New Zealand Transition Initiatives Social Network

From oil dependence to local resilience

The Case Of Jerome Daly v. First National Bank Of Montgomery, MN. a/k/a "The Credit River Decision."

Happy New Year all
You will find below an item that I sent to our American cousins to start a discussion there on Transition USA. I feel that this case may have some ramifications here, depending of course, what is in the New Zealand Reserve Bank Act.
Wo knows, maybe because of how the banks here also create money out of thin air, the "consoderation aspect" that defeated the First Bank of Montgomery could do the same here.
Comments and crticisms invited
Kind regards
Geoff. Waterhouse



Greetings from New Zealand to all our "TT American Cousins."
My name is Geoff. Waterhouse and i am a member the Steering Committee of TT Bay of Islands in New Zealand's Winterless North. I will get to the point.
I recently watched "Zeitgeist Addendum" (highly recommended for those who haven't seen it) on Google. It did a great job of exposing the Federal Reserve Banking scam, as also did Money As Debt which i also highly recommend and which can also be watched on Google. There is also, in my personal opinion, some rubbish on Zeitgeist Addendum, but the part about the money system is great.
OK. There are 2 really amazing items in the Zeitgeist movie.
The first is the reference to a publication called "Modern Money Mechanics," which, incredibly, was originally produced by Public Information Center, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. It was available free of charge!!!!!!! It is now out of print, supposedly, but in view of its content, I am surprised it even saw the light of day. I did a Google search "Modern Money Mechanics" found a site and was able to print out a copy. It really is incredible and i suggest that anyone wanting documentary evidence straight from the horse's mouth about how the Fed creates money out of thin air, get hold of it.
The second item is the most amazing and is The Jerome Daly Case which took place in 1969. A simple Google search will provide a whole load of information.
I will just give a brief summary here so that you have an idea of the magnitude of the implications for the Federal Reserve as a result of the decision, which has never been appealed or overturned and is, therefore, apparently still law in the USA.
Jerome Daly had a mortgage with the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota. In Spring 1967, he was $476.00 in arrears, the bank foreclosed and bought the property at a Sheriff's sale on June 26, 1967.
The bank sued for possession and a jury trial , presided over by Martin V. Mahoney, Justice of the Peace, Credit River Township, Scott County, Minnesota, was held on December 7, 1968. The record of the trial is a source of wonderment to me. The record state, and i quote, "A Jury of Talesmen were called. I had never even heard of "Talesmen" so I looked it up and here is what I found on Wiktionary:-
NounSingular
tales
Plural
tales


tales (plural tales)

(law) A person available to fill vacancies in a jury.
(law) A book or register of people available to fill jury vacancies.
(law) A writ to summon people to court to fill vacancies in a jury.

Interesting eh?

The bank's president, one Lawrence V. Morgan (interesting name) appeared along with lawyer R. Melby for the plaintiff and Jerome Daly, who was a lawyer apparently, appeared on his own behalf.
You will find below an item from just one of the sites that refer to Jerome Daly's case and "The Credit River Decision"
You may also be interested to know that Martin V.Mahoney died in " a boating accident" some 6 months later but, according to reports, his body was full of poison when found.
Anyway, in summary, "The Credit River Decision," which is, apparently, still "The Law OF The Land" declared the following
# the Federal Reserve Act unconstitutional and VOID
# holding the National Banking Act unconstitutional and VOID
# declaring a mortgage acquired by the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota in the regular course of its business, along with the foreclosure and
# the sheriff's sale, to be VOID





A WORD FROM AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE
WHO KNEW AND WORKED WITH
JUSTICE MARTIN V. MAHONEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ABOUT THE CASE.

The "Credit River Decision" handed down by a jury of 12 on a cold day in December, in the Credit River Township Hall, was an experience that I'll never forget.

The Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court had phoned me a week before the trial and asked me if I would be an associate justice in assisting Justice Martin V. Mahoney since he had never handled a jury trial before. I accepted, and it took me two hours to get my car running in the 22 below zero weather.

I got to the courtroom about 30 minutes before trial, and helped get the wood stove going, since the trial was being held in an unheated storeroom of a general store. This was the first time I met Justice Mahoney, and I was impressed with his no nonsense manner of handling matters before him. My object was to help pick the jury, and to keep Jerome Daly and the attorney representing the Bank of Montgomery from engaging in a fist fight. The courtroom was highly charged, and the Jury was all business.

The banker testified about the mortgage loan given to Jerome Daly, but then Daly cross examined the banker about the creating of money "out of thin air," and the banker admitted that this was standard banking practice. When Justice Mahoney heard the banker testify that he could "create money out of thin air," Mahoney said, "It sounds like fraud to me." I looked at the faces of the jurors, and they were all agreeing with Mahoney by shaking their heads and by the looks on their faces.

I must admit that up until that point, I really didn't believe Jerome's theory, and thought he was making this up. After I heard the testimony of the banker, my mouth had dropped open in shock, and I was in complete disbelief. There was no doubt in my mind that the Jury would find for Daly.

Jerome Daly had taken on the banks, the Federal Reserve Banking System, and the money lenders, and had won.

It is now twenty eight years since this "Landmark Decision," and Justice Mahoney is quoted more often than any Supreme Court justice ever was. The money boys that run the "private Federal Reserve Bank" soon got back at Mahoney by poisoning him in what appeared to have been a fishing boat accident (but with his body pumped full of poison) in June of 1969, less than 6 months later.

Both Jerome Daly and Justice Martin V. Mahoney are truly the greatest men that I have ever had the pleasure to meet. The Credit River Decision was and still is the most important legal decision ever decided by a Jury. - Bill Drexler



I sincerely believe that if information about this case can be dissemineted nationwide, it could help the many Americans currently in foreclosure and living in tents as a result of losing their homes, to take on and beat "the Bankigarchy" just as Jerome Daly did. Maybe there is, somewhere in the USA,
a "caring lawyer," which is the same type of oxymoron as "honest politician," but you never know, there may be just one who would consider, maybe, a class action lawsuit against 1 Shylock outfit. The Daly case would, on the face of it, seem to provide a suitable precedent.

I don't know, as yet, what the situation is here in New Zealand. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand is owned by the government who, supposedly, are "public servants" elected to work for the good of the people. Yea Right.

I wish a Happy New Year to all our American cousins and a successful banker hunting season
Kind regards
Geoff. Waterhouse,
Opua,
Northland,
new Zealand

Views: 201

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I see now that you are in Taranaki. Would you like to e mail me your phone number? My address is "paihiaradisecabs@yahoo.com
Hi Geoff - yes I'm down in Taranaki. I'm happy to call you or you call me on 06 273 8030 whatever you like.
Cheers
Liz
Thanks for the email address Geoff I wait for your call shall I?
Hi Liz,it a

I had wondered at the applicability of challenging the banking system over a foreclosure and thought it would be a great means by which to raise awareness of the fraudulent nature of our monetary system.

Yes I was aware of those cases in America as I've been followng the unfolding of the subprime mortgage crisis since August 2007 with a great deal of interest. As for doing so in context of the securitization processs by banks, unfortunately it appears you missed the aspect of the Rupa case where they attempted to challenge the validity of their mortgage contract with the bank within the same context and the court found in favour of the bank thereby setting AFAIK setting a legal precedent. Don't take my word for it though as I'm no lawyer. It perhaps may be able to be challenged as unless it stipulates in your contract that the bank is acting as an agent for the mortgage counterparty who bought your mortgage note, you may be able to contest the banks authority to do so as they are no longer party to the contract . Did they suddenly change the terms of the contract? If so, and they are no long party to the contract as they sold ownership to another party, surely they are in breach of it.

Before legal action I'd first threaten going public (not good for the banks as they're not exactly the flavour of the month at the moment) and perhaps talk to your local MP as is within your rights, due to the fact that the banks demanded that the government (NZ taxpayer) underwrite their risk through the deposit insurance scheme.

Good luck. Hope everything with your case works out ok.
Hi James yes the political rather than the strictly legal angle is probably the way to go. As taxpayers supporting bail outs we could become beneficiaries of those schemes in the legal sense. Anyway that is an argument you could run. The idea about going public is a very good one.
The ball park has changed a little since the Rupa case. I will get the case and have a closer look though.
Hope you will keep in touch on this one as it is very lonely at the moment and I need all the support I can get.

kind regards
Liz
Hi folks

New here and I feel I ought to contribute some of my own findings into this subject. The fraud in mortgages mainly concerns the prommisory note. Banks have been in the habit of taking the prommisory note/valuable consideration of the borrower and before the settlement they monetize the note by stamping the back side of the note(altering a negotiable instrument) with "pay to the order of" and deposit it into a demand deposit account(fraudulent conversion of securities) where it remains for 30 days. After 30 days they treat it a abandoned and use the funds to pay the "borrower" who in effect funds his own loan, this all done without full disclosure. The note is then sold on and hypothecated on up to ten times, again without knowledge or consent from the owner/drawer of the note. So there are several elements here to be investigated. Viewing the original note(the only one that has value) will show evidence of this conversion which is fraudulent. The fact that the bank did not present funds of its own or valuable consideration to the contract and in fact used your own consideration would be a breach of contract voiding the contract. This opens many remedies to mortgage forclosure that can be explored. First step would be to start asking the bank for disclosure of source of funds for the loan and location of YOUR note that they purported to HOLD as security. Only the holder in due course of the origonal note has a right to call on the note.

Tuohu

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Groups -- Login Required to Join

Events -- NZ Time -- Record and Share Notes

© 2012   Created by Deirdre Kent.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service