Quantum Indictment Chewing Gum

Quantum Indictment knowledge to correct with Parse-Syntax-Grammar Communication while chewing gum, walking and talking, or face perjury charges…

While some of the Quantum Grammar Coach’s notes on this page are taken from DWM videos, do you own research by reading DWMLC.NET and watching DWM videos.

This is a very unique story, and the judge is fired for two years because of the following events….

When DWM corrects Frank Marantino’s IRS case for US$1.3m and 17 years in prison for failure to pay taxes between the ages of 18 and 34, because of an Indictment.

INDICTMENT, meaning “No Contract”

And the way it’s written on the documents is:

I N D I C T M E N T

[SIDEBAR: If you’re struggling with adverbs, verbs etc, read about the parts of speech , before you go any further:]

I is an adverb, modifies the adjective N, which

modifies the pronoun D

is connected by the adverb I

and is connected by the adjective C

then the adjective T

which modifies the pronoun M

so the adverb E

modifies the adjective N

and the pronoun T

Also, because it’s underlined and the continuance of evidence is broken

All letters in the alphabet are Facts

With the vowels,

The “I”s are vowels, but they’re used as adverbs in this argument., and the letter “I” and “E” are interchangeable.

Question: How come the C didn’t become a modifier for the T for the other…

You can have 20 adjectives in front of a pronoun…But a pronoun can’t be in front of a pronoun…Only an adjective can appear in front of a pronoun

And the only thing that can follow a pronoun, is an adverb

These are rules and regulations that cannot be violated in syntax.

Here “M” is used as a pronoun, because it’s followed by an adverb.

[SIDEBAR: Okay, so if you’re wondering what the numbers mean for this Quantum Indictment, read the rules for Correct-Sentence-Structure-Communication-Parse-Syntax-Grammar]

Now, back to the story… So what the IRS lawyer does here, is:

I¹  N³  D⁴  I¹  C³  T³  M⁴  E¹  N³  T⁴

Now, the way it shows on the document, it’s not a word… it’s an acronym of misinformation…

To help Frank, DWM takes the witness stand,by saying:

”Ladies and gentlemen of the jury…. I have a question for you…”

The District Attorney jumps up and says: “Mr. Miller, you cannot ask questions of the jury!”

Quantum Question Before Indictment

So DWM says: “Well if I can’t ask the jury questions, then I can’t qualify if they’re smart enough to understand my answers.”

Now the judge says: “Mr. Miller, you can’t ask the question of the jury.”

“Well then, I’ll ask you the question your honour. It’s your court, you’ve got ruling on that usually…”

”I’ll tell you what, Mr. Miller,” the judge says. “This question… if I don’t like the question you spend six months in jail”

DWM: “Yeah, no problem.”

Judge asks: “It’s really that important for this question to be asked of the jury?”

DWM says: “If you don’t ask the jury this question, how are we supposed to know what I’m saying to them?”

And the judge says: “Well, it must be a pretty important question if you’re willing to spend six months in prison over it.”

So the District Attorney stands up and says: “I object, your honour. Mr. Miller’s not allowed to talk to juries.”

“Overruled!” he says. “Mr. Miller you will whisper in my ear the question and I will then ask the jury.”

Next, DWM whispers in the judge’s ear, and the judge says:

“You know, Mr Miller, that’s a really good question. Because I would really love to see the answer. But if you don’t have an answer for me after I asked the jury a question, I’m going to sentence you six months in prison.

“If I don’t like your answer to this, so be it. Ok? So we have a contract… Ladies and gentlemen of the jury I’d like to see a show of hands that’s two plus two equal four.”

And all twelve hands went up.

Does T-O plus T-O-O equal F-O-R?

DWM blurts out: “Does T-O plus T-O-O equal F-O-R? Or does T-W-O plus T-O equal F-O-R-E?”

[ TO + TOO = FOR?   2 + TO = FORE?]

The D.A. jumps up and says: “Your Honour, I like say, Mr. Miller’s in contempt for making fun of the jury.”

DWM says: “What do you mean I make fun of the jury? You spelled indictment with underlining each letter. You misrepresented the value of this word… and these people thought that there was an indictment against Frank Marantino, by your own trickery of syntax.

“And you write the documents an adverb-verb. Also the IRS supply you with information in adverb-verb, so you both act in the conspiracy to obstruct this jury. So this jury doesn’t know any better because you read off what you are here for today. Now you commit a fraud in syntax. You commit a fraud in communication skills, and you commit a fraud with ‘to plus two equals for’.”

DWM says: “This jury wouldn’t know an apple from an orange based on syntax.”

And then the IRS jumps up, and says: “We have no claim against Frank Marantino.”

So the DA jumps up and says: “well my claimant has now withdrawn all charges. I have no claims against Mr. Frank Marantino.

The judge stands up and says: “Frank there’s no charges against you, you’re free to go. You don’t owe them any taxes. You’re not going to jail, you are a free man.”

F.R.C.P. 12b(1) Knowledge

“Mr. Miller, get out of my court …you got 15 seconds or I’m going to have you arrested for trespassing on a derelict vessel in drydock.”

So DWM walks out of the courtroom… and then judge says: “Frank, do you know what was just said?”

Frank says: “No.”

The judge says: “What do you mean? You don’t have any knowledge of what just happened here today?”

Frank says: “Mr. Miller has the knowledge (of the quantum indictment), and I copied him.”

Judge: “Oh you cheated? So you copied? And you don’t have knowledge? Federal Rules Civil Procedure 12b(1) …I hold you in contempt of court for perjury… as you come to this court under false pretences, and you don’t know what you’re doing… 18 months in jail.”

And he goes to jail for perjury… the judge sentences him to 18 months.

But as soon as the judge vacates the case, he recuses himself from the trial…

So the he starts, under a judges motion, a new trial to hold Frank Marantino in contempt, for copying and not having knowledge.

And from that day forward every judge in America uses the rules and regulations of knowledge to certify if you are qualified to come into court and make an argument.

When I N D I C T M E N T Is A Lie

The way the lawyer writes I N D I C T M E N T, as a series of letters… it’s engineered lie to a jury.

Because the lawyer lies to a jury… That’s perjury.

So DWM catches him out.

And when you obstruct a jury, you’re looking at ten years in prison.

The judge, Pregerso, gets fired for two years over this.

And Douglas, his clerk of the court, is fired right along with him… Because he’s the puppet master.

So two years later Pregerson and his clerk of the court are back… in the Daini case… and guess who walks into the courtroom? DWM.

Judge Pregerson isn’t even on the bench a week, and DWM walks in and sits down…

And Douglas says: “Judge… Miller’s here again!”

The Daini case goes on for six weeks… and DWM wins the case.

The Court does everything in their power to get these people to talk to them.. And the only thing that Dainis’ (all six of them)… have to say…to the prosecuting attorney is:

”Can I see the correct sentence structure communication syntax…”

To the judge, to the DA, and to the jury… for six consecutive weeks. Never breaking, saying nothing but: “Can I see the correct sentence structure communication syntax ?”

And in the end they vacate the case…

Eighteen months later they’re intimidated enough to get lawyers… But the minute they get lawyers… (about a week later)… the Dainis all go to prison for three and a half years.

Because their lawyers silence them from using syntax… and volunteer for them to go to jail.

So if you’re going to write a syntax document, and correct a fiction document, or quantum indictment, and identify the facts on that as to be a lie…

You better know how to walk, talk, and chew gum at the same time, otherwise the judge will chew you up and spit you out…