THE JUDICIAL COUNCIL OF CALIFORNIA

(a constitutional entity)

doing business as

THE NEVADA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

(a fictitious business)

THE STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA	|	Declaration of
AND DOE(S) PRESENTLY UNKNOWN	|	Thomas Murrell Thornhill III
	|
versus	|
	|	Case number [?]
Thomas Murrell Thornhill III	|
(a natural born, adult Man)	|	at: 201 Church Street
	|	Nevada City, California
_______________________________	/	Date: []

Declarant, ___________________________________________, is a competent witness and does Solemnly state that:

1.a. I am a natural born, adult white Man, one of the people of the United States of America and one of the people of California.

1.b. I am not a trained or licensed Attorney; so, of necessity, I am acting at all times within my fundamental right to defend my life, liberty, and property as set out in CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION (2001), Art. 1, Sec. 1 (from http://www.leginfo.ca.gov./.const/.article_1 [as of May 9, 2001]):

All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

2.b. That information bothered me enough that I started a course of research to try to verify or disprove it. I visited the courthouse in Nevada City, California and saw flags as described on the website displayed in several courtrooms. I visited the Nevada County Administrative Center and saw flags as described on the website displayed in the Board of Supervisors chambers. I started visiting various law libraries and reading various legal references. I present some of the results of my research here and in the attached and incorporated Memorandum of Points and Authorites.

3.a. Subsequently, Declarant has personally observed courts in Nevada County, California, behaving as described in In Re Palacio (1965), (238 Cal.App.2d 545, 546) [a case involving the court-martial of Palacio]:

"At the time he appeared for trial, petitioner was advised that the summary court-martial officer would act as judge, jury, prosecutor and defense counsel, and he previously had been advised that he had no right to counsel at a summary proceeding..."

3.b. Declarant did not understand said behavior by the court and researched California law to discover some statutory basis for such behavior.

3.c. Declarant currently believes from the observed behavior of the Nevada County courts that said courts are purporting to sit as courts-martial for some reason presently unknown to Declarant; purporting to sit in Admiralty for some reason presently unknown to Declarant; or sitting as Administrative Agencies for some reason presently unknown to Declarant. To the extent that said courts has failed or refused to tell me the Nature and Cause of this proceeding, I must hypothecate a defense. I have developed these hypotheses further in the attached and incorporated Memorandum of Points and Authorities concerning Courts-martial in California, Memorandum of Points and Authorities concerning Admiralty in California, and Memorandum of Points and Authorities concerning Administrative Agencies in California.

4.a. 50 U.S.C.A. Appx. (2001), § 454 reads (in part):

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this title [sections 451 to 471a of this Appendix], every person required to register pursuant to section 3 of this title [section 453 of this Appendix] who is between the ages of eighteen years and six months and twenty-six years, ... shall be liable for training and service in the Armed Forces of the United States; Provided, That each registrant shall be immediately liable for classification and examination, and shall, as soon as practicable following his registration, be so classified and examined, both physically and mentally, in order to determine his availablity for induction for training and service in the Armed Forces;...
No person shall be inducted into the Armed Forces for training and service or shall be inducted for training in the National Security Training Corps under this title [said sections] until his acceptability in all respects, including his physical and mental fitness, has been satisfactorily determined under standards prescribed by the Secretary of Defense; Provided, That the minimum standards for physical acceptability established pursuant to this subsection shall not be higher than those applied to persons inducted between the ages of 18 and 26 in January 1945;...
No person without his consent, shall be inducted for training and service in the Armed Forces or for training in the National Security Training Corps under this title [said sections], except as otherwise provided herein, after he has attained the twenty-sixth anniversary of the day of his birth....

4.c. In reasonable reliance upon that NOTICE OF CLASSIFICATION, Declarant believes he was thereby officially designated not-able-bodied in 1971.

5.a. It is an undisputed fact that declarant, currently at age 52, is now over the age of 26 years of age and believes he is no longer liable to induction into the military services of The United States.

5.b. It is an undisputed fact that declarant, currently at age 52, is now over the age of 45 and believes he is no longer liable to be a member of the unorganized militia of The United States or The State of California.

6.a. It is an undisputed fact that declarant is not now, and never knowingly has been, an inducted or enlisted member of the military services of The United States, nor of The State of California.

6.b. It is an undisputed fact that declarant is not now, and never knowingly has been, an inducted or enlisted non-commissioned or commissioned officer of the military services of The United States, nor of The State of California.

7.a. Declarant hypothecated that registering with the SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM might create the presumption that one had been inducted into the Armed Forces of The United States, but that hypothesis has been refuted by the United States Supreme Court:

These considerations together indicate to us that a selectee becomes "actually inducted" within the meaning of § 11 of the Act [Selective Training and Service Act of [September 16] 1940 (54 Stat. 885, 894, c. 720, 50 USCA appx § 311, 11 FCA title 50, appx 5, § 11)] {now 10 U.S.C.A. Appx. §§ 451-473} when in obedience to the order of his board and after the Army has found him acceptable for service he undergoes whatever ceremony or requirements of admission the War Department has prescribed.
(information in {} added, information in [] from 88 L.Ed. at p. 918) Billings v. Truesdell (1944), 321 U.S. 542, 88 L.Ed. 917, 927, 64 s.Ct. 737.

7.c. It is Declarant's reasonable inference that having been Classified as not acceptable for military service rendered Declarant not eligible nor liable for membership in the statutory unorganized militia of The United States, or of The State of California, and for any liabilities which may be attendant to that status.

7.d. On that basis, Declarant rebuts the undisclosed presumption that a United States court-martial (or a forum purporting to be sitting as such a court-martial) has any legal juridiction whatsoever over him.

I certify under the laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct.

Signed: ___________________________________________

At: ____________________________________

Dated: ________________________