Application of the DISTRESS Process

Application of the DISTRESS Process



1 – Parties

 Judge Donald E. Rowlands is the Trial Court Judge (Judge) in charge of this Case No. CI 12-235.

Attorney Terry Curtiss, is an inferior Judicial Officer known as an Esquire, is prosecuting this case.


The Esquire is attempting to use the Judge, the Court, and the Judicial System to prosecute the said case and use the court debt collection process to conduct, conceal, protect, and finance an Estate Theft Scam without presenting genuine Credentials of Authority.

The Distress Demandant(s) Edmond and Kathleen Jesse and Randy Due have tried to deal with the Esquire/Attorney by strategically honorable legal method of battle involving the use of Affidavits, but the Esquire refuses to operate in the truth-world of Affidavits, and therefore has no genuine standing in the real-world of Commercial Law and Commerce.

The Judge is facilitating this Fraud by a Suppression of the truth about the origins of the Case No CI 12-235, by concealing the crime and its commission under the shell of an Equity (Judge Only) Court Shell Game Process, and by using the Court to produce an apparently Negotiable Instrument titled a “Judgment”.


Distress Defendant Donald E. Rowlands, the Judge, has failed in his duty as a judge to inform/educate the Esquire/Attorney in the Court, and On The Record about his responsibility to give hard proof of his awareness:

>1. Of his special authority to act as an inferior Judicial Officer of the Court known as an Esquire or Attorney,

>2. that he is being given a special consideration, respect, assistance, and blessing of the Court, a Title of Nobility, to represent his clients before the Court,

>3. that he has special use of the Court Judge to authorize, collect, and enforce the collection of, his purported legal fees directly from the defendants despite their opposition to it.

The Judge Rowlands did not inform/educate the Esquire/Attorney that:

>4. as a Judicial Officer, he must purchase the necessary Commercial Public Official Liability Insurance Policies or Judicial Bonds (Case Replevin Bonds, etc.) for the prosecution, representation, and debt collection of the Court case.

>5. Insurance Companies and Bonding Companies are not allowed to sell any Insurance or bonding that will encourage any Criminal Behavior or the commission of any crime, including injuring the Judicial System of the Nation, injuring the lawful money system of the nation, undermine or overthrow its Constitution, or foster Insurrection or Rebellion against the Constitution, or Treason against the United States of America and its Constitution.

>6. Whoever buys Judicial Insurance or Judicial Bonding must swear and bear a true Oath of Allegiance to the Nation and its Constitution, and Support the commerce of the States and of the United States by protecting the covenant contract power of Affidavits.

>7. The failure to recognize, honor, conduct, and consummate business by sworn Affidavits is a Capital Offense against the Nation.

The Esquire/Attorney had refused to honor, answer, or challenge any and all of the Affidavits in all of the inseparable cases, and/or refused to respond or proceed by Affidavits.

Distress Defendant Judge Donald E. Rowlands did not order the Esquire/Attorney to honor or contest point-for-point all of the Affidavits in the cited Cases Nos. CI 12-235, CI 12-235-62, CI 12-235-66.

Therefore, a mistrial resulted followed by the unlawful issue of a Judgment in Case No. CI 12-235, CI 12-235-62, CI 12-235-66 against the defendants (Distress Demandant(s)).

Therefore Distress Demandant(s) demands the Distress Defendant Judge Donald E. Rowlands reverse his Judgment –withdraw, quash, make null and void his Judgments against the Distress Demandant(s).

Distress Defendant Judge Doland E. Rowlands failed in his duty as a Judge to “Order” the Esquire/Attorney Terry Curtiss to provide Positive Identification of his Insurance or Bonding Surety, or provide his Covenant Oath of Allegiance to Defend the Nation and its Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, or give proof that he was truthful evidenced by his respect for the obligation of contracts, and his willingness to deal honorably by the recognition of, respect for, and use of Affidavits.

About arnierosner

As an American I advocate a republic form of government, self-reliance, and adherence to the basic philosophy of the founding fathers and the founding documents, I ONLY respect those who respect and "HONOR" their honor. No exceptions!
This entry was posted in Civil Rights Violations, Judicial Corruption, Patriot Action, Randy Due Case. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Application of the DISTRESS Process

  1. Pingback: Randy Due Case | Scanned Retina Blog

  2. Pingback: Affidavit of Distress Right | Scanned Retina Blog

  3. Pingback: Randy Due Case – Updated 8-31-2013 | Scanned Retina Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s