Force and Intimidation

Dr. Bear made it clear to the Fox family's neighbor that he and his associates would forcibly take control of Mr. and Mrs. Fox's kits.

Puriscal, Costa Rica. On July 26, 2011 Dr. Cerdas and eleven other officials, some with handcuffs, arrived at the top of our friends' driveway in three vehicles. Our friends were away. Dr. Cerdas spoke with our friends' neighbor and said that our friends needed to call him, immediately. Dr. Cerdas told our friends' neighbor that the next time he and his associates visited, they would break our friends' gate down, take our friends' children, register our friends' children, vaccinate our friends' children and send our friends' children to school.

Our friends, especially their children, were terrorized by the news of this visit.

Terrorism-

1. The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

2. The state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3. A terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Instead of engaging in a lawful dialogue, Dr. Cerdas and his associates have resorted to threats, intimidation, and coercion in order to induce fear and submission of our friends. This is a terroristic method of governing.


The following is the affidavit that our friends submitted in response to the visit they missed while they were away.

Delivered July 28, 2011 to the Ministry of Health and PANI and the prosecuter's office as directed by Dr. Doctor Cerdas to obtain the name of the judge and relevant information. When our friends approached the prosecuter's office, the representatives of the office of the prosecuting attourney refused our friends' testimony which indluded their request for infomation.

Translated to English.

Attention: Mr. Cerdas and the Ministry of Health , PANI, and other interested parties.

On July 11th, these ministries were presented with questions regarding their constitutional relationship in order that we assist them in creating an amiable solution. On July 15, when returning to the ministry of Health , they refused to answer the simple questions and did not request an extension.

On July 26, 2011, Mr. Cerdas along with approximately 11 other individuals bearing handcuffs, driving 3 vehicles answered to those questions by accosting my home when I was not present. My neighbor attests to talking with Mr. Cerdas, where he indicated that when they return they will break down the gate, remove the children, register the children, vaccinate the children and put the children in school.

Mr. Cerdas also insisted that I call him immediately and that it was very important that I call him as soon as possible.

We have not received ANY written answers to our questions and we have not received any intelligent approach to Law or respect of Law. Mr. Cerdas answered to our many inquiries with naked power, force, intimidation, and terrorism.

Why is it that Mr. Cerdas attests that we refused vaccination orders on the Orden Sanitario when indeed we never refused but conditionally accepted bearing that the facts on the order were incorrect?

If it was indeed an order under lawful dictate, why did Mr. Cerdas need me to agree to the order by signing?

Has Mr.Cerdas used an abuse of process by telling the court that we refused, when in fact we have not, so that he can begin the process of a malicious prosecution?

Did he indeed request that his associates (driver and policeman ) purge a document in order to allow a process to start which in fact has no basis in the claim that he makes?

Is it possible that indeed Mr Cerdas cannot answer the questions we asked , because if he addressed the questions , he would find that he and his associates lack the jurisdiction over the persona?

And is that the reason why they need information, cedulas, and other civil nexus, just as the prosecutor in 2002 needed the same in order to establish a persona and civil nexus or contract?

Why?

Is it possible that Mr. Cerdas is not operating within the constraint of the constitution of Costa Rica; Under article 11 , and 27?

How is that possible?

Later in the evening of July 26, 2011, I did respect Mr. Cerdas' wish and I called him as he requested.

I asked him the same series of questions submitted on July 11th of this year on and he answered affirmatively to the questions indicating that he is a 'public' servant under the restrictions of the constitution, that the vaccines were 'free' and that he supposed the government of Costa Rica was subservient to God of Israel.

Romans 13 and Acts 5:29 provide that the government has been authorized to create a judiciary capable of adjudicating criminal matters as well as matters of equity (civil matters involving contracts).

I then asked if he brought a court order to my home earlier in the day. Mr. Cerdas then indicated that he had brought a judge to the scene. I asked the name of that judge and Dr. Cerdas replied that he did not know. He responded that I would have to receive that information at the prosecutors offices. I further asked him how they could be granted a court order when I have never even been summonsed to court? The phone call was then promptly terminated and no further calls could go through.

Mr. Cerdas had asked me to call him, and I did for the purpose of establishing a lawful remedy. Mr. Cerdas clearly is not interested in establishing clarification of facts, but instead is focusing on an agenda that he has not divulged to me.

Being that we were never served with a subpoena , summons or citation to show up in court and give our testimony, and based upon Mr. Cerdas' lack of 'knowledge ' about the judge's name , I can assume that the ' judge' was a tribunal judge party to a private court which was to be held in my driveway.

For the record, Mr. Cerdas and his ilk have disregarded the nature of all lawful communication for the purpose of a lawfull remedy. Mr. Cerdas affirms that he is a public functionary in accordance with the constitutional laws of this country , yet he refuses to follow the constitutional laws (11, 27, 19, 25, 75 and others) by which we can establish a non threatening dialogue via written correspondence that would permit time to access counsel and intelligent responses that are not based upon intimidation and fear.

For the record, Sra. Duran of PANI, Sra Fernandez and Mr. Cerdas have not answered to our contructive notices in any detail, and instead of constructive dialogue, Mr. Cerdas, Sra. Fernandez and Sra. Duran of PANI resort not to law but to threats of coersion and terrorism.

The conversation with Mr. (Dr. Cerdas ) affirms that he is a public official acting in the public domain. As such, this testimony is the record of his public activities which will be made public for the purpose of transparency to those he claims to serve.