Adverse Possession I
by Joe Kelley
10-5-2022

The Strange Doctrine of Adverse Possession and Its Origins
by Racine Olson
February 10, 2017
[racinelaw.net]

“It is typically used to resolve ownership disputes in favor of the person who has actually occupied, cared for, and paid taxes on the property.”

If the assumption assumed by the adjudicator (The Decider) is such that the power of moral judgment is external to each individual human being, the human being making that judgment is possessed with an obvious, self-confessing, blind belief in an ongoing fraud, confessing a prejudice as The Deceiver.

It wasn’t my responsibility to be accountable for my decision, I blame my Dog Sam or my Uncle Sam, it was those SAMS WHO told me to do it, and I was merely following external orders without question.

Nothing personal.

Even when judges charge juries to adjudicate a verdict justified by the whole truth and nothing but the truth, to rule out all reasonable doubt, and to ensure that the goal of justice is not twisted by errors, omissions, withholding evidence, stacking juries, bribing juries, extorting juries, defrauding juries, fraudulent confessions, fraudulent witness testimonies, etc., the fact that matters, the whole truth in the case, every case and any case, is beyond reasonable doubt, where the rubber meets the road, which is inside a human being all alone, or independent individual human beings in a group of 12 forced by their own moral principles to abide by a suggested set of rules, to discuss the matter deliberately, in the effort to establish a unanimous decision, a decision requiring every single “voter” to vote in UNISON.

Everywhere I go, I follow along like a little puppy dog.

Everyone with a functioning brain knows, criminals, as a rule, WILL NOT take the suggestions prescribed by any moral rule, and that is by natural laws precisely how criminals join the criminal cult. The price of admission, if you have not been TOLD yet, or if you make the vain attempt to think about it, the price of admission in the criminal gang, conspiring with each other or not, is their abandonment of moral responsibility as these criminals create the path they choose to take, and they go merrily on their way to malevolently cause injury to innocent people, such as the choice to abandon their own internal power to conscientiously object to following criminal orders, orders that only make sense if the goal is to cause injury to innocent people, doing so by making sure that no one is ever held responsible for causing injuries to innocent people on purpose.

Hmmm, should I stay within my moral boundaries clearly known when I apply a simple Golen Rule, or give up and be free at last?

No sir, I have to abdicate, let someone else decide, moral duty is above my pay grade, why don’t you go see so and so, that dude is issuing criminal orders night and day, and all you have to do to find him is follow the material evidence, the tortured souls, the blind followers drinking liberally from the cool-aid produced by him, and there you have your fearless leader.

He is very happy, willing, and able to deceive other persons, to cover up what he often does, with vim and vigor, to other persons.

Leader of The Free World, free from moral duty, free from moral responsibility.

Don't worry, the deceiver never, ever, not in a million years, not in a billion years, never, ever does the deceiver turn on his own.

The external adjudicating force can easily inject into the targeted victim a false and misleading statement, just as easily as the external adjudicating force can make damn sure that vital information, information that is necessary to construct the whole truth required to pass the threshold of going beyond a reasonable doubt, information easily withheld from the internal adjudicating force charged with the moral duty to act upon actionable information, so as to do what is moral and to not do what is immoral, in this case of interest to the external adjudicator banking on a predetermined decision made by the external adjudicator, the predetermined verdict injected into the internal adjudicator, by omission. A corrupt judge can just as easily order the assassination of a key witness as can a corrupt juror. A corrupt assassin, hiding behind any false flag, can order the assassination of anyone, or do the job themselves.

I didn’t do it, I was just following orders.

Any adjudicator can make a decision opposite and contrary to the previous decision one second after the original decision with or without an external adjudicator injecting into an internal adjudicator fraudulent or misleading material evidence of a crime in progress. Just as easily, an internal decision is made to disregard evidence that does not fit into a predetermined verdict, as if the material evidence never existed until it was inconveniently spoiling the predetermined verdict.

Sargent Shutz said he saw nothing.

How could I have possibly known, when the judge told us, jurors, to disregard the confession that the defendant was threatened with torture if the defendant didn’t confess as ordered by the same judge fingered by the defendant as the one WHO ordered the torture to extract the confession, and his buddy the prosecutor administering the threat, and his other body the big guy with the badge executing the sentence of torture, and all that appears to have been a predetermined verdict, but again, how could I have possibly known? I was told, emphatically, and under the threat of torturous punishment not directly specified, but I got the message, so how could I have possibly known something I could not know, according to the external adjudicator?

Forgive me, I could not know, the evidence inculpating the criminals went missing somewhere along in the process, here, here, here, and here specifically, but if I tell you that, I will have to kill you after torturing you with threats to your life, liberty, property, the pursuit of happiness, and by God, your means of defense, your temporal salvation, the bloody soul that you sold to the highest bidder.

“We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth—to know the worst and to provide for it.”

OOOH, OOOH, That smell, can’t you smell that smell?

Adverse Possession.

Example narratives are born from inquisitive minds, so anyone can imagine into being an almost infinite number of example narratives. From one’s own authority, one can create an example to satisfy their own internal powers of judgment, deftly validating the clear boundary between right and wrong.

I can exemplify this power to create such a narrative, but so can anyone else.

Judge Judy Just-US, the Empire Builder Treasonous Fraud Parasitic Predator decrees by Executive Fiat that the original Edict concerning property “rights” is now enforceable Statute, and when she speaks she borrows from her selected Empire precedent, a needle dug out of the haystack of immoral HER-STORY, like the magic wand that provides the coincidental excuse to continue with Business as Usual, the predetermined verdict of guilt and punishment.

Judge Judy Just-US:
“I own all the land, fuck you, pay me.”

Joe Blow:
“Taxes are theft.”

Judge Judy Just-US:
“YOU there, torture that slave now! Torture him until he is begging for more torture, just to please me.”

Joe Blow:
“It says so right here in your rules that you are not supposed to inflict cruel and unusual punishment.”

Judge Judy Just-US:
“Dude, I have almost the entire Majority of “people” (she makes the quotes signs in the air with an air of pomp and circumstance), you know “other persons.” I, and I alone, JUST me, in Union with me, unanimously with me. I have decided that all those WHO are LEFT without their moral compass, waiting for me to speak for them, as they are begging me not to torture them as much as they will now torture you...”

Joe Blow:
“Hold on lady, and I deploy that title loosely since I am not a biologist, we are doing this during a zoom call in legal fiction no less, and THIS IS AMERICA (spoken like the now famous actor speaking “THIS IS SPARTA&rdquo and I am armed with the peaceful solution to any dispute of any kind anywhere where the law of the land still stands firm on the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me, not you, and not your pretend “Majority Rules.”

This is Sparta. Full scene.
13,639,423 views
Mar 28, 2007

No, no, no need to kick anyone back into the pit they crawled out of, their words and their deeds confess where they are in fact. The law, the whole truth-backed law process, puts them where they confess to being by their actions certainly, but also by their words factually, with a little help from you know who.

Caveat Emptor