6-Step Process

Alphonse Faggiolo has a “6-step process” that he walks trespassers through when they encroach upon his rights, property, or intent to commit fraud based on “presumptions”. The basic tenet of his method are supported in the more lengthy quotes from AVR below this list. These are my notes from Alphonse’ review of his process, not a literal transcription. I encourage you to read and listen to the resources listed below for a more complete “pitcher”…

1. Mail Fraud: unsolicited mail with these “issues”:
   1. no contact person; “corporate fiction” organization
   2. using USPS to make “claims”; no injured party
   3. no named man/woman to address, no “standing”
   4. no wet signature, no full lawful name
   5. extortion of money by “fraud” (corp. fictions)
   6. bring in “outside eyes”
2. Go on offense; facts in “your testimony”, file claim.
   1. draft separate “testimony” of status
   2. include status testimony-affidavit” every claim
   3. you become the hunter, they are hunted
   4. Testimony-Affidavit of Fact (specific claim)
      1. back with evidence, connect the dots
      2. They cannot rebut your statement of facts
   5. Notice of Claim (specific trespasses)
      1. trespassed upon my property
      2. “uttered forged documents against me”
      3. presented through mail fraud
      4. add a financial component (invoice/fee schedule)
3. State Criminal Complaints (State)
   1. Write criminal complaints
   2. One document per incident, per infraction
   3. base your format on their forms: familiarity
   4. copies to (see Find Grand Jury below):
      1. District Attorney of County
      2. Attorney General of State
      3. “present copies to grand jury…”
4. Federal Criminal Complaints (Federal)
   1. Call local FBI, “Special Agent in Charge”
   2. Forward Federal Criminal Complaints
   3. Each complaint on separate sheets.
   4. To bring suit to you, they must have “standing”
      1. no damaged injured party = no standing
      2. can’t produce a “witness” with knowledge
5. B.A.R. Grievances & Judicial Complaints
   1. B.A.R. grievances; required to report to insurer
   2. puts insurance coverage “at risk”
      1. attorney’s (1-2 strikes, lose coverage)
      2. law firms (3 strikes, lose coverage)
6. Judicial Claim
   1. Attorney speaks out:
      1. “objection for rule 602”
      2. Attorney has no personal knowledge
      3. cannot testify to facts
      4. require attorney put under oath
   2. If “denied”, file Judicial complaint against Judge
   3. Judges operate by Canon – look up state canon
      1. Judges also carry indemnity insurance (claim)
      2. exponential damages at judicial level

A lien on their property (how?)

1. solid documentation / evidence
2. statements of fact
3. persecution / claim with:
   1. no legal standing
   2. no jurisdiction in the matter
   3. presume to have rights on my property
   4. no personal knowledge of the matter
4. …procedure (?) Administrative claims (?)
5. “They, we, and us”
   1. Who is “they”?
   2. produce the witness
   3. with a full lawful name
   4. that has standing
   5. can make a claim

Notes & Comments:

The 6-Step Process Video; Alphonse Faggiolo

Alphonse says “affidavit”, AVR would argue “only the dead issue affidavits“. Submit testimony from the living in the “form of an affidavit”, see AVR#2790, or [TTS video]

“An ‘administrative complaint’ is usually all that it takes to cause a ‘tag’ or book entry to be made on any particular bond. Any particular bond, once complained against three or more times, causes a change in underwriting bond ‘risk’. For bonded Bar attorneys, who in many cases may also be appointed, commissioned, or elected to ‘public office’ as ‘Judge’, ‘Clerk of Court’, etc. when/if their bond is complained against for good and reasonable cause, their bond may be ‘pulled’, and due to loss of effective bond or ‘suretyship’, they cannot ‘practice’ or ‘discharge’ the duty of the office held, or occupied.” (AVR#1026 pg2 p1)

“In short, the bond maker-issuer is the bonding party for the benefit or on behalf of the ‘bondee’, ie. the purported ‘public officer’, ‘employee’, or ‘official’. This would extend as well to all other ‘public employees’ and ‘agents’-‘agencies’, etc.” (AVR#1026 pg2 p2)

“Once three complaints are filed against any bond, assuming they are with merit and well supported by fact and ‘law’ of the ‘breach’ of fiduciary duty, the bond is most always pulled or revoked. The ‘servant’ at ‘risk’ by assuming the responsibilities of operating in any ‘official capacity’ or by ‘employment’, can no longer be underwritten as a ‘no risk’ or ‘low risk’ contract.” (AVR#1026 pg2 p3)

If the bond is not in existence, the [bonded – person being bonded or insured] is ‘exposed’ and without ‘coverage’ by any ‘surety’. Therefore, there is no ‘guarantor’ behind the agent, officer, official, or employee having ‘exposure’, by ‘assumption of risk’, of a material breach or injury in fact by the [bonded]. This leaves the person under taint or cloud of operating ‘in the public interest’ without the constitutionally and statutorily required bond, and therefore, in tacit violation of the constitutions and statutes under the scheme of ‘law’. (AVR#1026 pg2 p6-7)

Notes & Comments:

Reference: AVR#1026

There are plenty of chinks in their armor, we need only learn where the chinks are and how to exploit them to remove them from the seats where they commit their abuse (dp)