Letter bearing witness to Nick Nanthos acting as a prosecutor of Virginia, regarding his obligations in law!!

Notice of a Demand for Accommodation of faith Church of the Ecumenical Redemption International Edmonton, Ecclesia 12431-90th Street Edmonton Alberta Canada. no code non commercial From minister Edward Jay Robin Tel: 780-399-6250 Fax: 780-609-7227 owlmon@gmail.com 12431-90th Street Edmonton Alberta Canada 11/05/2020 To: Attention Nick Nanthos 1 East Main Street Front Royal, Virginia 22630 Telephone: (540) 635-5441 Fax: (540) 635-4864 Dear Nick, I appreciate your busy schedule and do recognise that if you had a problem dispute or any reasonable proof that any of the facts, I was asked to get you to agree with by Christ, were wrong you would by now have replied. Re: your legal fiction case file number [187GM1900005195] with a scripturally foul way of rendering his name unrecognised in law. This is fair scriptural Notice to you as a man Nick that several other brothers and sisters have confirmed they bore witness to your not disputing the facts regarding Dean [Harting’s] faith and that you are indeed aware of Dean’s freedom from intimidation to violate his new found faith. We will be posting a notice to effect our witnessed agreement with you in a local paper and will send a copy to you for your and the Courts benefit. I do hope you have had the opportunity to read article 18 of the ICCPR and Article 27 of the Watchdog Vienna Convention as it relates to your office as it was and is my duty to warn you as my ministry deems it mandatory so as to avoid assumption we are making any use of dead corporate secular law as observed in Ezekiel 33:1-10. Myself and many others, as brother Deans witness, are asking through our Lord and Savior Yahushuwah in Yahuwah’s sacred name that you execute wisdom mercy and compassion for Dean his faith his medical disabilities and the most basic common law precept there is. If there is no damaged party to bear witness to the damage there is no legitimate claim and abuse of due process in equity is being abused. Locus Standi can be proven here as you are trying to harm Dean and make him a criminal for using, not selling, God’s created gifted and granted as his appointed herb bearing seed. In law, as I do believe you may know and now know to be aware of, that standing or locus standi is the term for the ability of a man like brother Dean to demonstrate to the inherent court, which Dean will indeed demand as of right, where brother Deans freedoms will be recognised or to demonstrate with witnesses to those officers assigned the job of processing the case , that there are indeed witnesses to, sufficient connection to, and harm from the law or action of the State so challenged, to support a man like Dean or any of his witnesses to participate in or intervene in the case. Standing exists from one of three causes: The man like brother Dean is directly being subjected to an discriminating negative and a scripturally unfounded punitive effect by the statute or color of law action in question that attempts to criminalize God’s gift of Genesis 1:29 that is protected by Romans 11:29. The harm Dean, and others reading holy scripture walking Christ’s path enjoying his fathers gifts wil experience , and being persecuted for growing and using what God sanctioned, will continue unless you recognise the duty in law laid before you as witnessed by many to bring a motion to stay the Charges against this new found disciple of Christ. In the Ulterior Dean can be entitled to in the form of private liability civil and punitive damages damages. He may also demand accomodation by a factually observed finding that the Federal or State color of law code either does not apply to him as a man, as the redeemed of Christ considering no proof or harm that Dean committed has been produced by the state, or prove that the ICCPR law Article 18 is void upon the State or can be ignored or nullified by any state service provider. This is called the "something to lose" doctrine, in which Dean has standing because he will be directly harmed by your intimidation nuisance and obstruction of his faith to commit joinder with a person of law and thereby be intimidated coerced and relieved of his freedom to practice his faith unmolested. This is an unlawful bully like attempt by the use of unGodly color of law to profit the Corporation using Deans body for surety. Your using Dean for a performance bond to give evidence of a contract to substantiate the issuance of securities whereby the court’s small business security issuer trades those securities’s for profit with the Judge collecting a percentage via his superannuation pension fund. The Punitive conditions for which you are asking the court for State relief to get a penal contract will generate hundreds of thousands of dollars for the States Prison and Corrections Administration contractor. The Party the State thinks is a person called Dean is not directly or indirectly harming any man or woman and the conditions by which they may petition the court for relief will be reliant upon the burden of proof for the State to prove the damages which would validate their claim absent color of law. The damaged party claiming standing asks for it because the harm involved has some reasonable direct relation to their situation of faith, and the continued existence of the harm reliant on color of law assumption may affect others who might not be able to ask a court for relief and negatively influenced. In the United States, this is the grounds for asking for a law to be struck down as violating the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, because while the plaintiff might not be directly affected, the law might so adversely affect others that one might never know what was not done or created by those who fear they would become subject to the law – the so-called "chilling effects" doctrine. The damaged party is granted automatic standing by act of law.[1] Under some environmental laws in the United States, a party may sue someone causing pollution to certain waterways without a federal permit, even if the party suing is not harmed by the pollution being generated. The law allows them to receive attorney's fees if they substantially prevail in the action. In some U.S. states, a person who believes a book, film or other work of art is obscene may sue in their own name to have the work banned directly without having to ask a District Attorney to do so. In the United States, the current doctrine is that a man cannot bring a suit challenging the constitutionality of a law unless the man claiming damage by the state in it’s imposition of law upon them can demonstrate that he/it is or will "imminently" be harmed by the law as Dean can. Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff, "lacks standing" to bring the suit, and will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim of unconstitutionality. To have a court declare a law unconstitutional, there must be a valid reason like a plaintiff claiming damages for the lawsuit. The party suing must have something to lose in order to sue unless it has automatic standing by action of law. In light of all that Nick it is our affiliation as a body of men and women standing under the positive law of Scripture that we honourably demand that you stay all charges against Dean until such time you can provide evidence of harm to the state or anyone else by Deans actions!! Blessings upon you acting upon your oath Nick. Your Oath to uphold the US Constitution and the 1st Amendment and the treaties to which the US has bound itself to! !! minister Edward Jay Robin: