Posted 10:34 AM by Creditwrench

Here is a list of questions that a certain Yahoo group is telling it's
members they ought to use when questioning witnesses in a credit card
case.

Some are good and some are bad. Just for fun and practice which ones do you think are bad and why?

1. Is it your testimony "Any Company" is a Delaware Corporation? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

Factually what is a Delaware Corporation?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

2. Is it your testimony that as a Delaware Corporation "Any Company" is subject to the "Title 5 Section 1503 Minimum Books and Records for Credit Card Institutions" banking regulations of the State of Delaware? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

Factually what is the State of Delaware?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

3. Is it your testimony "Any Company" performed Audit Reports as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 3.2? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

4. Factually what is an Audit?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept transaction journals as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 4.3? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

5. Factually what is a transaction journal?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

6. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept general ledger records as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 4.3? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

7. Factually what is a general ledger?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

8. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Customer Applications as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.1? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

9. Factually what is a Customer Application?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

10. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Customer Correspondence as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.3? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

11. Factually what is Customer Correspondence?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Credit Files as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.4? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

12. Factually what is a Credit File? <>Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept a Trial Balance as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.5? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

13. Factually what is a Trial Balance?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept a Delinquency Report as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.6? Yes or no.

14. Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

15. Factually what is a Delinquency Report?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Card Holder Agreements as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.7? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

16. Factually what is a Card Holder Agreement?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Statements as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.9? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

17. Factually what is a Statement?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Transaction Journals as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.9? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

18. Factually what is a Transaction Journal?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Record of Extensions of Credit over $5,000.00 as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.11? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

19. Factually what is a Record of Extensions of Credit over $5,000.00?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

20. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Collection Letters as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.12? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

20. Factually what is a Collection Letter?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

21. Factually what is money?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony the Audited Credit Card records of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

22.Factually where are the Audited records?

23. Did you audit the records? Yes or no.

24. Why aren't those Audited records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony the Transaction Journals of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

25. Did you create the Transaction Journals? Yes or no.

26. Factually where are the Transaction Journals?

27. Why aren't those Transaction Journals here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law.

28. Is it your testimony the General Ledger records of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

29. Did you create the General Ledger records? Yes or no.

30. Factually where are the General Ledger records?

31. Why aren't those records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

32. Is it your testimony the Trial Balance of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.
So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

33. Did you create the Trial Balance? Yes or no.

34. Factually where are the Trial Balance records?

35. Why aren't those Trial Balance records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony 15 USC 1566(a) as passed by Congress allows a consumer to dispute the Statements? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

36. Factually what is a law?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" provided instructions on the back of the Credit Card Statements to dispute errors on the Credit Card Statement? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

37. If a Credit Card Statement is disputed, what records are used to verify the accuracy of the Credit Card statement?

38. Why aren't those records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

39. Is it your testimony the Statements of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

40. Factually what records were used to verify the Statements are correct?

Did you use those records to verify the accuracy of the Statements? Yes or no.

Why aren't those records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken

Is it your testimony "Any Company" is a Delaware Corporation? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

42. Factually what is a Delaware Corporation?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

43. Is it your testimony that as a Delaware Corporation "Any Company" is subject to the "Title 5 Section 1503 Minimum Books and Records for Credit Card Institutions" banking regulations of the State of Delaware? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

44. Factually what is the State of Delaware?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" performed Audit Reports as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 3.2? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

45. Factually what is an Audit?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

46. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept transaction journals as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 4.3? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

47. Factually what is a transaction journal?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept general ledger records as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 4.3? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

48. Factually what is a general ledger?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Customer Applications as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.1? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

49. Factually what is a Customer Application?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

50. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Customer Correspondence as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.3? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

51. Factually what is Customer Correspondence?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Credit Files as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.4? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?
So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

52. Factually what is a Credit File?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

53. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept a Trial Balance as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.5? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

54. Factually what is a Trial Balance?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

55. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept a Delinquency Report as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.6? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

<>Factually what is a Delinquency Report?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken

56. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Card Holder Agreements as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.7? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

57. Factually what is a Card Holder Agreement?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

58. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Statements as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.9? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

59. Factually what is a Statement?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

60. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Transaction Journals as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.9? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

61. Factually what is a Transaction Journal?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.


62. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Record of Extensions of Credit over $5,000.00 as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.11? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

63. Factually what is a Record of Extensions of Credit over $5,000.00?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

64. Is it your testimony "Any Company" kept Collection Letters as specified in Title 5 Section 1503 7.12? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

65. Factually what is a Collection Letter?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

66. Factually what is money?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

67. Is it your testimony the Audited Credit Card records of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

68. Factually where are the Audited records?

Did you audit the records? Yes or no.

69. Why aren't those Audited records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

70. Is it your testimony the Transaction Journals of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

71. Did you create the Transaction Journals? Yes or no.

72. Factually where are the Transaction Journals?

73. Why aren't those Transaction Journals here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law.

74. Is it your testimony the General Ledger records of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

Did you create the General Ledger records? Yes or no.

75. Factually where are the General Ledger records?

76. Why aren't those records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

Is it your testimony the Trial Balance of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

77. Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

78. Did you create the Trial Balance? Yes or no.

79, Factually where are the Trial Balance records?

Why aren't those Trial Balance records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

80.Is it your testimony 15 USC 1566(a) as passed by Congress allows a consumer to dispute the Statements? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

81. Factually what is a law?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken

82. Is it your testimony "Any Company" provided instructions on the back of the Credit Card Statements to dispute errors on the Credit Card Statement? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no?

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

83. If a Credit Card Statement is disputed, what records are used to verify the accuracy of the Credit Card statement?

84. Why aren't those records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

85. Is it your testimony the Statements of account number from "Any Company" show I owe "Any Company" money? Yes or no.

Is that an arbitrary opinion? Yes or no.

So it's based on facts currently within your knowledge? Yes or no.

86. Factually what records were used to verify the Statements are correct?

88. Did you use those records to verify the accuracy of the Statements? Yes or no.

89.Why aren't those records here today?

Remember we are trying to set up the witness to contradict themselves or get the judge to sustain an objection from the Plaintiff's attorney their witness is not able/competent to testify. Or show the witness doesn't have firsthand knowledge of the account. Or "Any Company" didn't follow the law. When this happens, ask for all the testimony to be stricken.

If you would like to answer any of the above please do so by clicking on this link and join the groups.yahoo.com/group/Cornforth-Strategies/ group.

Posted 2:23 PM by Creditwrench

You must have the special Sony player to listen to the September meeting of the Jaccuse national headquarters group.

Click here to download the special Sony player for this audio post

Several interesting topics were discussed last night including a special report on the Pembina Indian Tribe. This has been discussed before but this report details how the internet promotions are nothing but a pure fraud.

Tribal membership, tribal drivers licenses and tribal license plates are not available anywhere at the present time but the tribe might consider letting people in on an immigrant status at some time in the future. If it is the J-accuse membership will be among the first to know about it and if it is ever tribal approved the J-accuse group will feature the announcements.




The Oklahoma City National J-accuse group is helping to fund and put out the following yard signs in order to hopefully stop the new gasoline tax the state wants to put into effect. With the gas prices as high as they are now who needs more taxes?

Posted 5:34 AM by Creditwrench

Vinny Tecchio conference call for 08.23/2005

Posted 10:25 PM by Creditwrench

Click here to download the special Sony player for these audio files."

We had an extremely interesting meeting yesterday evening. We
discussed a number of things and one of those things that Richard
discussed in detail was the Cornforth strategies Yahoo egroup.

The audio recording of the meeting is posted on the http://j-accuse.blogspot.com blog so that it went out to Carol's group and anyone subscribed to her group or who follows what is posted on the blog.

As promised, I did ask Richard about Chuck Conces and Richard gave his
approval of Chuck and his work. However, I also spoke to him about the
problem of associate referall links which are links that carry a
question mark and then some combination of numbers and or letters and
he is in complete agreement with me that such links should not be
allowed.

Discussion about some other researcher either pro or con is very
acceptable but in general we need to refrain from giving links at all
unless it is to some official state or government or court website, a
media resource or some such thing as that.

This is just common courtesy to the host of whatever forum one might
be in. Posting links to competing websites or forums is just plain
rude since it tends to lead others away from the discussion group and
in many cases the reader who follows the link never comes back.

Another reason it is an unacceptable practice is because search engine
spiders do crawl the egroups and message forums from time to time and
one of the prime things that those spiders are looking for is links.
If that link happens to lead to some web site that the webmaster or
owner or moderator of this forum (for example) disapproves of or which
happens to carry some inappropriate comment or content the spiders
pick that up and the two sites become "associated" with each other.
That is not good.

So in general let's be very sparing with links. If someone wants to go
see what you are referring to they can do a search for that site. If
the site is to an official or otherwise trusted site then fine. No
problem. Obviously the rules or guidelines on that cannot be strictly
enforced because to do so would stifle conversation and turn people
off badly so all I normally intend to do is ask people to use
discretion when posting links to other sites. Links can end up being
very helpful or can have unintended results.

Linking is one of the key issues in search engine optimization and
many webmasters go to great lengths and even pay high prices for links
to the right web sites. Getting mention and linked to one's web site
or blog on another web site or blog can be a big boost for the web
site receiving the incoming link or it can be a very bad thing
publicity wise depending on many factors. Search engine optimization
and linking are extremely important and a subject that I am constantly
studying as well. Content and linking are the two keys to top search
engine rankings. How that content is placed on the page is also very
important but of course I'm not going to worry about that kind of
stuff here in this forum and you folks don't need to worry about it
either.

Anyway, the audio from last night's meeting is on the j-accuse blog
and there is also a link to the proper codec (player) there as well.
The reason I use the Sony dvf format is because it makes extremely
compressed files so uploading and downloading as well as storage space
is kept to a bare minimum. The file is about an hour and a half long
and there was a lot of joking around and laughing for the first few
minutes but once things got settled in it was a great meeting.

Posted 6:53 PM by Creditwrench

Having to move out isn't necessarily the end of the road. It is only over when you give up and you are the only one who can make the decision to do that. And even giving up isn't the only possible outcome. You can stay and help educate others about the mistakes you made and how to avoid them. The first mistake you made was in not knowing about non-judicial foreclosures and making sure you didn't get stuck with one. So lack of knowledge was your first mistake. Give up and just go about your life and you rob others of the knowledge and experience you have. Stick around and maybe start a J-accuse group in your area and work to get the law changed in your state. Work to become a leader in your own right, working to educate lawmakers about
the injustices that are being heaped on innocent people by the legal system. Those are other things you can do to fight back. We can and should fight back in any way we can when we see an injustice being done or about to be done.

I've done that a lot over the years. One of the more notable that I have done was to start the 10th Amendment Group here in Oklahoma and end up helping defeat the push to hand the United Nations a new United States Constitution for it's 50th birthday back in 1996. We didn't win the 10th Amendment fight because the government did an end run around us but we did defeat the CON-CON or Constitutional Convention.

That fight was spearheaded by Sen. Charlie Duke of Colorado and Sen. Don Rogers of Calif. Charlie Duke was the real leader of the two. They alerted people all over the U.S. as to the danger that was about to befall us. They got people who could put together a group in each state to work to deny their state the number of delegates needed to hold a CON-CON.

I and my group stepped up to the plate here in Oklahoma. We made it a hot button issue but we were not alone in the fight. Other groups and lobbyists got into it too. We probably could
not have done it alone but we did our part. Working with other groups all across the nation we managed to prevent the dreaded CON-CON from ever happening.

One of the good things that came out of that effort was starting my
MAGNA CARTA NEWS SERVICE which is still very active to this day.

They got people who could put together a group in each state to work to deny their state the number of delegates needed to hold a CON-CON. I and my group stepped up to the plate here in
Oklahoma. We made it a hot button issue but we were not alone in the fight. Other groups and lobbyists got into it too. We probably could not have done it alone but we did our part. Working with other groups all across the nation we managed to prevent the dreaded CON-CON from
ever happening.

One of the good things that came out of that effort was starting my
MAGNA CARTA NEWS SERVICE which is still very active to this day

Posted 6:45 AM by Creditwrench

--- In Cornforth-Strategies@yahoogroups.com, "charliegirl2005"
wrote:
> I'm starting to be angry now. Something that I wasn't much of
yesterday.
> You know how you can 'feel something' rising up on the inside?
>
> Last night I couldn't sleep so I got my pillow and comforter and
went to the sofa. I thought over
> the events of the day yesterday.

Something like Charlie Brown and his security blanket eh? (LOL)

>
> This is all moot, I realize, UNLESS I decide to strike back and not
throw in the towel.
>
> I have all this paperwork and nowhere to 'fire' it.
> And essentially no gun either, now that we're having to move out.
> Later,
> Charlene
>
Having to move out isn't necessarily the end of the road. It is only
over when you give up and you are the only one who can make the
decision to do that. And even giving up isn't the only possible
outcome. You can stay and help educate others about the mistakes you
made and how to avoid them. The first mistake you made was in not
knowing about non-judicial foreclosures and making sure you didn't get
stuck with one. So lack of knowledge was your first mistake. Give up
and just go about your life and you rob others of the knowledge and
experience you have. Stick around and maybe start a J-accuse group in
your area and work to get the law changed in your state. Work to
become a leader in your own right, working to educate lawmakers about
the injustices that are being heaped on innocent people by the legal
system. Those are other things you can do to fight back. We can and
should fight back in any way we can when we see an injustice being
done or about to be done.

I've done that a lot over the years. One of the more notable that I
have done was to start the 10th Amendment Group here in Oklahoma and
end up helping defeat the push to hand the United Nations a new United
States Constitution for it's 50th birthday back in 1996. We didn't win
the 10th Amendment fight because the government did an end run around
us but we did defeat the CON-Con or Constitutional Convention.

That fight was spearheaded by Sen. Charlie Duke of Colorado and Sen.
Don Rogers of Calif. Charlie Duke was the real leader of the two. They
alerted people all over the U.S. as to the danger that was about to
befall us. They got people who could put together a group in each
state to work to deny their state the number of delegates needed to
hold a CON-CON. I and my group stepped up to the plate here in
Oklahoma. We made it a hot button issue but we were not alone in the
fight. Other groups and lobbyists got into it too. We probably could
not have done it alone but we did our part. Working with other groups
all across the nation we managed to prevent the dreaded CON-CON from
ever happening.

One of the good things that came out of that effort was starting my
MAGNA CARTA NEWS SERVICE which is still very active to this day. In
fact I'll be using it to get as much information as possible out of a
super secret meeting that will take place here in OKC very soon. That
meeting will start the beginning of a very tough fight that will face
a great number of of debtors in the very near future. Getting advance
notice and information about this new threat will be key in fighting
it for a lot of people in the future. Right now I can't even talk
about what that threat is because if I do that I'm going to pull the
trigger that starts the "beast" (LOL)in motion. But one thing I can
tell you is that it is a relatively new trick that lawyers can pull on
you now and in some high stakes cases it is being used with
devastating results. All it is going to take is for a few smart alec
lawyers to find out about it and realize that it can also be used
against debtors in much smaller cases. And the reason I don't want to
talk about it is that I don't want to be the one that tips them off.
>
> http://www.jurisdictionary.com/index.asp?refercode=SC0000000

Now then, what do I have to do to get you to stop advertising
Jurisdictionary in this forum? As you know I do support
Jurisdictionary and I too have an affiliate number but I don't
advertise it in this forum because doing so isn't fair to Richard
Cornforth and this is supposed to be Richard's forum.

We all have to make money however we can but there are some places
where attempting to do so is simply inappropriate and this is one of
them. Please stop it.

Posted 2:16 AM by Creditwrench

An attorney must file an appearance in PA

I might have error in judgment, but I did think it through.

PMT, the trust, collects rents and pays for repairs.

A utility company doing work on the street, put black top
over the vent sewer line, which caused many back up
and thousands in cost.

So I did not pay this bills personally, the PMT trust did.

That was the thinking behind why I filed suit in the trusts
name, it was that trust that absorbed the loss.

Am I wrong here, if I sued personally, I was thinking they would
have it tossed because I was not damaged.

The property is in it's own separate trust.

The trusts are so called constitutional common law contract in trust form
(pure trust)

So I am supposed to be out of the statutory reach, but I might not
be that way in the courts ?

The courts coined the term unincorporated business trust, that was not
my term, but it came the closest to what I use.
Just want to make sure I do not get tossed out on my ear, court is
set for Dec 2005.

Thank you again Bill, Gary



I really don\'t know about corporate law and trusts would fall into the
realm of corporations, LLCs and the like.

Whether or not you did the trust the right way is something I have no
idea about but I do know that many such trusts are bogus and based on
scam ideas. If you did a family or other type trust you would most
likely have hired an attorney to do it for you or you would have at
least registered the trust with some state or other. Maybe you used
one of those offshore trusts. I don\'t know. If your trust was not done
properly or was some kind of offshore trust the IRS will not normally
recognize those. Neither will the courts. But your trust,
unincorporated or otherwise is a non-natural person and in most cases
non-natural persons cannot represente themselves in court but rather
must be represented by an attorney.

In your situation why would you claim that you were before the court
as a trust of any kind? The only way you would do that is if the
trust were being sued or had filed suit against someone else.

The trust is supposed to be a hidey hole so unless the trust were
directly summmoned for some reason you would not even want to mention
that it existed. If the trust was not summoned it would have no reason
to be before the court at all since it would not be a party to the case.

So whether or not you did the right thing would depend on who was
being sued. If the trust were being sued and you wanted to save money
by representing the trust in court then you would have to apply to the
court to do so. If the trust were to be sued you could not represent
the trust without the permission of the court. Only an attorney could
do that and in some states he would have to inform the court by filing
a notice of appearance and in other states the mere filing of a motion

Just want to make sure I do not get tossed out on my ear, court is
set for Dec 2005.

Thank you again Bill,
Gary

I really don't know about corporate law and trusts would fall into the
realm of corporations, LLCs and the like.

Whether or not you did the trust the right way is something I have no
idea about but I do know that many such trusts are bogus and based on
scam ideas.



If you did a family or other type trust you would most
likely have hired an attorney to do it for you or you would have at
least registered the trust with some state or other.

Maybe you used
one of those offshore trusts. I don't know. If your trust was not done
properly or was some kind of offshore trust the IRS will not normally
recognize those. Neither will the courts.

But your trust, unincorporated or otherwise is a non-natural person and in most cases
non-natural persons cannot represente themselves in court but rather
must be represented by an attorney.

In your situation why would you claim that you were before the court
as a trust of any kind? The only way you would do that is if the
trust were being sued or had filed suit against someone else.

The trust is supposed to be a hidey hole so unless the trust were
directly summmoned for some reason you would not even want to mention
that it existed. If the trust was not summoned it would have no reason
to be before the court at all since it would not be a party to the case.

So whether or not you did the right thing would depend on who was
being sued.

If the trust were being sued and you wanted to save money
by representing the trust in court then you would have to apply to the
court to do so. If the trust were to be sued you could not represent
the trust without the permission of the court. Only an attorney could
do that and in some states he would have to inform the court by filing
a notice of appearance and in other states the mere filing of a motion
or an answer or whatever he files serves as his notice of appearance.

That is something else that we need to know about. Does the attorney
have a notice of appearance before the court or does he even need one
in your state. If he needs one then check to see if he did in fact
file one. If multiple attorneys from differing firms show up in a case
does the newly introduced attorney work for the same firm as the first
or has the plaintiff hired a new attorney or what? If a new attorney
enters the case then did he do so correctly? All that is usually
explained in your court\'s rules of procedure and in order to know
those things and more you must be familiar with the rules of civil
procedure and your rules of evidence. They will answer your questions
most of the time. If you aren\'t familiar with them then be prepared to
lose because you probably will.

DeWayne Flint just posted about that in another forum. I posted what
he had to say on the j-accuse blog.

, "Gary D"
wrote:
> Bill - Thank you that was appreciated.
>
> I am here to learn, in 1999 I put everything into
> trusts, that is why I need this case law.
>
> I do not want to have to hire a lawyer for small
> things.
>
> Or are you saying I can not represent the trust ?
>
> Gary




or an answer or whatever he files serves as his notice of appearance.