Comparison of Common Law v Civil Law

Lawful De jure government .................................................De facto government

• God's Law / Common Law..... ................................................................Admiralty (law of the sea - corporate)
• Sovereign authority(people)..................... .........................................................Artificial entities (corporations)
• God-given Rights.......... .........................Privileges + civil, natural and political rights (ie: no protected rights)
• Unalienable Rights under God........................ ........................................Inalienable civil rights (not protected)
• Claim of Right................................... ...............................................................Color of right
• Ownership with fee simple title or contract................................... .............Color of right to possession by 'law'
• Full liability for actions............... ............................Limited liability ponzi scheme (Social Insurance/Security)
• Government based on sovereign authority..Corporate governments of defacto power or pretended authority.
• Organic Constitution................ .........................................Corporate Military Constitution acting on the citizen
• State statute that govern how officials uphold the law to protect our God-given rights... ……Federal and State
  commercial code that we volunteer ourselves into.
• Electors elect independant representatives......................... .......Voting in a two or more party corporate system
• Inhabitants............ ......................citizens/residents/persons (corporate entities with diminished political status)
• Births are recorded...........................................................................Births are registered (certificate)
• Sovereigns breaking God's law, Government officials braking lawful statute.. ..Breaching the peace (breaching de facto gov.- straw man citizen statutory/commercial contract - basis of thought crime).
• People are responsible for themselves and their own protection......... ......'citizens' want government to 'protect them' on a personal basis
• God-given right to own, keep and bear arms............... .......................................licensed privilege to have arms
• Intent to hurt or damage is what determines unlawfulness...........accidents or 'negligence' is considered a crime
• No conflict of interest in government (prosecutors were private).......... ........Corporate government pays salary of judge, prosecutor and POLICE.
• Courts are Constitutional...................................All courts are in equity (corporate) acting on corporate straw men names!!!
• Sheriffs and deputies (Citizens on Patrol:COPs).................. ...................... Peace officers (POLICE = POLICy Enforcer).
• Search warrants must be based on affirmation of a verified criminal complaint, based on probable cause by a judge that a crime was committed and signed by a judge.... ......... Searches based on belief, warrant signed by clerk only
• First hand knowledge of an injured party crime...................... ..................."Probable cause" to believe a 'crime' committed against corporate statute/by-laws (may or may not be an existing injured party).
• It's all about the facts in evidence of violation of rights or harm.... ............Charges based on allegation or reason to believe
• Habeas corpus can be presented to question nature and cause of charge/arrest/being held..... ….....No Habeas Corpus
• There is always an official court record................ ...................There is often not even an official court record.
• Consent not needed to try................ .............. Understanding and consent of accused needed to be prosecuted.
• No negotiable instruments.............................Informations and Warrants/Prisoner Bonds are negotiable instruments.
• Jury Nullification (juries try validity of the law, and the facts of case).............. ........Juries aren't instructed to try the law.
• Lawyer...........................................................................................................Attorney at BAR.
• Judge.................................................. .................................................................................Quasi-judge.
• Judicial................................................... .............................................................................Quasi-judicial.
• Lawsuit questioning law and facts........................ .............................................."lawsuit" of facts.
  
  And there is more.

Maritime Law

History in England
Eleanor of Acquitane, acting as regent for her son, King Richard the Lionheart, during the Crusades, established Admiralty/Maritime law in England
In England, special admiralty courts handle all admiralty cases.
These courts do not use the common law of England, but are civil law courts largely based upon Roman Law.

Difference between Common Law & Maritime Law
Littered throughout Law is the concept of "reasonable belief" (when detaining people or property) which is based on admiralty law, the law of the sea where the captain of a ship only needed reason to believe that his ship was in danger by those under his command to order that certain things be done to protect it's commercial goods and goals.
Everything in admiralty works backwards from due process common law. A person being guilty before being proven innocent.
In Common Law, crimes can only occur if there is there has been physical damage to someone or to property, AND if there was intent to hurt someone.
Accidents and "negligence" are not crimes.
But we can be charged and sued for negligence.
Suing is a function of the corporate world.
No longer does there need to be an existing flesh and blood injured party anymore to file a criminal affidavit to initiate criminal proceedings, just the breaching of a statute, a de facto corporate statute (breaching the peace), a by-law or regulation, where the 'injured party' is the state, or corporate entity.

Commercial Contracts
Today in our law courts, all Commercial contracts that private parties enter into with each other that are under Maritime Jurisdiction, are now also under Admiralty: The reason is the beneficial use and re-circulation of Reserve Bank Notes makes the federal government an automatic silent third party to the arrangements.
Admiralty jurisdiction has in many respects, “come ashore”.
It currently affects almost every element of our inland commercial society.
In the USA, Admiralty jurisdiction rules are used to settle claims and grievances regarding cargo, international conventions, financing, banking, insurance, legislation, navigation, hazardous substances from nuclear power plants, stevedoring (the unloading of a vessel at a port), and undersea mining and development, the navigable rivers of the United States, as well as world-wide off-shore oil drilling activity.

Maritime Law on Land
The reason why Admiralty jurisdiction is of concern to us is because our government is using jurisdiction attachment rules applicable to an Admiralty jurisdictional environment to on-land-based citizens where Admiralty jurisdiction does not correctly belong.

The only ordinary land based people who should properly be under the government’s in personam Admiralty jurisdiction are government employees (federal and state), military service personnel, and those who specifically contract into Admiralty Jurisdiction (such as employees working for a Defense contractor with a security clearance, and private contractors hired by government to perform law enforcement related work).

Maritime / Admiralty Law in Australia
The Federal Court of Australia operates under Admiralty Law under the Blue Ensign.