The One Peoples Public Trust was started by Heather Anne Tucci Jarraf.
She initially filed a record with the U.C.C. (Uniform Commercial Code) and consistent with OPCA theory, after the filing was not “rebutted” by the “due date” it went into default, creating a “law” that “foreclosed all governments and corporate entities” and granted direct access to the vast amounts of cash held in peoples “birth bonds” by this “slavery system”.
People were instructed to issue “Courtesy Notices” to all authorities informing them that they were foreclosed, citing the OPPT UCC filing. This movement had quite the following, with these notices appearing for some time in government departments and private businesses, even in Australia.
“The overwhelming evidence reveals that our government, state and commonwealth, and subsequently all of the public service network, are in fact corporations masquerading as government, as is the case now throughout the world, certainly in western ‘democracies’ with central banking systems, or more accurately ‘was the case’ due to the UCC filings by OPPT (One Peoples Public Trust) that comprehensively foreclosed on all corporations, banking systems, including corporations masquerading as government, worldwide, announced on 25th of December 2012. Pursuant to the OPPT foreclosure which effectively cancels all contracts and eliminates all debt, in addition to the unrebutted affidavits relating to the judgment [subject to this appeal], and fraudulent claim by [the first respondent], I DECLARE JUDGMENT IN MY FAVOUR, and hereby consider this matter concluded. Anyone that chooses to ignore this, does so with unlimited personal liability, fully informed, duely noticed, completely devoid of authority, nor legal, or lawful standing. That party also accepts the terms of the attached courtesy notices. Both the alleged Bailiffs office, real estate agents, and Police department are being informed and duely noticed as well. Hereinafter, anyone attempting to enter my property … will be under video surveillance, arrested, detained, and subject to common law private prosecution”.
“Heathers Reply To Freeman Delusion”
Did you get all that?! Don’t believe her? Check the references cited…!!
UCC 1-103… “(a) [The Uniform Commercial Code] must be liberally construed and applied to promote its underlying purposes and policies, which are: (1) to simplify, clarify, and modernize the law governing commercial transactions; (2) to permit the continued expansion of commercial practices through custom, usage, and agreement of the parties; and (3) to make uniform the law among the various jurisdictions. (b) Unless displaced by the particular provisions of [the Uniform Commercial Code], the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, bankruptcy, and other validating or invalidating cause supplement its provisions.
UCC 1-308… (a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as “without prejudice,” “under protest,” or the like are sufficient. (b) Subsection (a) does not apply to an accord and satisfaction.
UCC 1-305… (a) The remedies provided by [the Uniform Commercial Code] must be liberally administered to the end that the aggrieved party may be put in as good a position as if the other party had fully performed but neither consequential or special damages nor penal damages may be had except as specifically provided in [the Uniform Commercial Code] or by other rule of law. (b) Any right or obligation declared by [the Uniform Commercial Code] is enforceable by action unless the provision declaring it specifies a different and limited effect.
“Defendant has filed yet another document entitled “Mandatory Judicial Notice.” (See Dkts. #99, 86, 66, 59, 58.) The “Mandatory Judicial Notice” notifies the Court that Defendant “relies in good faith on the public/commercial REGISTRY entries as published at http://www.peoplestrust1776.org, inclusive of Universal Law Ordinance, UCC #2012096074 . . . .” For lack of a better term, this is gobbledygook. The Court is unsure of the document’s purpose, and given its undecipherable nature, no response is expected from the Government. Defendant is apparently a member of a group loosely styled “sovereign citizens.” The Court has deduced this from a number of Defendant’s peculiar habits. First, like Mr. Leaming, sovereign citizens are fascinated by capitalization. They appear to believe that capitalizing names has some sort of legal effect. For example, Defendant writes that “the REGISTERED FACTS appearing in the above Paragraph evidence the uncontroverted and uncontrovertible FACTS that the SLAVERY SYSTEMS operated in the names UNITED STATES, United States, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and United States of America . . . are terminated nunc pro tunc by public policy, U.C.C. 1-103 . . . .” (Def.’s Mandatory Jud. Not. at 2.) He appears to believe that by capitalizing “United States,” he is referring to a different entity than the federal government. For better or for worse, it’s the same country. Second, sovereign citizens, like Mr. Leaming, love grandiose legalese. “COMES NOW, Kenneth Wayne, born free to the family Leaming, 20 December 1955, constituent to The People of the State of Washington constituted 1878 and admitted to the union 22 February 1889 by Act of Congress, a Man, “State of Body” competent to be a witness and having First Hand Knowledge of The FACTS . . . .” (Def.’s Mandatory Jud. Not. at 1.) Third, Defendant evinces, like all sovereign citizens, a belief that the federal government is not real and that he does not have to follow the law. Thus, Defendant argues that as a result of the “REGISTERED FACTS,” the “states of body, persons, actors and other parties perpetuating the above captioned transaction(s) [i.e., the Court and prosecutors] are engaged . . . in acts of TREASON, and if unknowingly as victims of TREASON and FRAUD . . . .” (Def.’s Mandatory Jud. Not. at 2.) The Court therefore feels some measure of responsibility to inform Defendant that all the fancy legal sounding things he has read on the internet are make-believe. Defendant can call himself a “public minister” and “private attorney general,” he may file “mandatory judicial notices” citing all his favorite websites, he can even address mail to the “Washington Republic.” But at the end of the day, while sovereign citizens and Defendant cite things like “Universal Law Ordinances,” they are subject to both state and federal laws, just like everyone else. For the reasons stated above, no response is required by the Government.”
The defendants unsuccessfully appealed their convictions in United States v. Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf, No. 18-5752 (6th Cir. 2019):