In Regards to Fraud
May 2, 2017 § Leave a comment
In Regards to Fraud
Any Court / Judge/Magistrate is impartial and brings question in regards to their insistence that
one surrender a Right, which is very evident when they hold back, not answer, refuse to answer
Writs; ‘Averment of Jurisdiction’, which has been submitted to the Court. These acts also bring
question in regards to Fraud, and includes any Officer of the Court, who Colludes with such
Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit… includes the deliberate
concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation. A public
official is a fiduciary toward the public,… and if he deliberately conceals material
information from them he is guilty of fraud. McNally v. U.S., 483 U.S. 350, 371-372,
Quoting U.S. v Holzer, 816 F.2d. 304, 307
Fraud also includes any intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing
another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a
legal right. A false representation of a matter of fact… which deceives and is intended to deceive
another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. … It consists of some deceitful practice or
willful device, resorted to with intent to deprive another of his right, or in some manner to do him
injury… (Emphasis added) –Black’s Law Dictionary Fifth Edition, page 594.
U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F.2d. 1021; U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F. 2d. 297, 299, 300 (1977)
Silence can only be equated with fraud when there is a legal and moral duty to speak or
when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading. We cannot condone
this shocking conduct… If that is the case we hope our message is clear. This sort of
deception will not be tolerated and if this is routine it should be corrected immediately.
Morrison v. Coddington, 662 P. 2d. 155, 135 Ariz. 480(1983).
Fraud and deceit may arise from silence where there is a duty to speak the truth, as well
as from speaking an untruth.
Max Ma on