Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2007 02:00 -0800
From: Bill Thornton
To: Bob Schulz
Subject: The law requires citizens to pay Income Tax

I'm ready to show you the law.

However, there is one problem: You may not be able to understand it.

Because persons can't figure it out they get convicted.

It will take quite a bit of thoughtful study for you to see it.
Once you see it, you'll be kicking yourself for overlooking the obvious.

I'm not so certain you are up to the effort required to see it. (Most persons are not, which is why the gov't gets the convictions.)

By the way, not only can I show you the law,
I can also show you the courtroom solution, the antidote if you will.
I can also show you how to bring suit in such a way that not even the Supreme Court may review a court decision in your favor.

Please call.

Bill Thornton
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 21:43:39 -0800
From: Bill Thornton
To: bob schulz
Subject: Re: The law requires citizens to pay Income Tax

Do you want me to show you the law?

To the extent that you are serious about considering my points,
to that extent I'm serious about showing you the how & why the IRS gets

No $$$ cost to you, but you may have to spend some time to understand it.

By the way, I can also show you how to counteract the law.
I've identified the problem, and I have the solution.

Bill Thornton
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2007 11:41 -0500
From: "Bob Schulz"
To: "Bill Thornton"
Subject: RE: The law requires citizens to pay Income Tax

Pls do.
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2007 15:32 -0800
From: Bill Thornton
To: Bob Schulz
Subject: Re: The law requires citizens to pay Income Tax

Although I can show you the law, just showing you the law is not sufficient.  You must understand the system that produces that law.  Below you will find a brief outline of that system and how it leads to a law requiring one to do whatever the IRS wishes.

It's actually very simple.  The information here is described in much greater detail at
The underlined links provide more information.

Here's the chain of logic:

In the USA there are two systems of law:  Roman Civil Law and Common Law.  Roman civil law is the law of the legislature.  Common law is the law of the people.

Attorneys are well trained in Roman civil law, but they have near-zero training in common law.  However, the common law trumps Roman civil law.  Even the Supreme Court of the USA may not second guess a decision of the common law.

A court is defined as "the person and suit of the sovereign."  That means that the plaintiff is the sovereign and owner of the court.  In any action at law, legally speaking, the plaintiff is the king and retains all powers for himself, including the power to make court judgments.  A judge of a court only has those powers which are delegated to him by the plaintiff king.

"The very meaning of 'sovereignty' is that the decree of the sovereign makes law."

A court of record is the only fully empowered [superior] court in America.  All other courts are inferior courts.

Ask any attorney and he will explain that a court of record is a court that keeps a record of the proceedings and has the power to fine or imprison for contempt.  That's only half the story.  The rest of the story is that it is a court that proceeds according to the common law (no statutes), and the tribunal (the one doing the judging) is independent of the magistrate (the judge).  Notice that in a court of record the judge is not allowed to do any judging; judging is reserved to the tribunal.  In a court of record there are only two entities that are true tribunals:  the sovereign of the court (the plaintiff), and the jury (if present).  Several times I have fined judges for contempt of court when they refused to obey the law of the court.

The IRS strategy is simple.

The IRS opens a court of record.  In the accusatory papers the sovereign accuser decrees the law:  "Defendant is required to file."  Right there, believe it or not, is the sovereign decree that creates the law in accordance with the rules of the common law.

Defendants are famous for demanding that the law be shown to them.  The "law" is contained in the accusatory papers, decreed by the sovereign plaintiff. 

The defendants do not recognize the law when they are looking straight at it.  Because defendants don't see it, their entire strategy is not relevant to the accusation.  A perfect example of this was in the Dick Simkanin case.

Defendants are correct when they claim that there is no statutory requirement to file.  But, that is not the question before the court.  The real question is, "Did you, or did you not, file your papers as required by the common law decree of the sovereign plaintiff in this court of record?"

The defending strategy is equally simple.

The proper tactic is to do a counterclaim which challenges jurisdiction.  Just as in football, the best defense is a good offense.  It is in the counterclaim that the legitimacy of the plaintiff's sovereignty may and should be challenged, because no government entity in the USA has sovereignty.  The defendant becomes the sovereign counterplaintiff, and the plaintiff becomes the questionable counterdefendant.  Because no sovereign can legislate against any other sovereign, it follows that the counterdefendant has no legitimate authority to decree any law applicable to the counterplaintiff.

That is a broad-brush explanation.  There is a lot more detail involved which I will be happy to give you, if you are interested.  At the web site there are three 8-hour lectures that go into great detail.  The most relevant one is at

Perhaps we could talk on the phone.  If we do, I suggest that you record the conversation for your future reference.  The best times for me are after 7pm PST, Monday thru Friday, and any time Saturday & Sunday.  During those times I can call you back at no cost to either one of us.

Bill Thornton

Bob Schulz has not yet replied.

Most people have a hard time believing that there is another superior system of law in the USA. Perhaps Bob Schulz feels that way. Or, maybe he is too busy.

The website,, has the information to invoke the superior law of the people and stop abuses by the IRS. Those who take the time to understand the information on the website have had some very interesting successes in stopping IRS abuses.