David Wynn Miller, (or Judge: David Wynn: Miller as he prefers) was another prominent guru of the sovereign citizen movement, and had capitalised to the extreme on the existing concept that uppercase lettering in peoples names implies a dead corporate entity. He asserted the government is seeking to control the population by controlling grammar, and turning yourself into a prepositional phrase is a way to escape jurisdictional applicability.
His techniques are notoriously complex and peculiar, “Millerese” materials use a highly stereotypic and peculiar language structure. Miller’s nine and a half hour YouTube video of his September 2012 QUANTUM GRAMMAR SEMINAR includes many interesting assertions, such as C4 is a plastic explosive, and that this means it explodes everything made of plastic; and all the bombs dropped on Pearl Harbor had one-dollar postage stamps on them, so that the Postmaster General of Honolulu could legally deliver them. If you don’t want to watch all nine and a half hours, the first two minutes give you an authentic dose of quality Miller content as he explains why he is a ninety-second-degree Freemason. (even though there are only 33 degrees in Freemasonry)
He described himself as a “Plenipotentiary-Judge“, an ambassador, banker, postmaster, and King of Hawaii. He introduced himself as “David hyphen Wynn full colon Miller” and claimed to have 1 billion adherents worldwide. Miller claimed he became the king of Hawaii after he turned Hawaii into a verb. Miller said he is fluent in numerous languages, has an IQ of 200, and that he has not aged since he died and was resurrected at age 25.
He is the originator of a certain syntax to be used by people involved in legal proceedings. He referred to his syntax as QUANTUM-LANGUAGE-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR which he asserted constitutes “correct sentence structure communication syntax” and that his language is “for the stopping-claims of the Theft, Cheating, Fraud, Slavery and War.” His incoherent ideology invokes a supposedly mathematically-based variation of the English language. Among his claims is that he discovered “the interface in the truth that certifies all 5,000 languages, frontwards and backwards”.
Miller invented what he calls the Mathematical Interface for Language or Quantum-Math-Communications and Language or Correct-Language. According to Miller, the language he pioneered could end war. He parses sentences into parts of speech: verb, noun, adverb and so on. He gives syntax rules for how parts of speech may be put together to form valid sentences. An invalid sentence is an illusion, a lie. His syntax rules are different to everyone else’s, naturally. Statutes, regulations and the Lord’s Prayer don’t follow his rules so are invalid. Miller’s design involves some sentences that begin with prepositional phrases, using the word For. His sentences have many more nouns than verbs. According to Miller, only nouns have legal authority. The language also has an abundance of punctuation. For example:
FOR THE FORMS OF OUR PUNCTUATIONS ARE WITH THE CLAIM OF THE USE: FULLCOLON=POSITION-LODIO-FACTS, HYPHEN=COMPOUND-FACTS =KNOWN, PERIOD=ENDTHOUGHT, COMMA-PAUSE, AND LOCATION-TILDES WITH THE MEANINGS AND USES OF THE COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE FULL-COLON OF THE POSITION-LODIAL-FACT-PHRASE WITH THE FACT/KNOWN-TERM OF THE POSITIONAL-LODIO-FACT-PHRASE AND WITH THE VOID OF THE NOM-DE-GUERRE = DEAD-PERSON.
To be valid, a sentence must start with “FOR”. The only valid verbs are “IS” and “ARE”, and gerunds. Adverbs and adjectives are not allowed. The reason for this is that “adjective” and “adverb” both start with a vowel and two consonants, so they both mean “no contract”, which makes the sentence untrue.
Take “The United States of America”. Most of us would parse this as “article, adjective, plural noun, preposition, proper noun”, combining to form a noun-phrase. David agrees, but moves on: “the” and “of” are separated so both become adverbs. The adverb modifies the adjective, the adjective modifies the pronoun [what pronoun?], the pronoun is connected by the adverb which then modifies the dangling participle verb “America”. A pronoun is apparently any word that stands alone. According to Miller, the addition of hyphens and colons identifies a person as a matter of fact, existing in the “now-time-dimension”.
The names as written in this way are distinguished from the names listed at birth and in “all-caps” (as on a birth certificate), which identify the legal estate and not the living being in fact. In fact, signing up to get a “birth certificate” creates a taxable Person (Corporation) (e.g., DAVID WYNN MILLER as opposed to :David-Wynn: Miller.).
The Anti-Defamation League described Miller in an article on the Redemption movement:
“This Milwaukee, Wisconsin-based sovereign citizen is one of the most unusual of the ‘common law gurus’ who travel the country holding seminars and offering legal advice. Miller has created his own unique version of English grammar, one that even many sovereign citizens find hard to understand or accept.”
The Los Angeles Times has characterized Miller’s political views as “far-right”. An article published by the Southern Poverty Law Center in 2003 referred to Miller as a “Professional Conspiracist” and stated that Miller claimed that Bill Clinton and the entire Supreme Court of the United States were his students. The Southern Poverty Law Center listed a wide variety of conspiracy theories associated with Miller. Southern Poverty Law Center: “‘Full Colon Miller’“:
Miller appears in courts around the world on behalf of others, claiming to be a judge eligible to practice anywhere on the planet. He makes assertions such as that the dots between the words of the motto on the New South Wales coat of arms in a court mean the court has no jurisdiction. For some reason, he doesn’t mention in his seminars his consistent run of court failures, nor that he has been declared a vexatious litigant.
Abalos et al v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. et al
In July and August 2010 he toured 10 Australian cities including Sydney, Melbourne, Hobart, Perth and Brisbane. The flyer for his 2011 Brisbane course, which costs $1800 for six days, says: ”If you learn how to syntax your contracts you will learn self security. Protect yourself from being harvested.” The class of about 40 consisted of people who had travelled from Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and North Queensland, including about six who had lost their houses.
SMH: “‘Messiah-like figure’ is doing own harvesting“:
In December 2009, Miller unsuccessfully applied to the Federal Magistrates Court to appear as an expert witness on ‘‘syntax fraud” for an engineer, Masood Falamaki, whose long property battle with Wollongong City Council has left him bankrupt. Falamaki is reported to have paid Miller $5000. The Federal Magistrate Michael Lloyd-Jones dismissed Miller and his supporters as a ”linguistic cult”. He has disrupted several court cases in NSW, including one in Lismore in which a man was about to go on trial in the NSW District Court on serious child sexual assault charges. While a jury waited to be empaneled in November, the accused, John Jarrett, repeatedly told the court, on Miller’s advice, that the indictment was ”not written in the correct sentence structure communication syntax language” and thus the case should be struck out. Lawyers from the Aboriginal Legal Service stepped in but several hours later Jarrett was ordered to undergo psychiatric testing.
He barged into a Family Court matter in Sydney in 2010 in which a couple were fighting the Department of Community Services for custody of several of their children, and attempted to file 40 pages of gobbledygook. The couple had spent more than $2000 to fly their barrister from Brisbane to Sydney for a session with Miller. ”They were convinced that Miller had all the magic solutions,” said the barrister. In April 2010, the NSW Land and Environment Court endured almost two hours of Miller’s ravings on grammar and maritime law.
”I’ll give you a little secret,” he told Justice Malcolm Craig. ”Every word that starts in the English language with a vowel, a, e, i, o and u, and followed by two consonants is a word that means no contract … All paper is a vessel in sea of space …”
Miller is one of the few sovereign gurus that can say he has clients in four different countries currently serving prison sentences. Despite these failures, Miller’s exotic punctuation scheme is rapidly growing. Judges are more patient with him than they should be. In the case of David Wynn-Miller et al v. Argent Mortgage Company, LLC, et al. in Hawaii in 2012, Judge Leslie E. Kobayashi said:
“Plaintiffs’ complaint is completely nonsensical and has no apparent relationship to any claim for judicial relief. It does not contain any coherent or complete sentences, let alone identify any specific claims that Plaintiffs are advancing or factual allegations they are making. Indeed, the Court cannot make out a single allegation from the Complaint. The Complaint is essentially comprised of a random collection of unintelligible words, symbols, and initials laid out in no apparent order. This incoherent text cannot be said to provide Defendants fair notice of the wrongs they have allegedly committed.
Accordingly, the Court hereby dismisses this action for failure to comply with Rule 8. Further, the dismissal is with prejudice, because the Court finds, based on the content of the complaint as well as plaintiff David-Wynn Miller’s numerous other filings in this district court, that he has filed this action in bad faith and that granting leave to amend would be futile.”
Similarly in Paet et al v. Argent Mortgage Company, LLC et al
In the case of Kualaau et al v. Full Spectrum Lending Inc., Chief Judge Susan Oki Mollway said:
“This complaint is only one of many filed by David-Wynn Miller in this court (as well as many other federal courts). Like his other filings, the complaint consists of a collection of disjointed words, symbols, letters, and phrases and is completely unintelligible. As a result, those of Miller’s other complaints that have been the subject of court rulings have been dismissed for failure to comply with Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and/or Rule 12(b)(6). The complaint in this action must be dismissed for the same reasons, it is unintelligible and frivolous on its face. Indeed this court has just filed an Order directing David Wynn Miller to show cause why he should not be required to obtain leave of Court before filing any new action.
In a footnote, the judge observes:
“The complaint refers to David-Wynn Miller as a federal judge, although he is not a judge of any United States tribunal. Miller is cautioned not to make false representations.”
Other defendants have attempted to use Miller’s language or ideas in courts of the United States and Canada. These attempts have been uniformly unsuccessful, netting them judicial responses such as in National Leasing v. Top West Ventures et al, 2001 BCSC 111 (CanLII):
“The plaintiff’s action again st the defendants is for a debt alleged due for a computer system and accessories. It is difficult to describe the nature of the defence or counterclaim. The counterclaim consists of 97 paragraphs, over 26 pages. It was apparently drafted by a friend of the defendant Mr. Shandler who has a somewhat idiosyncratic approach to English grammar. For instance, he has deconstructed the outline of the defendant by counterclaim prepared for this hearing, breaking it down into its constituent parts of speech. According to the helpful code he endorsed on the outline, the three personal names forming the title of the defendant law firm, Douglas Symes & Brissenden, are respectively an adjective, a pronoun and another pronoun.”
In 1998 Miller assisted Ingleside, Illinois, resident George Johnson in his legal defense against child molestation charges. Johnson was convicted and returned to prison in 1999. 1 In June 1998 Prescott, Arizona, resident James McCreary filed a federal lawsuit after being arrested in February for aggravated assault and possession of drug paraphernalia. In his filing, McCreary mentions the name of his apparent mentor. “David Wynn Miller of Ohio is an advocate of the restoration of Constitutional rights through ‘correct’ language and procedure”. McCreary’s actions in court got his conviction reduced by the judge to three misdemeanors, and he was sentenced to three concurrent 60-day sentences in jail. 2
In August 2001, Paul and Myrna Schuck unsuccessfully used Miller’s language during a tax-evasion trial in Calgary, Alberta. They were later sentenced to jail after claiming postage affixed to their clothing and signed by them made them legally equivalent to royalty. 3 In October 2001, Andrew William Sereda, a naturopath, went to jail in Calgary, Alberta, for contempt of court when he addressed a judge in Miller’s language during his tax evasion trial. 4
In September 2002, Miller was profiled when Milwaukee-based accountant Steven Allen Magritz was jailed after engaging in what authorities called “paper terrorism”, or filing large numbers of legal claims against perceived enemies, as part of the sovereign citizen anti-government movement. The article calls Miller “the movement’s linguist” and outlines his belief that people don’t need to pay taxes if they can “prove that money is a verb”. Magritz was convicted in 2003 on seven counts of criminal slander of title and sentenced to five years in prison. 5
In December 2002, Wisconsin juries convicted Oconomowoc, Wisconsin, residents Janice K. Logan and Jason Zellmer (Miller’s cousin) of “simulating legal process” by filing documents that purported to be legal documents from the jurisdiction of the “Unity States of the World” a concept originated by Miller. Zellmer had been previously convicted of resisting an officer. Miller testified at the trial. The defendants were found guilty. Miller remarked that the genesis of Truth-language was when he “turned Hawaii into a verb” and showed “how a preposition is needed to certify a noun.” In 2002 and 2003, Ed Dick stood trial in Vernon, British Columbia for unlawfully failing to provide income tax returns for the taxation years 1997 and 1998. Dick succeeded in having the style of cause amended to include his name with a colon, namely, Edward: Dick. Among other tactics, he challenged the jurisdiction of the court. Dick was found guilty in R v. Dick [2003] BCPC 0013.
In 2005, Montclair, New Jersey, resident Brenda Rickard was arrested and charged with orchestrating a $30 million mortgage scam:
“Rickard, who claimed her name is Brenda: Rickard, is a follower of Judge: David-Wynn: Miller, who gives seminars around the country and advocates speaking in the ‘true language,’ which features odd punctuation and syntax. ‘I have no problem with the complaint against me as long as it’s in the truthful language,’ Rickard told the judge.”
Her lawyer requested a psychological evaluation following Rickard’s behavior in court. Rickard and co-defendant Jamila Davis were convicted of conspiracy and six counts of bank fraud in 2008.
In 2006, Hemet, California, physician Jerome Mueller was jailed for tax evasion:
“Part of a loose-knit group calling themselves ‘freemen’ and ‘patriots,’ Mueller is an adherent of ‘truth language.’ Developed by self-professed genius David Wynn Miller, of Milwaukee, truth language is based on mathematics and purports to be the only correct way of interpreting English. A major tenet, according to interviews with Miller published on the Internet, is that maritime law is the only worldwide governing authority because the Earth is a vessel in a sea of space. The U.S. government, however, contends in everyday English that Mueller owes income taxes back to 1993.”
On 7 July 2008, La Crosse, Wisconsin, dentist Frederick G. Kriemelmeyer complained about his conviction for falsifying federal income tax returns. In the United States Court of Appeals, he asserted that he had not been permitted to use Miller as his counsel during the trial. The magistrate judge had refused to allow Miller to act as counsel because Miller was not licensed as an attorney. The Court of Appeals ruled that the magistrate judge’s refusal was correct, and that Kriemelmeyer’s argument that he was not subject to the tax laws was frivolous.
In 2008, Wai’anae, Hawaii, resident Rita Makekau was convicted of eight counts of assault and one count of domestic abuse for injuring five children in her care with hammers and knives. In 2009, Makekau challenged her child abuse conviction by claiming her sovereignty group, Hawaiian Kingdom Government, declared her innocent. Miller said he is the group’s spokesperson and is a “plenipotentiary judge, ambassador and postmaster”. Makekau was ordered to prison in 2009.
In October 2012, Kosciusko County, Indiana, resident Paul A. Graber was sentenced on two counts of financial institution fraud to eight years in prison. He represented himself at the trial and read from a prewritten statement that repeatedly referenced Miller as “Judge Miller”. Miller was called as a witness to the trial.
In March 2015, David Lewis Turner, a resident of Mooresville, NC was convicted in Statesville, NC of embezzlement of nearly $400,000. He was sentenced to a term of 6-8 years for this Class C felony. He represented himself at trial as a sovereign citizen. He had been the first successor trustee of the estate of his mother. The trust directed that each of her 3 children receive an equal 1/3 of the net estate. Rather than distribute equal shares, the defendant kept 2/3 for himself. His defense was that the trust was invalid since it was not written in D. W. Miller’s recommended proper syntax grammar. Turner espoused therefore as trustee he had no obligation to follow the terms of an invalid trust. He did not explain how the alleged invalid trust was valid enough to identify him as first trustee and allow his control of all trust assets. At one point he read a statement in parse-syntax-grammar, then declared himself the only true judge in the courtroom, tried to take control of the court and ordered the bailiffs to stand at attention.
Some reports published after the 2011 Tucson shooting included references to purported similarities between the writing of convicted gunman Jared Lee Loughner and Miller’s writing method. Miller has stated that although he did not know Loughner, he agreed with Loughner’s video postings on government mind control and grammar, but was appalled by Loughner’s actions. Miller has stated that the idea that his work could have inspired the mass shooting was “ridiculous”, and “I expect he’s been on my website… He’s just repeating things I’ve had up on my site the past 11 years.” Miller claims that Loughner must have been brainwashed by the Air Force.
David Wynn Miller was helping another sovereign with a civil suit in the Seattle District Court: David Russell Myrland was sentenced to 40 months in prison, and has filed suit accusing the government and its agents of using poor grammar and writing at a second-grade level. The “evidence” attached to the suit filed 23 January 2017 is the federal criminal complaint filed by the Justice Department in January against Myrland, accusing him of threatening to kidnap and injure the mayor of Kirkland, Wash. Every word in the complaint is painstakingly footnoted as a “syntax-word-key meaning.”
Myrland, part of a sovereign group calling itself “Assemblies of the Counties,” pleaded guilty last August to threatening to use deadly force to arrest various government officials. The group has ties to Alaska militia leader Francis Schaeffer Cox, who faces charges of plotting to kidnap and kill judges and state police officers. For the past 20 years, Myrland has been illegally practicing law and teaching others how to cheat on their federal income taxes, prosecutors said in court filings when he was sentenced in December. Somewhere along the way, Myrland hooked up with Miller, a frequent speaker at antigovernment “Patriot” movement gatherings. Both men’s signatures (with hyphens and full colons, of course) are on the suit, along with Miller’s fingerprint atop his signature. After 10 pages of single-spaced, legal gobbledygook, the suit concludes:
“FOR THE ‘WHY’ OF THE SHERIFF’S-STATEMENT-WRITINGS AND: UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S-STATEMENTSWRITING ARE WITH A SECOND-GRADE-READING-LEVEL AND: WRITING-LEVEL AND: VACATING-FACTS, OPINIONS, GUESSING, MODIFICATIONS, VIOD [SIC]-FACTUAL-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR WORD-MEANINGS BY THE VASSALEES AGAINST THE COLLUSION-CONSPIRACY WITH THE HANDYCAPPING [SIC]-PARSE-SYNTAXGRAMMAR-COMMUNICATION-PLEADINGS AND: BABBLING-COLLUSIONS-THREATS AGAINST THE DAVIDRUSSELL: MYRLAND BY THE VASSALEES. (WHY DID THE VASSALEES DO THIS CASE WITH A VOIDCOMMUNICATIONS?) FOR THIS FEDERAL-JUDGE: DAVID-WYNN: MILLER’S-CORRECTION OF THE VASSALEESFICTION-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR-PLEADINGS IS WITH THE CORRECTION-PARTICIPATION-CLAIM OF THIS BABBLEINDICTMENT-EVIDENCE AND: BAD-PROBATION-SYNTAX=GRAMMAR-EVIDENCE. FOR THE VOID-DROGUELAW, VOID-OATH OF AN OFFICE, VOID-JUDGE’S-OATH, VOID-DOCKING-COURT-HOUSE-VESSEL IN THE WASHINGTON-STATE-DRY-DOCK AND: VOID-ORIGINAL-LODIAL-LAND-TITLE.”
Whew. Unsurprisingly, the Myrland-Miller lawsuit had hit a snag. William McCool, the court executive for the Western District of Washington, sent a letter addressed to both men, saying their suit was not accompanied by an In Forma Pauperis form. The plaintiffs were given until February 23 to either pay a $350 filing fee or prove with a certified copy of Myrland’s prison trust account that he’s truly indigent and can proceed as a pauper.
Australian cases
Wollogong City Council v Falamaki [2009] FMCA 1204: (from 21):
“In summary, Dr Falamaki and Ms Williams are making an informal application for a person identifying himself as Judge: David-Wynn: Miller to intervene or to appear as amicus curiae in order to prove by evidence and draw the Court’s attention to a series of frauds which they describe and characterise as syntax fraud.
I have ignored and put to one side the numerous statements delivered by Ms Williams and her supporters that the failure to hear and accept the argument in respect of syntax fraud would result in me also being guilty of fraud and breaching my judicial responsibilities. The apparent fervour of the members of this linguistic cult led by Mr Miller has the distinct character of a crusade – searching for a public platform to ventilate their views. This is not a person or persons adopting the traditional and accepted role of amicus curiae.
Ms Williams’ statement in respect of the position of amicus curiae seems completely misunderstood. The argument being advanced is that by filing a form stating that a person is an amicus curiae immediately joins them to the proceedings. In the circumstances I do not intend to grant leave for this person to appear in that capacity.
Fraud at common law or in equity concerns the use of false representations to gain an unjust advantage. Syntax is the grammatical arrangement of words showing their connection and relationship (a set of rules for analysis of this connection and relationship). The concept of fraud perpetrated by syntax is not a concept currently reflected in the Commonwealth or State statutes or at common law.
The preliminary argument advanced by Ms Williams and a large number of supporters present in the Courtroom, some of whom I am advised are specialists in the area, is that the Creditor’s Petition was fraudulent because of the structure of the syntax in that document. I enquired of Ms Williams whether her argument was that all Petitions issued were fraudulent because of their grammatical construction. She indicated that she did not wish to pursue this broader argument but wished to focus on the Petition currently before this Court.”
Wollongong City Council v Dr Masood Falamaki [2010] NSWLEC 66 (from 35):
“I invited Mr Miller to focus the submission that he would give on 15 April upon the rule that Dr Falamaki invoked, namely Pt 36 r 15 and the cases that inform the operation of such a rule. It is appropriate for reasons which I will next make apparent, that I quote from the transcript both my observation to Mr Miller and his response.
“HIS HONOUR: At 2 o’clock tomorrow the arguments will conclude, the hearing will conclude within that two hours and can I respectfully remind you that your focus would and should be upon the particular rule that authorises or rather provides to me a discretion to set aside perfected orders. There are a large number of decided cases that relate to that.
MILLER: Conclusionary law not based on now time jurisdiction under rules of evidence are void for one thing. Two, I’ll give you a little secret. Every word that starts in the English language with a vowel, a, e, i, o and u and followed by two consonants is a word that means no contract. If you’re arguing a condition, a negative condition which can’t be proved under a seal which says syntax would be used in its correct format then the technology of writing will be syntaxed accordingly. The words will be identified for their true syntax and the value of that word will be brought to this court so if you have a rule our syntax can tell you exactly what it means frontwards and backwards because the order of operations of syntax are one and the same planet- wide in all five thousand languages, just like as a track multiplying and dividing for the operations of numbers. It is universal communication issues. Closure has to be on the table here for everything under maritime law of commerce because a piece of paper is a vessel in a sea of space and vessels must give closure for their movement between point A and point B and I’m a past master and as a plenipotentiary judge of 75,000 hours of training and 30 years I know how to dissect all this. There hasn’t been anything put in front of me in 30 years that I haven’t been able to dissect to its syntax.
Mr Miller appeared for Dr Falamaki at the resumed hearing of the matter on 15 April. He proceeded for almost one and a half hours to make submissions in terms similar to those that I have quoted in the preceding paragraph. When, after listening to his philosophical discussion as to grammar and syntax, I sought to direct him to the orders which were the subject of Dr Falamaki’s application, the following exchange took place:
“HIS HONOUR: This case is not about sentence structure and syntax. It’s about orders which I’m sure Dr Falamaki can read and understand.
MILLER: Actually, he doesn’t.
HIS HONOUR: I see.
MILLER: Because when he looks up the definition of the words, he can’t find them. They don’t exist and there was no closure put on the documents for the modification of language and if you don’t show your closure, what the volition is of the content of the moving party under maritime law, that document is moot.
HIS HONOUR: We’re not dealing with maritime law here.
MILLER: That’s a maritime vessel. It’s got a stamp on it. It’s a vessel. All paper is a vessel in a sea of space and therefore it has to fly a vessel. It has to pay its postage to go between point A and point B. The bailiff over here is actually the letter carrier to transport the letter from myself to you. The postage has been paid on my letter, to go to you so that you could mark it as evidence. The postage has been paid for me to bring it from the street. Dr Falamaki has also signed it. To transport the vessel from the street to the port of the court. Have it filed and filed stamped. The clerk of the court file stamps the document and received the vessel into the port of the court and signs their name across the received stamp and I also cancel that stamp as well and then it goes to you for adjudication.
I know the procedures of how vessels flow through the court but that shortcut, everybody likes to take the shortcut and skip over those things. I don’t take shortcuts, I follow all the rules and regulations that are correct to move that vessel as correct evidence into this court. You’ve received it as correct evidence, it was carried to you by the bailiff or a tipstaff. So the documents are delivered to you and now it’s your choice to make a determination and if you have a problem with what syntax is and how it works on the back of the cover of my book we have a complete outline that took six years to research as to the accuracy of how syntax functions so that the information that I bring to this court, I can back it up and you have your styles manual that Australia publishes, we have a styles manual that the United States government, that China, Russia, all the other countries of the world have their style manuals to communicate under a standard of styles and a standard of syntax and mathematical procedures otherwise we wouldn’t have communications.
When those styles are violated and the modifications are allowed to go unchecked we have chaos and so I brought the mathematical interface on April 6 1988 when I broke the code and I was able to mathematically certify it is what has created this book to advertise how the math interface of language now functions in now time. Not only that all judges worldwide and attorneys worldwide have been asked to try and defeat this and find out if this is a lie and they’ve all come back to certify the fact. This is required study at Scottsdale Arizona and Reno Nevada at the judge institutes. I have been teaching there for 15 years now. Universities that teach law for lawyers are required to study this book so that they understand what syntax means. We’re in a changing world. You can call my government, you can call the United States Supreme Court, your judge can call your High Court down here, you don’t think they haven’t contacted Washington and talked with the Supreme Court to compare notes as to what’s going on and how big this things has gotten and how many cases are involved with this worldwide? I invite you to do it, take my passport number, run my passport and check the 38 pages of information, credentials I have on that as to my travels around the world to educate.
When I was invited to this case I looked at the paperwork and I said, this is all wrong, it’s impossible for a case to run as long as it has but because that nothing has been said, I said show me the first piece of paper, the first day of trial and when that first day of trial was handed to me I said I syntaxed it and said it’s in a box, it’s written in adverb/verb, there’s no correct sentence structure, therefore it’s mute. If you build a case on a lie, it’s a lie. From what I understand you’ve just been brought in as a judge to sit on this case after all the other judges have recused themselves because they know it’s a fact. I don’t know what your position is or what the politics are going on behind the scenes here but I can pretty well put the pieces together, I’ve been around the court system for 30 years.
Regrettably, I did not find the submissions helpful in addressing Dr Falamaki’s claim.”
The Trustee of the Property of Currey (A Bankrupt) & Anor v Currey & Anor [2017] FCCA 2692 (from 15):
“FOR THE DATE-~27-~ OCTOBER-~2017 OF THIS WITNESS: Kevin-Grantley: Currey WITH THE LOCATION OF THE ~177-~CURREY-ROAD, -~ WONGAWALLAN, -~ ‘QUEENSLAND’, -~ 4210, IS WITH THESE CLAIMS BEFORE THIS FEDERAL – CIRCUIT – COURT OF AN AUSTRALIA-COURT IN THE DRY-DOCK BY THIS: Kevin-Grantley: Currey.
1. FOR THIS WITNESS: Kevin-Grantley: Currey’s KNOWLEDGE OF THE CORRECT-SENTENCE-STRUCTURE-COMMUNICATION-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR IS WITH THIS DAMAGE-CLAIM OF THE ORIGINAL-FILING-SYNTAX-FRAUD and: TESTIMONY-FRAUD BY THE COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA and: “OTHERS”, WITH THE FIRST-COURT-HEARING AGAINST THE CASE-FILE: ‘No.9397. Of 2013’ IN THE SUPREME-COURT OF THE ‘QUEENSLAND’-TERRITORY WITH THIS CLAIMANT: Kevin-Grantley: Currey.
2. FOR THIS WITNESS’S KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACTS IS WITH THIS DAMAGES-CLAIM OF THE PERJURY, MIS-APPROPRIATION, and: FRAUD-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR-DOCUMENTS WITHIN THE ORIGINAL-FILING-SYNTAX-FRAUD-DOCUMENTS BY THE ‘COMMONWEALTH BANK OF AUSTRALIA’, ‘QUEENSLAND’-STATE’S-VASSALEES, and: “OTHERS”.
Judge Lloyd-Jones was confronted with a similar document in Wollongong City Council v Falamaki [2009] FMCA 1204. At [13] – [19] his Honour reviewed the facts of that case against the commonly understood function of amicus curiae in the courts of this country. Curiously, the application before Judge Lloyd-Jones was for a person who identified himself as Judge: David-Wynn: Miller to appear as a lay advocate for one of the parties in that case, as well as to give evidence as an expert in respect of “syntax fraud” and finally as that of an amicus curiae in assisting the Court to understand the offence of “syntax fraud”. His Honour declined to permit “Judge: David-Wynn: Miller” to appear as amicus curiae.
While there is no similar application before me, the respondents’ argument is that by reason of “syntax fraud”, the respondents have some type of defence to these proceedings. The document that I have admitted as exhibit 1 (the “amicus curiae”) bears the name of “FEDERAL-PLENIPOTENTIARY-JUDGE: David-Wynn: Miller”. That appears to be the same name of the person to whom Judge Lloyd-Jones refers in his reasons in Falamaki.
“Judge: David-Wynn: Miller” has in another case attempted to explain a theory that appears to be a creation by him that Mrs Currey referred to before me as “CORRECT-SENTENCE-STRUCTURE-COMMUNICATION-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR”. In Wollongong City Council v Falamaki [2010] NSWLEC 66, Craig J had the benefit of Judge: David-Wynn: Miller appear before him to explain his theory in support of Dr Falamaki’s case. After setting the transcript of some exchanges with Judge: David-Wynn: Miller and recording that lengthy submission had been made by him, Craig J recorded that: 37 Regrettably, I did not find the submissions helpful in addressing Dr Falamaki’s claim.
Similarly, I do not find the submissions made by Mr and Mrs Currey based upon what they described as “CORRECT-SENTENCE-STRUCTURE-COMMUNICATION-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR” helpful. Indeed, I did not find them comprehensible.”
Maksacheff v Commonwealth Bank of Australia [2017] NSWCA 126 (at 53):
“Mr and Mrs Maksacheff’s written submissions also assert that there were various deficiencies in the Bank’s supporting affidavits and the judgments of the courts below, to the effect that the differing languages and fonts appearing in the judgments proved “deception by this arbitral tribunal that appears not a Court of competent jurisdiction or have subject matter jurisdiction” [sic, as in original] and that the pro-forma “Judgement/Order” documents contain “unreadable hidden languages, which appears to be dog latin/Glossa”and are illegitimate for want of a signature of a Supreme Court Justice. The submissions also refer to “symbolism”and the use of “hidden language” by the Bank, which is alleged to be an attempt to deceive Mr and Mrs Maksacheff and to constitute fraud.
As will be manifest, these assertions are nonsensical. Neither appears to advance comprehensible claims. We reproduce them, not to imbue them with any substance, but, rather, to illustrate their nonsensical nature.
Rambaldi & anor v Rice Bar Restaurant & anor [2018] VSC 218 (at 27):
“On 4 January 2018 the defendant filed an affidavit sworn by him on 28 December 2017. The affidavit is rambling, nonsensical and, aside from the occasional assertion in respect of matters the subject of this claim, is unresponsive to Mr Rambaldi’s affidavit of 7 December 2017. By way of example in this regard, an extract of the defendant’s affidavit:
We make this “special appearance” before this honourable court, to assist the court in distinguishing between ourselves: Kim Huit living spirit of the House Tang and KIM HUIT TANG (and all the derivatives and variation in the spelling of the said name (CORPORATION SOLE), in DOG-LATIN of the grammatical fact stating that such NAME written in DOG-LATIN-GLOSSA style in any of your documents are Corrupt and Criminal, our appearance before the court must not be construed as volunteering or consenting to the Plaintiff or the court jurisdiction.”
.
- 1 Staff report (August 14, 1998). Ally of molestation suspect a ‘huckster,’ historian says. Right-winger: militia watchdog web site mentions Milwaukeean. Waukegan News-Sun Staff report (June 11, 1999). Ingleside man deemed sexually dangerous. To prison: will be held until safe for release. Waukegan News-Sun
- 2 Duncan, Mark (June 23, 1998). McCreary files federal lawsuit. Prescott Daily Courier. Duncan, Mark, (November 3 1998) Judge gives McCreary 60 days Prescott Daily Courier
- 3 “Screw the Taxman: The Weird Ideas of Tax Cheaters” 24 April 2006.
- 4 Hagan, Susan (14 October 2001). “Canadian tax dodgers confuse courts”. The Canadian Press.
- 5 Maller, Peter; Lynch-German, Lauria (September 3, 2002). ‘Paper terrorism’ gaining adherents. Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. Cole, Jeff (January 28, 2003). “Paper terrorist” gets five years in prison.