(Stillness in the Storm Editor) One People’s Public Trust trustee and Treasury Direct Account promoter Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf was sentenced to four years in prison last week, ending a year-long controversy that has embroiled many seeking to regain freedom from a defunct and corrupt system.
As someone who spent time with Tucci-Jarraf in Morocco in 2014, and was friends with some of the people involved in the OPPT, I can speak personally about this situation to a certain extent.
To be clear, I’m not making any damning indictments of anyone. But I do want to highlight the warning I issued last year in the lengthy article written about the TDA account campaign.
Do we live in a corrupt legal system? Yes.
Are we not informed about the full breadth of the legal frauds and schemes used to against the people? Yes.
Can we act unlawfully to try and fix an unlawful situation? No, we can’t.
The bottom line is, a woman has been sentenced to jail and is now unable to be a mother to her children. This is a sad state of affairs. But we shouldn’t ignore the glaring lessons that were presented to all of us through this situation.
The law is a tool that can be used to arrest the problems of this world and restore justice, but we must use it honorably. We must take care not to cause more problems in our efforts to defend ourselves from injustice.
Despite what I would argue as major lawful misconceptions related to using the TDAs pushed by Tucci-Jarraf, namely that these accounts were never ours, but were set up on our behalf, people continued to insist that it was OK and right to use them. But this isn’t true.
These accounts are not for us, they are used by the powers that be to fund their elaborate schemes, and as such, you invite serious repercussions by attempting to use them.
There is no rule of law, only the color of law. As such, even if we did have a right to these accounts, which we don’t, the criminals in power would have done everything they could to stop us.
Perhaps instead of trying to access these accounts, often without the complete knowledge of what they are and how they operate within a lawful and legal capacity, we should have spent our time learning the law and working together to form a coherent and lawful community that could truly stand up to the injustices of this world. Such a community could have used the law, in honor, to make careful and calculated steps to restore justice.
In war, strategy and careful planning are required. And make no mistake, we are at war with those who seek to usurp our God-given rights. But even in times of war, we must be careful not act recklessly, we should strive to be honorable as much as possible and only stray from the highest moral conduct when the laws of necessity demand it.
The powers that be want to paint anyone seeking to restore the rule of law as a paper terrorist, a sovereign citizen, and rule hating false anarchist. Thus, situations like this make it hard to do this great work of restoring justice difficult. So please, think carefully about how you defend yourself in the legal system or how you use your legal knowledge.
I hope we can form discussion groups and learning institutions so that we can pool our collective knowledge together, ferret out fallacious concepts, and strategize about how we are going to solve this age-old problem of injustice.
I am dismayed and saddened by what happened. I knew Heather, and I met her husband and children.
Let’s learn from her mistakes and take care that we tread wisely to restore the rule of law and make the world a better place.
Update: Some assumed that in sharing this article I completely agreed with everything in it. I placed a link to my perspective on the TDA situation above, wherein I make no reference to her being a Sovereign Citizen. Yes, I know that this term is an oxymoron and not applicable. As always, do not assume that because we share articles on this site that we completely agree with them.
Feel free to ask me questions as to my perspectives in the comments or via email.
– Justin
Related Free Money? Utilizing YOUR Treasury Direct Accounts (Birth Certificate/Strawman Trust/Bond)
by Travis Dorman, July 17th, 2018
Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf believes her imprisonment will amount to a “hostage situation.”
The former prosecutor turned evangelist for the so-called sovereign citizens movement said as much Tuesday before U.S. District Judge Tom Varlan sentenced her to serve 4 years and 9 months in prison for conspiring to launder money. Her sentence will be followed by two years of supervised release.
A jury in Knoxville found Tucci-Jarraf guilty of the federal charge in February. Authorities say she counseled Randall Keith Beane while he used electronic sleight-of-hand to rip off a bank to the tune of millions of dollars.
Beane also was convicted of conspiracy to launder money as well as wire fraud; his sentencing is set for July 24.
At her three-hour-long sentencing hearing, Tucci-Jarraf gave a 45-minute speech during which she repeatedly denied the jurisdiction of the judge, used terms like “collusion” and “foreign actors,” cited convoluted legal documents, and portrayed herself as a bold truth-teller being persecuted for working to expose the alleged corruption within the U.S. banking system.
“I’m the one voice they don’t want heard,” she said of the Federal Reserve.
Prosecutors accused Tucci-Jarraf — who has a sizable following online, where she’s often referred to by her initials, HATJ — of merely seeking fame. They pushed for a longer sentence, citing the need to deter others, like Beane, from following her advice to commit fraud.
“This is not a vast conspiracy,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Cynthia Davidson said. “The defendant is not a martyr.”
A half-million-dollar motor home
Prosecutors during the trial said Beane, an Air Force veteran working for Advantage Innovations in Knoxville, owed tens of thousands of dollars to the United Services Automobile Association, an online banking service catering to current and former military personnel.
Beane came across a YouTube video shared on social media by Tucci-Jarraf, a licensed lawyer in Oregon who worked as a state prosecutor there before she became involved in the sovereign citizens movement.
The video claimed Americans can withdraw vast sums of money from secret bank accounts with the Federal Reserve. It recycled discredited tropes popular among sovereign citizens, a loose collection of fringe groups that believe in a mishmash of conspiracy theories.
Followers typically deny the legitimacy of government authority and believe reciting the right legal jargon can unlock untold riches and exempt them from the law.
Prosecutors said Beane used automatic delays in the banking system of transfers of money from one bank to another to buy certificate of deposits using the Federal Reserve Bank’s routing number and a fake checking account number, quickly liquidating the CDs and stashing the money in his USAA accounts. USAA allowed its members to make withdrawals before the transaction was approved and funded.
Beane opened $30 million in CDs and cashed in roughly $2 million before USAA discovered the trickery, according to court records.
He used some of the money to pay off debts and to buy a half-million-dollar motor home — complete with two bathrooms, marble floors and countertops and pop-out side rooms — from Buddy Gregg Motor Homes in Farragut last year.
Prosecutors said Tucci-Jarraf talked Beane through the fraud “every step of the way,” and that she helped him set up a trust to try to hide the motor home purchase.
A few days after Beane’s arrest, Tucci-Jarraf was arrested outside the White House after the FBI got a tip from the Secret Service that she was demanding a meeting with President Donald Trump.
‘I don’t know what to teach my kids’
Tucci-Jarraf represented herself throughout the trial but at sentencing was joined by Attorney Francis Lloyd.
Much of the hearing revolved around whether Tucci-Jarraf’s sentence should be lengthened because she used “special skills” — in this case, her legal training — to commit or conceal the crime. Judge Varlan ultimately ruled the enhancement to be applicable.
Tucci-Jarraf then called two witnesses to testify on her behalf: her husband, Youssef Jarraf, and a friend, William Ferguson III, who described himself as a blogger who also worked to root out alleged corruption in the banking system.
Ferguson called Tucci-Jarraf “the most kind human being I’ve ever known” and said characterizations of her as “internet hungry” are wrong. At one point, he appeared to compare her to Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela.
Youssef Jarraf spoke haltingly, repeatedly wiping away tears as he talked about his wife and the four children they have together. “I don’t know what to teach my kids, what to tell them about justice,” he said.
Both men said they didn’t believe Tucci-Jarraf had committed a crime and that she didn’t deserve to be sentenced at all.
Youssef Jarraf asked if his wife could be housed in a prison in or near Boston, where he lives. Varlan said he would make the recommendation to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons.
In deciding her sentence, Varlan said he considered that Tucci-Jarraf had no history of mental illness or substance abuse, and that she had no prior criminal history to speak of. The sentence he imposed was less than prosecutors asked for and in the middle of the sentencing range.
After Varlan announced his decision, Tucci-Jarraf again denounced his authority — and asked the court clerk to file a notice of appeal.
Stillness in the Storm Editor’s note: Did you find a spelling error or grammar mistake? Send an email to [email protected], with the error and suggested correction, along with the headline and url. Do you think this article needs an update? Or do you just have some feedback? Send us an email at [email protected]. Thank you for reading.
Source:
Cheap shot Justin. I would have expected better from you. She did nothing illegal or unlawful unless writing a trust document is suddenly against the law. The number unfactual representations by the court are too numerous to even count.
Terran, Cheap shot? How so. Heather was promoting an unlawful process, she asserted that the system condoned the use of these accounts, and didn’t provide evidence that any de jure conveyance of rights to use these accounts took place. Without that conveyance of rights, we do not have a lawful right to use the funds. Unless Heather is ignorant of the way trust law works. But regardless, stating these things is not a “cheap shot” its the truth, and I’m raising this truth to prevent other people from being harmed due to following her bad example.
Secondly, just because I share an article doesn’t mean I agree with everything in it. I figured you, a blogger who shares information from other people, would understand that.
Bill is simply in denial at this point. Heather is on video falsely claiming to be Randy’s attorney, that alone is fraud. When she did the same thing in emails to Whitney bank it was wire fraud. The fact that she did it to help Randy spend money he stole from USAA makes it money laundering. And yes the theft was proven in court despite Bills denial.
Justin this article is full of untruths. It’s sad to see someone who I thought was a truther write such crap.
You’ll be eating your words. HATJ and RKB won’t be behind bars much longer. The DOJ is going down along with the FBI and Fed Res.
If needed DJT will pardon them both.
Please stop writing garbage and get back on the truther path.
Gary, not sure what you’re referring to. As I said in the commentary, you should read my TDA article to hear my full opinion on these matters. As for the article shared here, please don’t assume it is what I believe, I’m merely sharing it as an alert for your consideration. It’s dishonorable to assume what I think without asking or even taking the time to review what I do offer as my perspectives.
I did not follow this case much but once you take on these very smart criminals in their own courts its a safe bet you are not going to win because she exposed this fraud that had been going on for a very long time and they do not want their crimes exposed. She obviously did not understand or comprehend the consequences. Lets just all pray she lives through this.
Anyone who reads this take special note please! To call oneself or anyone else a “sovereign citizen” is an oxymoron. A citizen is subserviant to the superiority of a governing body. A sovereign is subserviant to no one and conducts him or herself in accordance to the laws of the creator, not the laws of mankind (natural law/universal law). The term “sovereign citizen” is utilized when people, without true study say these terms in ignorance of what truely sovereignty means
Agreed. The news service intentionally painted her as a paper terrorist. But we know better.
Justin,
This is a modification of a comment placed on i-uv.com before the sentencing hearing. I have changed the details to reflect the current situation.
I have followed the discussions of legal technologies and the situation of Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf (HATJ) and her use of UCC filings to modify / change the legal and financial system. The recent (7/6/18) discussion found on your (SITSSHOW) site of the Anti-corruption Society’s understanding of Act 2038 and later acts of FDR with references to M. Stamper’s book, “Fruit from a Poisonous Tree”, makes the point that the UCC is the law of the land not the Constitution. You seem to refute this position without any citations of fact.
The Federal court in the Eastern District of Tennessee is not functioning as if unrebutted UCC filings were controlling legal positions.
If the UCC is law then the work that HATJ did as of 2012 should be recognized, If not we need to know why and identify the other alternatives. There are many other advocates for legal and financial reform but they seem to ignore each other. I believe that you have correctly identified a crucial missing link, the need for deep understanding of the legal system and dependable support for those who try to get the changes to become law.
Is it possible that our current government is so corrupt that it is not the dependable base for such change?
SITSSHOW has included a few comments about TDAs, TDDAs and the utility or lack thereof, but few others have even bothered to recognize HATJs work. You make the point that TDAs, TDDAs, and other entities formed in the name of living humans are there for the use of others and there is no legal way to take possession of these assets within the current legal framework. This contradicts the work of HATJ and Anna von Reitz. Where have they gone astray?
You mention that we must work within the system for legal change, but you give no substantive route for this change to happen. I have discussed this situation privately in several contexts and those with governmental experience generally say that it comes down to finding a prosecutor who will take a case and follow it to its logical conclusion, and if that can not happen then it does not matter whether anything has been done right. It appears that this is where things stand – reference the NY Attorney General’s recent resignation.
Certainly HATJ thought that she had to do something to expose the current situation and that she had done enough to get the bad actors to be publicly identified. This may still be playing out and SITSSHOW has not begun to expose how this all fits together – probably few of us will know until it is all over (if it ever is?).
The recent posts regarding how the Grand Jury was manipulated with fraudulent internal FBI emails show a very disturbing tendency of the legal system to be completely unreliable. HATJ and RBK apparently are to be sentenced and serve out some of their terms of incarceration. There are many sources that say that everything is recorded and we will all be responsible for our words and actions at some point?
Is there anything that can be done to call all parties to account for the apparent lack of transparency and reliability (see Executive Orders 13818 & 13844)?
If what HATJ has done is real everything should be changing here. It is essential that this matter be clarified. There are so many areas of our physical lives that are being held up by the kinds of things that HATJ worked to clear up that it seems most appropriate to wait and see how the facts play out as the time for release of what various bad actors have done approaches. My forestry and rural life in general are on hold until the funding systems are changed to reflect the need for long term proactivity in sustainable situations.
If there is anything that folks like me should be doing please let me know and I will do what I can to add some fuel to the fire.
Alan C. Page, Ph.D., Research Forester
Justin,
In view of the developments that are being released on i-uv.com, I think that there is no point in trying to discuss something that, at least, I have) no direct knowledge of. So feel free to delete my recent post if it does not advance the understanding of everyone.
Ok Alan. I’ll leave your comment unpublished.
2018-08-02 (NOTE: already entered Comment, name, and email, clicked on “POST COMMENT,’ then when page reloads, there is no indication whatsoever that I can find that the Comment has been submitted / posted. Trying again:
The use of ALL CAPS is for emphasis; Claimer / Disclaimer below…
from early on in the first article:
“Can we act unlawfully to try and fix an unlawful situation? No, we can’t.”
This question and statement INDICATE that a conclusion has been made that HATJ acted “unlawfully,” and also interjects a presumption (one most likely based on zero — or at best insufficient — due-diligence research, study, and investigation) that the so-called “laws” that she was alleged to have violated were actually made in conformity with the Constitution, and thus valid, lawful, and in full force and effect; and, that Plaintiff (by and through its purported actors) never acted in violation of the principles of equity with respect to any and all matters RELATED to the subject case.
Terran wrote,
“Cheap shot Justin. I would have expected better from you. She did nothing illegal or unlawful…,”
to which Justin replied (in part),
“Terran, Cheap shot? How so. Heather was promoting an unlawful process, she asserted that the system condoned the use of these accounts, and didn’t provide evidence that any de jure conveyance of rights to use these accounts took place.”
Whoa…Justin, by all appearances, you presume and assume much.
Again, Justin’s statement, “Heather was promoting an unlawful process,” indicates a presumption / assumption has been made that the so-called “laws” that she was alleged to have violated are in fact made in pursuance (in conformity) with the Constitution, and thus are valid and lawful. If such law or laws are NOT made in pursuance (in conformity) with the Constitution, then those (law or laws) are null and void ab intio (from the beginning, from inception), and have no lawful validity, and no lawful force or effect.
“The question, whether an act, repugnant to the constitution, can become the law of the land, is a question deeply interesting to the United States; but, happily, not of an intricacy proportioned to its interest. It seems only necessary to recognise certain principles, supposed to have been long and well established, to decide it.”
…
“…in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the constitution itself is first mentioned; and not the laws of the United States generally, but those only which shall be made in pursuance of the constitution, have that rank.”
…
“…a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.”
Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803)
First, any so-called “law” made by a corrupt, unlawful, deceitful, criminal, de facto “system” is NOT lawful, equitable***, or valid. Such “laws” are null and void from inception. Study “color of law.” The so-called government, all 3 branches, on all levels (federal, state, local, that are made up of people purportedly acting in such capacities), are de facto (“Democracy”, better described as “Demonocracy”). They are NOT de jure (Constitutional Republic, as initially established).
***“Law is nothing without equity, and equity is everything, even without law. Those who perceive what is just and what is unjust only through the eyes of the law, never see it as well as those who behold it with the eyes of equity. Law may be looked upon in some manner as an assistance for those who have weak perception of right and wrong, in the same way that optical glasses are useful for those who are shortsighted, or whose visual organs are deficient. Equity, in its true and genuine meaning, is the soul and spirit of the law; positive law is construed, and rational law is made by it. [fn]4”
[fn]4: 3 Sharswood, Blackst. Comm. 329. Vol. II.–3 H
~John Bouvier Institutes of American Law, 1882, Vol 2, sec 3724 para 4
Additionally, the Plaintiff has the initial burden of proof, NOT the Defendant. No presumptions, go back to the FOUNDATION. The Plaintiff FAILED to prove that the laws they alleged that the Defendant violated are indeed in conformity with the Constitution; FAILED to prove that they have acted only in good faith and conscience (they acted under no deception of any kind); and, they FAILED to prove that the Defendant was lawfully SUBJECT to those so-called “laws.” Where is the evidence / proof that the Constitution, and subsequent laws, apply to the living, flesh-and-blood woman who goes by, “Heather Ann Tucci-Jarraf”? The Constitution and laws made in pursuance thereof are a LIMITATION and RESTRICTION on GOVERNMENT, and that which is lawfully created UNDER government (i.e. corporations). Spirit / Soul / Flesh and blood people are NOT created by or under government. Flesh and blood people become responsible and liable IF they create or cause an injured / damaged party (they violated someone’s right(s), and/or caused a tort — an injury / damage to property…and, each person’s BODY is their own PRIVATE PROPERTY.
“The governing principle is ‘that whenever a party who, as actor, seeks to set the judicial machinery in motion and obtain some remedy, has violated conscience, or good faith, or other equitable principle, in his prior conduct, then the doors of the court will be shut against him in limine; the court will refuse to interfere on his behalf, to acknowledge his right, or to award him any remedy.’ Pomeroy, Equity Jurisprudence (4th Ed.) s 397. This court has declared: ‘It is a principle in chancery, that he who asks relief must have acted in good faith. The equitable powers of this court can never be exerted in behalf of [one] who has acted fraudulently, or who by deceit or any unfair means has gained an advantage. To aid a party in such a case would make this court the abetter of iniquity.’”
Keystone Driller Co. v. General Excavator Co., 290 U.S. 240 (1933)
Note: does a ‘judicial system’ that has become predominantly corrupt always uphold law and equity as it should, as founded? Obviously not.
Where is the evidence / proof that governments (people acting in such capacities) had any lawful power and authority TO ABOLISH “ALL COMMON LAW FORMS OF ACTION, AND ALL DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN LAW AND EQUITY”???
An example: http://leg.wa.gov/CodeReviser/documents/sessionlaw/1854pam1.pdf (refer to page 131 of the .pdf; also of special interest, see pages 3 and 9 of the .pdf)
Any such purported lawful POWER conveying such authority must be expressly stated in the Constitution. If there is not a stated power expressed in writing in the Constitution, THEN THE GOVERNMENT HAS NO SUCH POWER, OR RESULTING AUTHORITY! I’ve not been able to find any expressly-written conveyance of such power(s) in the Constitution for governments to ABOLISH ALL common law forms of action, and ALL distinctions between law and equity.
Justin, do you truly believe that the people who have been and are purportedly acting for / as “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” HAVE NEVER violated conscience, or good faith, or other equitable principle, HAVE NEVER acted fraudulently, HAVE NEVER acted in deceit or any unfair means that has given them an advantage over the American people, of whom Heather is one? Really???
Leanne, correct. The so-called “Press” — which is ONE-SIDED and BIASED, which is NOT fair and independent reporting on BOTH SIDES of a story, which acts in bad faith, and uses unfair or deceptive acts or practices — paints Heather as a so-called “sovereign citizen.” I’ve never heard or seen that Heather ever claimed to be a “sovereign citizen.” The Plaintiff in the case may likely have used that term to describe her in the case — as they have done with many others who have stood up for their inherent rights in the past — although I have not seen such evidence in the case against Heather, but neither have I read fully every document that has been filed in that case.
The term “sovereign citizen” has been fabricated and then ‘vilified,’ in part, by the ADL and SPLC (look them up…which neither of these spurious organizations support their baseless accusations with fact and law, not that I have seen). So to paint Heather to be a “sovereign citizen,” by all appearances, is an unfair and deceptive act or practice, done in bad faith. I have not seen any evidence that the Plaintiff has object to or disagreed with this derogatory and oxymoronic term used to describe Heather.
Gary Tallison wrote:
“Justin this article is full of untruths.” Agreed. Although I do not necessarily agree that “HATJ and RKB won’t be behind bars much longer,” even though it would be nice if this were true. Jails and prisons are full of people who have been wrongfully convicted of victimless so-called ‘crimes.’ There MUST be an injured / damaged party (victim) for there to be a justiciable*** controversy. No injured / damaged party (no victim), no justiciable controversy. It’s not rocket science. It’s pure logic and reason.
*** Definition of Justiciable:
1 : liable to trial in a court of justice; a justiciable offense;
2 : capable of being decided by legal principles or by a court of justice.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/justiciable
Claimer / Disclaimer: non-assumpsit…nothing written by this writer is intended as “legal opinion” or “legal advice;” all material is for informational / educational / research / entertainment purposes only; this writer is not “anti-government,” but may be “anti-corruption in government”…
Yes she did act unlawfully, she advised people to unlawfully access trust accounts that weren’t lawfully theirs to access. A trust isn’t yours. Just because someone created one doesn’t mean you can go in and take what you want without the trustee’s permission. That’s what makes the whole access of TDA and her claiming “we’ve been given permission” unlawful. There was no permission, there was no conveyance of rights to access the funds from the trustee to the named beneficiary.
I don’t presume and assume much. I understand the law. In order for a trust to be accessed, one needs an explicit conveyance of rights to do so, from the appointed trustee. That didn’t happen. No one who accessed the accounts by using the methods endorsed by HATJ had a lawful right. Unless of course, they did contact the trustee and were given a lawful conveyance. If that happened, no one reported it.
Wrong. Law is law. Who created the law or legal policy doesn’t matter. What matters is if the policy is ACTUALLY CONGRUENT WITH THE LAW. If a tyrant made a law that said “no one has the right to infringe on free speech” it would still be valid. So the notion that “First, any so-called “law” made by a corrupt, unlawful, deceitful, criminal, de facto “system” is NOT lawful, equitable***, or valid. ” is completely wrong. Study the law, understand that merit and arguments related to truth and value are what establish validity. In short, the messenger doesn’t matter, its the message that matters.
The constitution derives it’s authority from pre-existing lawful concepts, ecclesiastical laws, established and maintained by the Vatican. The foundation of all law is, at this stage of society, held by the ecclesiastical bodies of the Vatican. Contrary to popular belief, the constitution is not the a prior foundation of law, it is merely a charter document establishing and asserting trust and rights related there to the territory of the USofA. So while much can be interpreted and understood within a constitutional framework, that document does not establish subject matter jurisdiction related to trusts and estates.
I know for a fact the people acting for the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA are criminals and have violated their sacred trusts to the people. I never claimed otherwise. I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here.
We agree at most levels save for the fact Heather was promoting an unlawful process. I have presented my argument for what that is the case. And no one has been able to rebut it. And I hope we can stop bickering about these things and work together to solve the problems of this world. I am eternally grateful for Heather because she initiated my step into lawful research. But I have learned much over the years and now I know with precision that the things she was trying to do would never have been effective and that greater solutions exist, namely that we as individuasl take the time to learn the full breadth of law and work together to create abundance by lawfully using our rights in trust. See my post here https://stillnessinthestorm.com/2017/09/where-does-wealth-really-come-from-the-keys-to-abundance-trust-law-and-fellowship-nesara-don-t-wait-let-s-restore-the-human-family-now/
By using the term “sovereign citizen” in your big bold article headline, the damage is already done. Clown. Nothing you say in your article matters since you willingly tow the sensationalism party line by using air quotes in a headline around a known oxymoron. Explaining that use buried in your screed does nothing to give any credibility to you.
And yet here you are. The fact is, she got arrested for being a fraudster, as she was. And she ruined other people’s lives with her “work”.