Just requesting a quick prayer for me Friday morning, please. 

I'm defending a fraudulent foreclosure case against me and I know that it is from the abundance of case law, statutes, etc. 

I've got the info in my head, I just need to be able to spit it out the way that it needs to come out, in the right order, at the right time.  

No "crisis" here, per se. 

I just know that I'm weary in body and going to get some more rest tonight. 

Thanks. Jim

more prayers

We get to go further down the path to knock out a void judgment in a 3 document process. 

Was definitely under a lot of duress this morning. 

Short version of a fraudulent foreclosure: 

I'm not opposed to paying for a property, per se, when it the real party in interest. 

But, why would you pay some entity that "says" that you owe them, and all they have are unauthenticated and uncertified copies of paperwork with no proper paperwork showing the proper transfer of the "debt"? You wouldn't. 

There's rules, laws, statutes and procedures, etc. for doing the paperwork. 

An assignment of the mortgage is not a transfer of the debt. You have to show the paper trail(business records) of you acquiring the debt - hence, actual damages in fact - in order to "have a claim" to come to court on. 

I made the arguments as best as I could under the gun, however, judge decided against me as they weren't good enough to make her question plaintiff attorney and produce the original promissory note ON THE RECORD. He showed a FEDEX envelope and said that he had it right there. 

Hence, now the judge is prejudicial by not making him enter it on the record. 

Therefore, the theme is that "if you don't pay the mortgage, you don't keep the house", irrelevant of the fact that the entity may not be legally entitled to foreclose and it's all a smoke screen. 

Angry? No. I ought to be. But no. It's the system and the judges are bent into a cut and dry mindset that the attorneys can't be wrong when the pro se litigant challenges them and the judge. 

An uncertified and unauthenticated copy of a promissory note is not the original on the record to be considered. It's hearsay. 

That "copy" is a counterfeit security in violation of 18 USC 513. A felony. 

This is what the judge accepted. This is what was in my pleadings. 

It's easier for me to sit at the table and visit over this than to be in front of a judge trying to educate the judge on the spot. 

I suppose that my temperment is still in process of being changed to be able to do this confidently. 

I think that i have a clue of what the block might be. And it'll need some working on, for sure. 

I do realize that i have a fairly good grasp of the concept of what i just said and i could go deeper. A lot deeper.

It's just frustrating that it's hard to push out when you're fighting the idea of "arguing" with the judge trying to educate them and you don't want to "get in trouble". 

Nevertheless, I will regroup with my mentor and coach, and push on to the next leg. 

Thanks for the prayers. Very much appreciated. 

Sidenote: I didn't go in there in and of my own strength and power. I took Father God with me. 

Thanks for being in my corner and letting me ramble and vent some.

 Hoping that you find the strength and words to present your information and it is understood and acted upon!

Regards,

 Chris