Act Local, Think Global. Be part of the solution or consider supporting those who are.
A private citizen advocate for parents in public education wanted to redress grievances at a local school board during the public comment period. But this particular individual had evidence that dissenting opinions that challenge existing ideology, lawfulness of mandates, or even the legal enforcement of policy, runs the risk of encountering violence. Violence in the form of threats, intimidation, coercion, duress, kidnapping and false imprisonment.
Notice to Township Managers
Sometimes it makes sense to explore the “Reasonable” options. Do you want to hear it in my own voice? It may not comport with projected narrative, but my integrity matters. Here is what I say. (This is not being pushed in the public yet)
The general consensus is that regardless of what is proposed, it is not reasonable to engage with me and just use the legal process.
You might want to review the recent order that came down from the Federal Judge Case #22-3329 Document #254
Unfortunately, we are surrounded by a culture which promotes submission, consent and encourages elevation of status to those who are claimed to have “God ordained” authority. This advocate adheres to that same ideology when those representing authority, embraces protecting citizens, from the actions of “evil doers”. But his ideology calls him to stand (lawfully and respectfully) as a Lesser Magistrate in defense of those experiencing harm. Specifically, when those in authority demonstrate the behavior and actions of “evil doers”.
This is not an act anyone should consider doing without understanding the breadth, depth and risk, associated with attempting to stand lawfully, peacefully, respectfully. All of those actions have legal criteria, which require the interpretation of a judge in relationship to Supreme Court precedent, Case Law and the United States Constitutional Bill of Rights.
The reality is that most citizens had never been taught through public education civics how to navigate life with our Bill of Rights intact. Every step of the way, we have been conditioned through structural hierarchy to obey those in authority or get punished. We all have experiences through academia. Give the teacher/professor the paper they require, not the paper you want to write. Stepping outside of those guidelines receive the judgment of a non-passing grade. This continues in spades through our political system. Just ask yourself. Why isn’t the fine for a traffic infraction $3,000.00? We are subject to arbitrary fines of correction even when no crime has occurred or any victim harmed.
Prior to the advocate even contemplating stepping up to speak at a public-school board meeting, he sent volumes of correspondence to those representing authority, to ensure that his constitutionally protected rights would be respected. If one were to follow the journey of the advocates federal law suit (Case # 22-3329) , one would see how the mere attempt to speak was being represented as a threat, and ultimately converted into a crime.
That’s right! Just attempting to stand on the constitution’s codification of unalienable right of the 4th amendment and the 1st amendment, public school officials dug deep to enforce “prior restraint”. Countless unlawful conditions requiring the advocates submission, surrender of his rights, just to speak for 3 minutes.
The public servants used their authority, under color of law, in a provocative manner, as an emotional and intellectual enticement or bait to prompt the advocate to “sin”. Why would man put a stumbling block before another man? Regardless of the answer, the advocate chose not to sin, and respectfully, professionally and lawfully attempted to correct the lies, misstatements, misrepresentations and misuse of their sworn authority (Video Evidence). The advocate was cautioning public servants to not “sin” when they swore an oath at the risk of God’s judgement.
Understandably, most people submit to prior restraint and just state one’s name and township, so one can be heard. To which I respond, absolutely, that is a choice anyone can make just like, sit in the back of the bus, don’t use this water fountain, or my body my choice and participate in therapeutic gene experimentation. But, others believe, as Alexander Hamilton said “If you stand for nothing, you will fall for anything.”
When examining the public record of the advocates lawsuit, visiting his social channels (Facebook, TikTok, Youtube, Podcasts, GiveSendGo) you can obtain your own context about the events which have transpired for over a year. Unfortunately, in this world of distraction and chasing dopamine flushes through flat screens, most won’t embark on that journey. But the involvement of every chief of police in Chester County might benefit from your attention.
In the Federal Complaint is a document called Affidavit of Facts to bring clarity to the volume of errors made in following the law by public servants. But here is the kick in the pants. The advocate predicted and knew these actions were pretty much routine and possibly practices (not necessarily memorialized policy) in avoiding following the law. With this advanced understanding, the weight of the transgressions by public servants, when interpreted from their perspective would never be attributed as being consequential. However, if our desire is to live with the unalienable rights bestowed by the creator of the universe, we either stand on God’s authority or we don’t. The key, is to not SIN or cause others to SIN, when doing so.
The advocate sent out a Conditional Settlement Offer to all of the defendant’s counsel, to be presented by defendants counsel, to the defendants, to reasonably resolve this issue. Federal court procedure stipulates that such private discussions are not admissible in case filings as established in the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54.
But isn’t that offer important to be considered by those who pay for the services of Law Enforcement? You know, the Township Supervisor, Mayor, City Manager, the township citizens, what about the insurance carriers which underwrite the bonds and liability insurance.
The advocate has made that offer available for the public to see and to draw their own conclusions. But this is the important part. Drawing a conclusion must be done with the lens of defining and seeking truth and how a conclusion is in balance or out of balance. If you are unfamiliar with the imbalance that exists as determined by the Supreme Court in Graham v Connor, one runs the risk of drawing a false conclusion.
Here is an opportunity for people to take one small step and learn that being a Lesser Magistrate is a biblical calling and we either stand on something, or will certainly continue falling for anything.
It might be worth even consider supporting through prayer or donation, the advocate, who is honoring God with his actions to be the Lesser Magistrate for those children in public education whose parents are afraid to get involved.
NOTE: If your municipality has an officer who may be involved in the Federal Complaint #22-3329 you might want to review the Conditional Settlement Offer as it was ignored by all.
Some additional Context:
- Color of Law Warning presented to the School Board.
- eBook Delusion of Freedom
- eBook Love Thy Neighbor
- What were the Deprivation of Rights?
- What about the School Board? How did they respond? They were warned.
- More context about wanting to be the Lesser Magistrate and anticipating unreasonable and potentially unlawful, public servants.
- Not desiring, but prepared for the possibility of being unlawfully arrested, and brought before a Magistrate.
Hint: Advocate never set the “financial” expectations related to the conditional settlement offer (7×70). My own public testimony provided a date stamped archive of clarity regarding “money” (never the goal). My audience knows that a WaWa 20oz Coffee and Sizzli are pleasing. Monetary equivalent of $17.91 in honor of Pennsbury v Amuso ruling.
The advocate has filed a Complaint in Eastern District of Pennsylvania Federal Court PRO SE. He would greatly appreciate support through prayer or donation.