they're arguing under, uh,
trust, it's a beneficial interest. If they're arguing beneficial interest, it's a trust, and, uh, the beneficiary is gonna
win.

.S :: I, I just, I just started to realize, I think .. in customer service parlance, I guess, because I spent a lot of time
there and, uh, I was trying to figure out why does it works so well sometimes when it does, um, because I can't think
that, um, they do it because they love me, but I was amazed .. hit the right spot, all of a sudden all the stuff clears up
and they're starting to do what you're asking them .. I wondered about that..there's a trust going on there, I bet ... and
I'm sticking ..

CW :: Well, let's put it this way. There's a trust going on if you express it to be one.

S :: You really got to have your principles straight when you go after them like that.

CW :: Yeah, if you're not expressing the trust, then it's debtor/creditor. You're doing a general deposit if you are
not expressing a trust. That's our whole problem. It's simple. It's either one or the other. It's either black or white.
Which, which color do you choose? Blackyou got debtor/creditor. Whiteyou got Trust. Yeah.

S :: So...

CW :: The red pill, the red pill is the trust pill, is the equitable pill, and the blue pill is debtor/creditor.

.S :: I'm just, Christian. I'm thinking of this example. I sent this letter to a Sears account because I really, really
offended with their service .. and like I come from that kind backgroundboth sides of the party, uh, and I took
them to task and gave a nice full complete, uh, general of everything that was relatedall the accounts and names
and people, the parties and .. and places and so on so they had it. I went straight to the CEO. Um, and I said This is
a revocation. I put in two notices on top of that .. revocation of power of attorney and I just put some instruction,
and I told youabout three hundred bucks, and they did fix the account, so I was, I got it pretty close, right. I know
this .. It's not the simple easy way .. I was hitting on it because I hadn't gotten the feeling, with the calls that were
coming back that there was some lawyer in the background going You gotta .. this guy because he might have an
argument. That's the kind of the impression I got from their phone calls coming back, but I never bothered to
respond to, because I wasn't sure. Do you think we should just leave it as it is?

CW :: Yeah.

S :: Does that make sense?

CW :: Express it as being a trust and go over to equity and take it cared of.
S :: Yeah, well now I think I could go more cleaner, now that I realize I have this power. I was arguing with them,
you know, letting them argue back with me and stuff and, you know. Now it just gets straight to a more clearer, um,
argument. We can argue it in the true sense, a logical argument.

CW :: Right, right. Anybody else have some questions out there? Press *6 to unmute. State your name, where you're
from.

H: Hi, Christian.

CW :: Hey, who is this?

H: Harold.

CW :: Harold! Hi. How are you doing?

H: Ok. Great show tonightquite a few Bingo's there.

CW :: Lot of Bingo's. << laughing >> We got the sledgehammer problem.

H :: <<garbled>>

H: Yup, that's true.

CW :: What's up?

H :: Ah, busy as ever. Getting ready to go, uh, go down to Philadelphia to mom's for the holiday.

CW :: Oh, yeah, yeah. SundayMother's Day. Anything on you mind, or anything, or just...?

H :: No, just...

CW :: Yeah, Tuesday we'll go over equity. Well, anyone else got a question?

G :: Hi, Christian.

CW :: Hi, who's this?

G :: Hi. This, this is Gale.

CW :: Yeah.

G :: Um, I just wanted to ask you. This is quite appropriate with what you're doing, you're saying tonight. But, I
went into a bank to open an account, another account, and the, uh, I filled out the, uh, card and put
Grantor/Beneficiary and gave it to the girl and she said Well, why are you putting that there? and I said Well,
that's just the way I sign my signature., so she took it and did something, made some copies, I guess. And then, uh,
she came back and I said I want a copy of this. and she said Well, you can't have a copy of that.. I said Yes, It's
mine. I want a copy of it.. She said Oh, no. She said I will call legal and so she called legal and then I was
sitting there for about a half-an-hour and I said I wasn't going to sit there any longer, and I picked the card up and
she got really excited and said You can't have the card! You can't have the card!, so I tore it up in little bitty pieces
and gave it back to her and said Here's your card. and, um, and walked out. Ok, but a week later I got something
from the bank that said I have an account there.

CW :: Aha.

S :: Wow.
G :: And, and so, at this point, evidently I have an account there I didn't want, uh, but I'm the Grantor/Beneficiary, I
wonder.

S :: Are you sure?

G :: Well, that's what I put on the, on the card.

S :: Oh.

G :: Unless, unless they took it off.

S :: The one you tore up, or another one?

G :: Oh, no, no, no.

CW :: Let me ask you this. When does the trust form?

G :: When I signed that, when I signed it.

.CW :: No it doesn't. .. What is the formation of the trust?

G :: Formation is, is my intent.

CW :: Uh, that's an element.

CW :: Yes. What is the formation of the trust?

G :: By title and interest.

CW :: That's an element?

CW :: When does the trust form?

?? :: (whispering) door number three.

.CW :: Yes, the trust forms when specific trust res is delivered into the hands of the trustee. When did you .. a trust
transfer in hands of the trustee. Was there any property transferred?

G :: Right then.

CW :: What was it?

G :: Card.

CW :: You ripped it up.

G :: Pardon?

CW :: You ripped it up.

G :: But I think she took. I think she took copies of it, so they used it.

CW :: Uh, well, that could be. Maybe you got a debtor/creditor relationship. Uh, how do you express a trust?

G :: << laughing >> But that is expression of the trust, isn't it, when I signed it Grantor/Beneficiary?
CW :: Well, your signature may be the trust res, eh, but you ripped it up.

S :: But then how do you explain the account being opened? Is that a new contract?

CW :: Uh, probably debtor/creditor. Yeah. Did you make a money transfer into the thing at all?

G :: No. I was going to, but then I picked the money up and just left.

S :: You just opened an account. You went in there with the intention. But then, you know what? It worked to their
advantage, I would interpret possibly, because you took the, uh, Grantor--what did you put on there?
Grantor/Beneficiary?

G :: Yes.

S :: Oh, you tore it up.

G :: Yes.

.S :: Right? So, are you not judged by your actions? So, I'm just saying. I'm just throwing this out there, and anybody
can jump in on it. Um, they said Well, she came in to open an account. She was gonna do that .. I wish you hadn't
tore it up, myself .. tore it up .. now they opened up an account for you. What's the .. kind of account that they would
open up for you .. I think they just opened a standard account for you and they're trying to show good faith or
something, but, uh. I mean, I'm saying that. .. like ..

CW :: Yeah, even as a grantor you would still be opened up a general account.

.S :: But you might be able to go back there, correct your mistake. Say, Wait a minute, I didn't mean to tear this up.
.. You let her get the better of you is what I'm trying to say. It's always the stupid little things where we're losing.
Christian is talking about, right. You were right there. You were close. I think you had it right, and she threw you off
with a bunch of crap and you were not supposed to buy into it, and say Wait a minute. .. .. let's go to somebody
higher or get the legal on the phone. Yeah, I want to talk to them.

CW :: Ah, how about going to another branch and, uh?

G :: Oh, I don't care about the account because, I have, I don't care about the account, but, uh, I just, uh, I can't
imagine that they've opened an account, and I said I didn't want it.

>>:: The bank makes money from opening of the account. Just opening an account, the bank makes money then,
even if there's no money in it.

S :: Yeah, yeah, but they don't have her signature from her apparently. And what do you say... ?

>> :: They have a copy of her signature from the card that she ripped up. They copied it.

S :: Oh, they did? Sorry. Gail, they made a copy?

G :: I think they copied my card.

S :: But still they don't have the original.

>> :: They don't need the original. She ripped it up, but she gave it back to them. That's the original. That's when the
trust was formed.

.S :: And the copy. And the copy .. Grantor/Beneficiary on the copy?

CW :: Ok. Let's, let's, let's assume that she didn't rip up the card. Uh, what was your next step gonna to be, then?

.G :: Uh, I .. I just .. an account.

CW :: Well, uh, I mean you say you have a trust, but, well, but what's the next step?

G :: <<laughing>> I don't, I don't know. I haven't done this before.

CW :: Well, you just can't just say I got a trust and now you just signed a card By: Grantor. That's, that's really
not going to be sufficient.

G :: That's not sufficient, huh?

CW :: No, no. You gotta create the evidence, because now you gotta be able to prove a trust or you're gonna claim a
trust.

G :: Ok, so I made special deposit.

CW :: Well, but where did you make a special deposit. Where's your manifest of your intent. Where, where's your
record?

CW :: Everything is gonna be construed as a general deposit until you prove otherwise.

G :: Ah, ok.

CW :: There's a natural presumption that everything is generally done. And because that's what we. We do
everything generally, and generally means it's a debtor/creditor relationship. We don't do anything specific; We
don't do anything specially.

G :: Ok.

CW :: What were your special things that you did to establish something wasn't general?

G :: The qualification of signature.

CW :: Yeah, but where, where, where is the record for that? You tore it up.

G :: I guess she copied it. << Laughing >>

CW :: But where is your evidence? Where is your evidence that you created a trust? Remember, he who claims
trust must prove trust. Where's your proof? Otherwise it's, it's just a general debtor/creditor relationship. You
can't, you can't prove trust unless you got proof to prove the the trust.

G :: Ok. That's fine. But I didn't, but the thing is I don't, I didn't want the account, and so I have an account.

[ @ 2 hrs : 36 mins : 05 secs ]

CW :: Well, ok. Uh, why don't we change the status on the account; let's change it into a trust account?

G :: That's what I'd like, yes, but I don't know if that's, if that's possible at this point because it's, um...

CW :: Sure it is. Sure it is. Whatever has been done can be redone and done over again.

G :: But I tore up the, the, the, my evidence, and they may, and what they may have done is whited that out.
CW :: Uh, could have, but let's, let's do a reformation of the thing, or let's do a withdrawal and, and, and get it out
of, say, general deposit, and put it into special deposit. Ok, so, what's, what's the purpose and what's the intent?
What, what are the elements necessary?

G :: Right, title, and interest.

CW :: Intent, purpose, parties...

G :: Right.

CW :: Specific res. So what's my, what's my intent and what's my purpose? Trust has to have those elements or
else it's not a trust. You have some kind, other. You have Agency or debtor/creditor relationship without the
necessary elements and a method of formation. Yeah, you just can't stick your name on something, say, signed
By: Grantor and say I've got a trust. The law is gonna look at certain elements. It's gonna see whether or not
you actually have a trust, and it, it's really not up to them to see; it's up to you to produce, and, your, the burden of
proof is on you.

G :: Hmm.

CW:: You're the one claiming trust, so where is your proof that you got a trust? You have to create the evidence. I
need some records, otherwise we have a debtor/creditor relationship here. We got a general deposit, not a special
one. Anybody else? Comments? Questions?

[ @ 2 hrs : 37 mins : 35 secs ]

T :: Eh, Christian, I, I have a question.

CW :: Yes, Who's this?

T :: I'm Terry. I'm calling from Cyprus.

CW :: Sure, go ahead, Terry.

T :: Um, I, what I've done is I've, um, declared a trust by taking a balance payoff statement for a mortgage and,
um, claiming that as the asset title. I sent it back to the bank and, and, um, they've acknowledged it, but they've, I
sent it directly to the CEO to do it as a private trust. He's got their legal department to respond to the actual process,
and they seem to be accepting that there is a trust in place, but they are saying that the Administrator is not
authorizing the conversion from, for the special deposit.

CW :: Aha.

T :: And I'm wondering, is there a, is there something that I'm missing in relation to the fact that they seem to be
saying that they accept there is a trust, but there is no conversion taking place?

CW :: Uh, have you ordered them to do the conversion?

T :: I'm sorry?

CW :: Have you ordered them to do the conversion?

.T :: Um, no, I, no, I haven't, which I'm wondering. They wouldn't do it. They wouldn't do it on the face value of it
being declared a special deposit from the actual title, I take it.

CW :: You might try to give them an order first, and see whether or not they'll do it.
T :: I'm going to. Actually I've sent out an amendment to the initial indenture that I sent with the, uh, with the asset
title.

CW :: Order them. Order them to do the conversion if necessary, otherwise extinguish the debt.

T :: Ok. Fantastic. Um...

CW :: Or, order the extinguishment of the debt and order conversion if necessary.

T :: I will do that, Christian, thank you. They, they've made reference to an Administrator, um, not authorizing. Are
they referring to the Trustee?

CW :: Uh, well, Adminsitrator, that's more of an agency relationship, other than trust.

T :: Because they said the Adminsitrator has to authorize the conversion.

CW :: Ok. Does the Administrator have the authority? That's the point. Have you given them the authority to do
the conversion if necessary, or to do the extinguishment of the debt?

T :: Ah, ok, so the Administrator could be deemed to be the Settlor.

CW :: Uh, no, not the Settlor. Uh, I don't know how you're playing this, but he, uh. Who's the Trustee?

T :: Ok, what I've done is I've declared it in the private with the, um, CEO of the bank being the Trustee, myself
being the Settlor/Beneficiary.

CW :: Ok, so the bank is Trustee and the bank is saying their Administrator can't, can't do the conversion.

T :: Correct. They're saying that the conversion has to be authorized by the Administrator, uh, and there's only
three parties in this, in this trust that are involved, and two are me, obviously.

CW :: Well, you could write them back a letter and ask them, uh, Does not the Trustee have Trustee position and
does not the Trustee have authority and is not the Trustee the Administrator on the trust here? And, do you have
all the documents necessary to effectuate, uh, uh, an extinguishment of the debt?

.T :: Right, excellent. Um, it certainly seems to be sort of three-quarters way there. They acknowledge that. They
certainly seem to have acknowledged that there is a trust in place.

CW :: Yeah. Ask them the question did they have everything necessary that they can effectuate what your purpose
is?

T :: I will do. The other question I was going to ask is that I directed the trust straight to the CEO as a private man.
Uh, he's got his legal department within the bank to respond. Would it still be, would it be deemed to be a breach of
my own trust if I was to speak to the legal department in relation to this matter?

CW :: Uh, no, I don't think so. No. You could probably ask them.

.T :: Oh, Ok, good, good. Then, then, then I could do that tomorrow, then. That's fantastic. That's the only question I
have, Christian. Thank you so much and I'll let you know how that gets on.

CW :: Alright, thanks for calling.

T :: Thank you.

C :: Christian.
CW :: Yes.

A :: I got one question for you, for .. If I opened up an account. Oh no, not if. I opened up an account a couple of
months ago and I wrote on the application By: Grantor and Without Recourse. Would that establish a trust
intent?

CW :: Uh, if you had the records that, that would be the manifestation of the intent, then you could prove trust and,
yes, it would be a trust.

A :: Oh, that's good, I'm doing something right.

CW :: But if you don't have the records to prove the trust, then you don't have a trust.

.A :: No, I have my... I didn't get the originals because the bank, uh, I think they're kind of ..

.CW :: This is... This is where we get tripped up at, I think, is that we think that once we've done something, that
that's good enough. No, in their realm it's not good enough, because the only thing that they can see of the real man
is when he creates a record. Everything else that the real man does, he can't, they can't see that. And just because you
signed a document that is special deposit, that is trust res, does not mean that they can actually see that. You gotta
create a record of that and make a public notification so that they could see it.

.A :: Right. The, the one in ..

CW :: And the counties.

.A :: And ..

CW :: Yeah in the counties. Because the only thing that they can see is in that realm is the manifestation of the real
man's intent and that is a record. If there are no records, there's no, no intent, even though you intend it to be.
<<laughing>>

.A :: Yeah, well, you know, .. getting to really fall into place, Christian, you know. We're not as wise, as smart as
you, but, you know, you're making us, you're making us get there.

J :: Hi, Christian, this is Jaime from California. How are you?

CW :: Alright. How are you doing?

J :: Great, fine, thank you. Um, I was hoping you'd touch a little bit more on the Cestui Que Trust. Um, earlier I
received an announcement. Maybe you already covered this. I got on here late.

CW :: Yeah, we don't have a Cesqui Que Trust.

.J :: Yeah, that's what the announcement says. It says You think you have a Cestui Que Trust. No you don't. But,
how does a Cesqui Que Trust comes into play .. I received an announcement..

.CW :: .. We don't have a Cesqui Que Trust ..

.J :: ..

CW :: Well, it's really the heart of it, except there not one in existence until you've create it and none of us have
created a Cesqui Que Trust, so therefore there's no Cesqui Que Trust.

J :: Well, that kind of goes, that kind of goes in with what you said earlier just a while ago, where, uh, if you don't
have a record of the trust and you can't prove the trust, well, what better record than your own personal testimony or
declaration out of your mouth at the moment.
CW :: Uh, yeah, but a real live man can't be heard in court. It's the record that speaks.

J :: I'm not so sure I buy that, that theory. Um, I believe that once, once you're in an open court, on the floor, on the
floor of an open court, and the court recorder is doing her job, it's all being put on the record.

CW :: That's what I said.

J :: So if you, if you speak that on and for the record you're in, so I don't buy that theory about the man not being
heard in the courtroom.

CW :: Well.

J :: As long as you establish your proper capacity in there, everything that you testify to, on and for the record, it's on
the record.

.CW :: .. Yeah. That's it. Whoever makes the record, that's what speaks.

J :: That's right, so I don't buy the theory that the man can't be recognized in court.

.CW :: .. look at him as a live man. He is the fiction.

S :: What does it mean when the judge says I can't see you?

J :: Because you haven't established a proper capacity. He figures you don't know who you are just yet. You haven't
made the proper declarations.

S :: So how do you come in as man and make declarations? That's what he needs to do?

.J :: No, you, first you gotta state For and on the record. Um, for example, um, maybe come in as, and make a
statement For and on the record .. say As Grantor/Beneficiary I'm appointing somebody here as a Trustee to,
uh, to uh, with the authority to settle and close this matter.

CW :: And what happens when they disclaim?

J :: Then what?

CW :: What happens when that party disclaims?

J :: Disclaims?

CW :: Yeah, yes, disclaimsrefuses.

.J :: Uh, refuses .. in order to refuse, it's got to be an express refusal, otherwise their silence is acquiescence.

<<garbled>>

J :: If there's silence there and no rebuttal, then you confirm the record For and on the record, let the record show
that my appointment stands.

.CW :: Yeah, if you can make the record, yeah. That would create the evidence .. the proof that you would need to
prove trust, yeah, if nobody rebutted it.

.J :: Yeah, it's, you know, one of my best, uh, my mentors that I've had privilege and many of us have. We, some of
us just don't know .. of learning from is, goes by the name Batman. Now, uh, his basic philosophy is, uh, the first
thing that should come out of your mouth when, uh, the judge calls the name of the strawman is I'm here for that
matter as a friend of the court. and, uh, the next statement would be There is a misktake. The next statement
would be I have no proper notice. And the next step would be I trust that this matter will be settled
honorably. and if there's no rebuttal to that, those statements stand for and on the record and then your silence and
then you can basically go on to say in closing, uh, uh, Being that there is no controversy here concerning me, it
appears my business here is finished. Thank you very much. Have a nice day. and then you walk.

.CW :: Now what happens when .. issues an arrest warrant for the party named on there because they didn't show
up?

S :: I agree.

J :: Uh, well, that's a little different issue. I'm referring to a scenario where you're in and you find yourself in the
court.

.S :: It could be construed that .. we don't know what .. they're gonna come out at you..and then you didn't have to
...I'm thinking.

J :: So basically you went in there and established this capacity as friend of the court, without pointing fingers, it
points out a mistake and you declare there's no proper notice, means there's no contract or binding agreement
between anyone or any meeting of the minds.

CW :: There is no contract.

J :: And so nobody is in there, and prosecution fails to rebut any of those statements, where's the controversy?
Without a controversy there is nothing to adjudicate.

CW :: Well, first of all, they're coming in, you're coming in to do business as a banker and, uh, you're either making
a special deposit or you're making a general deposit, and if you make a general deposit you're gonna be the, uh,
debtor, and they're looking for the intent of the parties, and, if you're one of the unlucky ones that they issue an
arrest warrant against, you'll have to handle that next.

J :: Well, yeah, see we're already past the arrest warrant..we're in the court talking to the judge, we've been arrested
or dragged in or have a notice to appear and we're in there.

S :: Did you want to have your own recorder?

J :: Well, judging from the transcripts and horror stories I've heard, where the court recorders were manipulating the
record after the fact. I mean I would always, uh, notify the court that I'm bring in my, uh, digital recorder or my own
private recorder or my own video camera. Uh, ...

S :: Yah.

J :: And with written notice prior to showing up. And if they failed to respond in three days contesting that, or
objected to that, then I'm coming in with my equipment, recording equipment.

.S :: Yeah, they'll try and stop you there, but, you know, there's, uh, exception rules, or whatever. Uh, I don't know
how much equipment .. but yeah, just basic recording, something .. like that ..

J :: Yeah, I'd like to come prepared to, to, to preserve my own record, just to compare with their record to see if
they're, you know, doing any hocus-pocus after the fact that the record's transcribed and making adjustments to it..
I've heard a lot of horror stories where that happens all the time, but sure, just the logic of it.

S :: Sure, sure .. like .. and get the records they recorded.

.J :: Yeah, right. I mean how, uh, how possible is it that they can manipulate it? So basically it's like giving them
notice, trying to cover all your bases as far as that's concerned. Each jurisdiction has its own rules of court,
specifically pertaining to them. Some might prohibit .. entities .. to give notice of it and you give it a notice of your
intention, uh, basically creating a trust indenture.

.S :: And since an issue .. an issue of having a portfolio of documents that are ready .. but, um, that can only be
presented privately, if, if needed. Is that right?

CW :: No, I'm still here.

S :: Ok. I just came back in. Uh, can you guys hear me?

CW :: Yes, yes.

.S :: Ok, I ..Um .. It's a matter of having a portfolio of records, uh, .. or the private presentation stuff?

>> :: Are you referring to Batman's?

.S :: Just the fellow who was talking and following his track of thought, so are you basically saying to create the
necessary document, but .. I'm assuming that, uh, and asking at same time that, uh, we can't, uh, interact directly, we
can't make reference to them again, ... it's a .. I see this, which reminds me ... this is a better document of
understanding and, and also how you act. This is everything, covering all your bases.

.CW :: .. jurisdiction on, on, on them. It's through the identity of interests. It's Black's Law. It says that the
relationship between two parties, so let's say between the strawman and the real man. The relationship between two
parties are so close, that suing one serves as notice to the other so that the other may be joined in the suit. I never
got this, but your strawman did, and they're so close as to the identity of interest that the other party got joined in
without even knowing them.

.A :: Nine out of ten times they will not put a court recorder in the courtroom when you're there, and if you request
one, it will be denied. No, unless you're there for, uh, some heinous crime or some very large fine, then you know,
you're probably get a court recorder ... I mean just, you know, .. and if you bring your own .. you know,
expense..that..

.CW :: ..

.J :: .. some places that I've tried that twice and I still paid the fine and went to jail.

CW :: Yeah.

?? :: It all depends on where you're at.

H :: Can offer a suggestion?

CW :: Yeah, go ahead Herald.

.H :: .. saying about what happened .. and so I've devised a little, uh, .. so if it's possible to have someone to go with
you that will take notes .... yourself immediately after the hearing ... affidavit based on your recollection of events,
be as specific as possible and get it notarized as soon as possible prior to you receiving the transcript, and if you
see, uh, major, uh, differences, uh, or omissions, then you go in and attach the transcript, and get your case
dismissed based on that point alone, but you have to register yours first, and what I do also, I take that affidavit and
put a self-executing agreement in it and present it to the judge and the opposing party, giving them 72 hours to
acknowledge what it is, whether the recollection is accurate or not and if they fail to so, it's deemed, uh, an accurate
record of the pleading. I've never had .. anything and the record was considered on appeal.

CW :: Harold, do you have a way of setting up so they can bring in your, your recorder?
.H :: Well, like, like the gentleman was just saying, you know .. a lot .. and I've dealt with quite a few jurisdictions.
They really rebuff that because they're trying to protect what they're doing.

CW :: Is there any kind of motions to put in or any kind of things we can put in too?

.>> :: Yeah. You could put in a motion ahead of time and, uh, but like the guy said, I've seen a lot of those get
denied, unless .. in the court rules.

.?? :: .. right now?

H :: Yes, I hear you.

.S :: Sorry about that. I must have gotten disconnected earlier. That was strange. Uh, you know, as far as the motion
goes, uh, it's basically giving them the discretion. I can serve an administrative notice with a self-executory clause
in it like Herald just suggested, as you did, with the, uh, you know, their establishing the facts, .. the record of the
proceedings .. earlier examples .. some notice of some sort of administrative intent, uh, getting their
acknowledgement or their acquiescence and agreement by, uh, a self-executory clauses. Whatever you want to
achieve, put it in a self-executory clause, because you're never going to get them respond, to establish it.

.H :: Yeah, I've never had .. became part of the record .. on appeal .. It was right there.

.>> :: If there's one thing I've learned, uh, from dealing with Shane .. in New York, a cousin of mine in the San
Francisco bay area and reading many many many transcripts since 2006, trying to find solutions for court issues or
criminal charges and that is that, uh, basically everything up until a trial, and even after the jury renders, uh, a
verdict, uh, everything is, uh, really, uh, it's all these pre-trial .. , really are private, uh, opportunities for negotiation,
opportunities for settlement, uh, and offers and acceptance and counteroffers. Everything is just a presentment. So,
it's always an opportunity to .. so it's always an agreement. .. settlement agreement, and so .. operating by law .. so
it's all by contract, and anybody that is in jail ... some justice once mentioned. Was it a justice of some court that
whoever is in there is there by their own agreement. So it's all contract whoever ends up in jail is there by their own
agreement .. so we need to remember that it's always just opportunity to come to some agreement.

.CW :: .. We're not entering the debtor/creditor realm .. We're not doing contracts. We're coming under trust and
we're allowing it to be enforced under the trust.

>> :: What happens, Christian, is, everybody gets, uh, hoodwinked as soon as they get a notice to appear, a
summons, a warrant, uh, an indictment and they think it's judicial. The whole thing is still administrative process ..
the opportunity .. the whole thing .. administrative ... to some agreement. In other words .. really deploying all these
court rules as far as the motion. Why not initiate a prior administrative process right there and then?

CW :: We're not doing debtor/creditor. We're doing trusts here. On this show we're doing trusts.

.>> :: I understand. And that's why I'm saying, when you're declaring, when you're expressing trust .. with the
authority to settle the matter .. just expressed your trust verbally For and on the record. That's an administrative
process right there.

.>> :: .. motion ..

CW :: If you haven't proved a trust, if you haven't claimed a trust, there is no trust. You're in debtor/creditor and
you're back in with the same debtor/creditor people.

CW :: We're not attacking this as debtor/creditor. We're attacking this as Trust.

>> :: Exactly. And so at the moment you express that intent or declare that intent out of your mouth. Those words
are the trust.
CW :: No, you're bringing too much truth into the public side of the court and you're contracting over with, and
you're waiving it all. That's what Shane did.

.>> :: Oh, absolutely. I wasn't supporting Shane at all on what he's doing, uh, when I .. I learned that everything is,
up until the trial, is an opportunity for you to settle the matter, and that is by expressing the trust and that's what
you're doing. You're coming at it, and that's something, uh, uh, that I learned from all this. Uh, no matter how much
paperwork you put into the court, uh, it's all useless if you don't know, uh, in what capacity you're bringing that in.

CW :: Yeah, but I don't want to express the trust on the public side, because if I put too much stuff about trusts in
there, I'm going to waive the trust. It's all privileged information I'm going to be spouting in, in open court, which
will get it, it'll get it waived.

.>> :: Well, um, when you make a simple .. basically you're establishing yourself as the Grantor, establishing them
as Trustee or whomever, .. prosecutor .. defender or even the judge, um, and then basically the trust property, or the
res, is, isn't that the case itself?

CW :: Right.

.>> :: And whatever outstanding issues and obligations of the case are, and liabilities that need to be settled? ..
trustee stands, uh, .. fiduciary's responsibility to settle them.

.CW :: Yeah, that may be his responsibility, but I don't know if he will or not. But that's not the point .. Can I enforce
the trust then? Do I have the necessary records created that I can prove the trust?

.>> :: Yeah, well the biggest. Uh, see, we're going back to records again, and basically the biggest record is the one
that's in your heart and that's your intent, so the intent is, look, I know you guys are .. .. You don't have to point it
out to him .. by just standing your ground and saying .. is your intent and the one question Why hasn't this
matter...

.CW ::

.>> :: Why hasn't this matter, Why hasn't this matter, Why hasn't this matter been settled yet? if they come at
you again .. You just want to know Who is going to settle this honorably?. That's you biggest tool. Why do you
need paperwork?

.A :: You're forgetting one thing. In court, the judge, with a flick of his fingers can get a list with your name on it ..
your social probably .. because you're there for a reason and come out on an IMF sheet as a debtor.

.S :: But there's, there's ways to deal with that .. That's why I keep trying to say, jurisdictions, standing, you know,
uh, looking at documents that they present you .. how to handle that. It's all the same thing. That's, that's, that's a
separate component. ..

.>> :: Whatever charge, whatever charge they drum up, whether it's valid or trumped up, you say Fine, I accept it.
Now who's going to settle it, because I, uh, want to know who's going to take responsibility for it, but it certainly
not, it doesn't concern me but if you want me to help you, I'm appointing whomever, uh, is the next guy next to me
here that's willing to settle this matter, or if you want me to settle it just tell me where I need to sign my acceptance
to authorize these guys to go, uh, ledger and close the accounts because all we are is an agent ... authorized agent
related to whatever trust account .. that's in existence or whatever tracking numbers are in existence that the alleged,
uh, uh, similar pseudo-name is related to us from birth.

.S :: Some kind of ..

.A :: .. you know, that kind of knowledge should also get you off that IMF or these .. , you know.

>> :: I'm not worried about any of that. They can track me all they want. They can track that account or their name
all they want .. It's their property. It's not me. Why, why, why are we even worried about those details?
.>> :: .. What I would like to know about is how can we gain control, how can we gain control of the unlimited
ability, uh, to access any resources, uh, that we may need for our sustenance in our life, or to produce whatever we
need. That's what I'd like to know. All the other stuff, we know that these accounts are there established and
registered with the governments to, uh, uh, uh, to make commerce viable, uh, but they're not us.

.S :: Right .. Well, we have some kind of relationship to them that is our behaviour activities .. these accounts, gets
back to that trust thing again. I mean, it's not a .. some kind of relationship. That's the thing .. wrestling with .. I
know that it's not us in the sense I think you're saying .. it's a record, it's a property, it's the documentation, and so on.

.>> :: .. the relationship is a trust relationship.

?? :: I think you're right.

>> :: And that is, and that is, that, uh, uh, if any issues ever come up and they try to attach any liability to me or you
or Christian, or any one of us, the trust is when you express it. I trust that you guys will settle the alleged
outstanding liabilities honorably. There is your trust.

S :: Yeah, and I think you're right. I think you're hitting it when you say, uh, Why hasn't this been settled?,
because you're kind of expressing. There's a lot of unspoken things.

.>> :: Exactly .. is that not a question when you ask that? Why isn't it settled?.. as the king.

.S :: Yeah, I don't mind that..it's been touched on, you know, that when that's, it's been touched on .. that's been
floated before for sure.

.## :: .. Christian ..You go in-camera hearing and you use this on the private side.

.CW :: Here's what I would've done. I would have set up the information records prior to, have them in court, and if
I was going into court, the only thing I would be asking is Why has it not been settled?, nothing about trust ..
cause as soon as I express something about the trust .. I'm going to waive the fact that I'm talking about the trust. I
am to have the evidence and the records set up before going in there if possible. Otherwise, I can't talk about
trusts. The only thing I can talk about is why hasn't it been settled?

>> :: Mm-hm. You act like it's, like it's already in place, and it always has been.

.## :: Now in-camera hearing, uh, Christian. Now .. both parties .... or is this strictly dealing with the judge?

CW :: Well, I could come in court and ask Why hasn't it been settled? But then if he wants to get into it, Well,
how did you settle it? Well, that's protected and then we'd have to go into chambers and talk about that.

.>> :: Yeah, because when enter a motion for an in-camera hearing .. the district attorney as well as the judge .. or
would you in there just with the judge.

CW :: If the district attorney want to be there, that's fine. The trouble is he can't speak as a fiction. He won't be able
to speak. The judge will probably shut him up.

A :: Well, Christian, will saying the word trust waive it?

CW :: Yup. In open court you talk about trust, you've just waived it.

A :: When people are divorcing and they put in their decree, would that be waiving it?

CW :: Now, if you want to talk about a statutory trust, that's a different thing, because that is on the public side of the
court. But I'm talking about the private trust. I'm going to use the case as trust res and use it on itself to close it
down by a trust. That, I can't reveal that kind of stuff in open court. Well, what kind of trust are we talking about
here? You just waived it.

>> :: Well, Christian, what about basically making a sort of an indirect statement in reference to a trust?

CW :: You could do that.

.>> :: When you're saying, when you're saying like, uh, you know, I trust that this will be settled honorably., you
know .. It's in there .. .. already, go ahead.

CW :: Yeah, and you can colorably say things like that, like in confidence, in reliance on, uh, don't talk trust
terms. You know, take, talk about portal words that would be considered in trust, but also would be considered in the
colorable realm. Yeah, you could do it that way, but just don't bring the truth in, in that open court, because you'll
waive it. Waiver is a privilege by voluntary disclosure under evidence rules A party ceases to treat a matter as
confidential, it loses its confidential character, right out of the evidence rules.

.>> :: So you can't even make reference, uh, to the word trust even .. can't say that I'm operating in trust. or
anything like that ..

.CW :: Well .. you know .. I don't know .. it could be construed either way. You're saying trust ...Well just what
exactly do you mean the judge might ask. What do you mean 'trust'?

>> :: You know, when you're writing a letter and the ending salutation you, uh, you usually to say something like
Thank you for your consideration, or, uh, Sincerely. I've been putting in there, uh, just two simple words In
trust, and then my signature down below By so-and-so for the, uh, you know, the all-caps cestui que trust.

.CW :: .. substitute in trust for in confidence, because that means in trust.

>> :: In confidence, sure...

CW :: Yup.

>> :: Or reliance of. I like those.

CW :: Alright, guys, it's getting kind of late. It's getting almost twenty after.

>> :: Thank you very much, Christian, blessings.

## :: Great call, Christian.

?? :: Last comment. Sincerely. Does anyone know what that means? Sincerely means without seal.

<<laughter>>

>> :: It's Latin. Sins means without, Sincerely is without seal, usually only used in private letters
Sincerely.

A :: Have you guys come across the word honor, what it means?

>> :: What do you have?.

A :: Well, off the top of the head, it deals with money, paying money. So, you know, we always use, uh .. something
in honor...

** :: There are 17 participants in this conference.

A :: It's a good word to look up because, see, when you go to court or watch it on TV, whatever, they call that person
Your Honor. Well, they're really meaning that the word is You're paying the debt. <<laughter>> and we just
didn't know it. Look up the word, guys, in a financial dictionary.

>> :: Well, see, there's so much patriot misinformation flying around, you know. You always hear Never refer to
judge 'Your Honor', he doesn't deserve it, or some patriotic argument like that. The thing, you boil it down to, uh, a
real understanding like it's based on some actual definition and, you know, it's like we got it all backwards.

A :: Is this call recorded, Christian?

CW :: Yeah, until I drop off.

<<laughter>>

>> :: Alright. Goodnight Christian. Have a nice Mother's Day.

CW :: Alright.

A :: I know you've got a mom, or someone's mom.

.CW :: Thanks. Alright ..

A :: You guys take care and great call, guys. Um, we need more intelligent questions and, uh, counter points and
stuff.

CW :: Ok, good night, guys.

.A :: You really work for it. ..

S :: Great call.

A :: Thank you Christian.