Quantum Lawsuits with Correct Sentence Structure Grammar start with writing specific names of all parties, including Claimants & Vassalees …

At the beginning of DWM’s lawsuits, the first thing he writes:

:David-Wynn: Miller, as the CLAIMANT

DWM’s name will be used as the CLAIMANT throughout the next 150 sentences…

At no other time will your name be used as a first person specific, because CLAIMANT is first person specific.

Now when you’re in a lawsuit with three other people… as a witness… say you have three claimants…

And now every sentence that ends, where it’s witnessing, or making a claim against the other parties doing a damage, it says :

FOR THE
OF THE

IS

WITH THE
OF THE
BY THE CLAIMANTS

Because you’re acting as a Corporation… suing this One Individual…And you, the three of you witnessing, two or more… it’s going to be CLAIMANTS.

That way you don’t have to keep writing everybody’s name.

And it simplifies the way documents are written when in law.

This is standard procedure, whether it be Legal-Fiction or in DWM technology, (FACT), that way of writing is standardised worldwide.

Structure For Writing Quantum Lawsuits

Here’s an example of the correct sentence structure for writing Quantum Lawsuits:

FOR THE SAM’S-KNOWLEDGE
OF THE ONE-RUNNER (fact)
IS
WITH THE WITNESSING-CLAIM
OF THE ONE-RUNNER’S-RUNNING
ON THE FOOTPATH
BY THE SAM

Question: Note that the above sentence is NOT in the first person…It starts off with a third person and it doesn’t specify where the runner … (that I witnessed you running)?

DWM: yeah, your WITNESSING-CLAIM is here…

Q: But it doesn’t say by whom?

A: OK, then you can just add “you” as SAM’S-WITNESSING-CLAIM

So can you change that the first “SAM”, to “MY”?

FOR MY KNOWLEDGE? Or is it “FOR MY PERSONAL-KNOWLEDGE?”

DWM: you’re the person that’s watching the runner…

You see, the runner is irrelevant. S/He doesn’t require the knowledge, s/he isn’t part of the sentence…

It’s your knowledge. You’re the witness…

Q: So can I use the personal pronoun MY, instead of the name?

DWM: NO. You don’t use MY, YOUR, YOURSELF, I or ME.

You don’t use any of those because they’re not first-person specific.

And you have to have a specific name when you talk in a lawsuit, specifically say that you are the claimant…

Quantum Lawsuit – Claimant or Personal Name?

Q: Are the personal names interchangeable with claimant…In whatever capacity it’s on the documents, but never with a personal pronoun?

DWM: Right, you can’t use a pronoun because you immediately drop it … You didn’t take jurisdiction for the pronoun.

Q: Then at the end of the sentence… if you can’t use a personal pronoun… what can you use to identify the person who was running?

DWM: Well if you have his/her name… But you’re just simply witnessing a runner… That’s all

Q: No, I’m making a witness statement that I can identify the runner, not just witnessing a runner…

DWM: You want to identify your son as being the runner? Then put his personal name in, like this:

FOR THE SAM’S KNOWLEDGE
Change THE ONE-RUNNER (fact) to the [NAME]

OF THE [NAME]
IS
WITH THE WITNESSING-CLAIM
OF THE ONE-RUNNER’S-RUNNING
ON THE FOOTPATH
BY THE SAM

Q: But if my claim is against you…would I put your name in the case?

DWM: Yes because when you’re going to swear on an affidavit that you witness somebody, you can’t use generics… you have to be specific:

“I saw this person shoot this person …”

And use his/her full name… at this time…in place and location

Now-Time In Quantum Lawsuits

Everything is time-sensitive in law,  because of jurisdiction in the law. Quantum Lawsuits are all in Now-Time. Past is gone. Future has not happened.

And everything is location sensitive, because of what jurisdiction it comes under.

You have to account for the:

1) time that the incident took place
2) location because of jurisdiction
3) the specific individuals,

You are to give as much specific information…

the name, address, social security numbers, has to appear someplace in the document… and any witnesses that will corroborate your position… In another sentence, because the document is a bonded document.

So all these points of information go together… as it’s a complete thought.

Q: If I were to write a document in the first person referring to myself, as I why did this… I saw that…. I did the other thing…

DWM: No, you have to be the CLAIMANT

Q: If I then I gave it to the judge, and the judge would have read it out loud,…

DWM: No, because the Judge would be saying “I am doing this… I did that…”

Which is the reason why we need to be specific, and that’s why you’re a claimant.

You see, gold miners didn’t file mortgages. They didn’t file promises. They filed claims.

Because Claim and Gold go together…

That’s why we use the word CLAIMANT

It’s the strongest position of who you are…

You’re not a:

  • Defendant …DE- No; Defendant means “No contract”
  • Petitioner… because you’re not there yet; a petitioner is asking permission in the future, but is not a claimant because he has knowledge firsthand
  • Respondent … RE – No; Respondent means “No-Spoken-Contract”; now you’re mute before the court

So you don’t want be a respondent or a defendant…

Vassalees in Quantum Lawsuits

If you’re not a respondent or a defendant, you are a VASSAL-EE.

A Vassalee is a servant-employee of this document… because your name’s on it…you’re better known as “the United States”

Two or more people coming together on a contract is “the United States”, because “United States” is defined as two or more people

You’re either be the CLAIMANT or a VASSALEE

DWM copyrights (copy-claims) the word “VASSALEE” in 1999. It comes from the word “Vassal” which means “Servant”, and look up -EE in any dictionary it says “employee”.

The word EE is a fact, it’s a word…you can use it in Scrabble game

Vassal = Servant.

Vessel = V-ESS-EL, (boat, container, etc)

Vassal = V-ASS-AL , is a servant employee of the paper.

So if your name is on the paper, and it’s been stamped, you’re under postal contract for commerce …they can’t get out of it in quantum lawsuits.

“SHOUT” is a command

Q: I noticed your book is all in Upper-Case, “Shout”

DWM: Right. “SHOUT” is a command …you must be obeyed…

This all comes about in the Moser case, with the Attorney General of Wisconsin… DWM sues the Attorney General of Wisconsin for fraud in a lawsuit back in 1996.

And this is in front of the 96 year old Judge Moser, who asks :

“Mr. Miller, why do you write all of your 12-page document in uppercase?” He says: “I notice the letter E is a little higher too…”

DWM says: “Well, I have a 1952 Bell typewriter.”

Judge says: “You know,” he says, “that’s the same one I used when I went to law school. That damn “E” always kicked-up.”

That was the old ribbon…You know the old ribbon typewriters you seen in the black-and-white movies… Well that’s what DWM wrote his very first lawsuit on…
Judge asks: “How come you didn’t write it in lower case?”

Well, the lower case key is busted on there.

“How come your name’s in upper and lower case?”

DWM says he had to use the needle nose pliers to pull the key up… And then tap it with a screwdriver… to write his name an upper and lower case to make it work…So doing a whole document like that would be kind of redundant… when writing quantum lawsuits.

Judge says: “Well, I got to give you a credit…How long did it take you to type this?”

Four months… With one key at a time, and making sure that the typewriter was working right… and replacing ribbons…it was quite a mess…

He says: “Yes, I see all the smudges on here…”

Attorney General asks: “What’s syntax?”

McDermott was the Attorney General in Wisconsin at the time… And the judge asks him: “How come you wrote all your lawsuits back to Mr. Miller in upper case?”

He says: “I didn’t know what he was doing… so I copied him.”

Judge says: “You’re the Attorney General… you’re supposed to know syntax.”

The Attorney General asks: “What’s syntax?”

Well, after the judge finished laughing, he says: “All right…It means SHOUT…”

And that’s when he educated me on the word “SHOUT”… It’s a command, and it must be obeyed.

Judge says: “Because you wrote in syntax, a syntax command has jurisdiction over an adverb-verb, which doesn’t say anything in shout. It’s just shouting nothing…”

DWM won that case because he wrote it in “SHOUT”, and he wrote it in correct syntax. And that’s why his book has always been in upper case SHOUT.

And it’s the same on his website.

Even when DWM types on his computer… Sending messages back and forth in emails, it’s all in upper case.

And his students still ask why he’s SHOUT-ing at them…

Some people know about it… But SHOUT is a word that most people don’t know about.