Congrats to Ricardo in Staten Island for getting a traffic ticket dismissed, and thanks for sending me the documentary proof below.
Ricardo filed the motion to dismiss and discovery request as there was no evidence to even suggest the constitution and code applied to him just because he was physically in New York. Richard sent me the following details.
Hello Marc, wanted you to add another confirmed “DISMISSAL" to
your success stories. I was the last person to walk in the
“court room” and the first person to be called without the police
officer being present. I pleaded “Not Guilty" and the “fake
judge” dismissed my case. After listening to your show, following
your steps and doing my research I was able to have my ticket
thrown out. I want to thank and commend you for your dedication
promoting awareness of true law to those who are willing to wake
up from the delusion these crooks have managed to implanted upon
The fake judge gave me no reason for the dismissal. In fact, I
barely heard him when he spoke to me, that I had to ask him what
was the verdict, like if he didn’t want the rest of the people in
the court to hear his decision. This experience really showed me
the amount of FRAUD within this system.
The facts are there was a traffic ticket filed against Ricardo. Ricardo filed a motion to dismiss because the prosecution had no evidence proving the constitution and laws applied just because he was physically in NY. This being the basis of jurisdiction.
At the arraignment the judge dismissed without argument or trial. This evidence, without speculation, the judge granted the motion or at least agreed with it. But for the motion would the judge have dismissed? That’s an obvious no. Saying that Ricardo was “too much trouble” requires one to speculate.
If there was evidence of jurisdiction, then the judge would not have dismissed. But, if you have proof, proof no other bureaucrat (or apologist) has been able to provide, please present your proof (relevant facts) during a live broadcast.
It’s been a pretty good year getting complaints dismissed, this is another from New York. Congrats to Lee for defending himself successfully against the government gangsters. And thanks for giving me the proof.
Regardless of the claims from the critics, such as this youtube troll:
Plenty of complaints have been dismissed or kicked out, and yes, the motion has been granted, though the critics can’t stand it. What they cannot do, just the bureaucrats can’t, is provide relevant facts supporting their claims the “laws” apply to us.
When you have no facts to support your claim you just lie and try to distract from the lack of evidence. If you’re being attacked, even if just a traffic ticket, and you’re interesting in learning how to defend yourself, then listen to the No State Project; Government: Indicted has also helped many people learn to effectively defend themselves from these criminals called “government.”
[Update] There are six more charges Lee had kicked out.
Congrats to Chrisitne for standing up to the predators in Wales, and thanks for sending me the proof. This is our first dismissal in Wales, at least as far as I know.
This was a traffic ticket and Chrisitne filed the application to dismiss he got from me. The application is based on a lack of evidence proving the laws applied just because he is physically in Wales, no jurisdiction and no valid cause of action.
A. Slight, the prosecutor, withdrew his complaint on grounds:
“there is not enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction.”
Given the application is based on a lack of evidence, it’s easy to see why Slight declined to prosecute. There is no guess work here, though critics will speculate it had nothing to do with the application.
And critics will further dismiss this saying “it’s just a traffic ticket.” A traffic ticket is based on the same claim as more serious charges, that your physical location makes their rules (“laws”) magically apply to us.
It’s no easier to prove the laws apply in a traffic case as it is in a tax or drug case. It’s impossible to do, that is why A. Slight, like so many others, declined to prosecute.
If you think there is evidence proving the laws apply to Chrisitne, evidence the crown prosecutor could not provide, then please call into a live broadcast and present it.
This is very unusual; as I mention in the video below I’ve never seen this before. Usually a trial by declaration is another form of pleading guilty.
But Al’s wife prevailed. Al got a demur template from me and mailed it to the court. The demur challenges the legal and factual sufficiency of the complaint. Because the complaint contains no facts or allegations the constitution and code apply, there is no jurisdiction and there are not enough facts to set forth an offense.
Al did not say there was a response from the cop or prosecutor. Even if they responded, it would not have been with any facts the constitution and code applied and there was jurisdiction. What is comes down to is the argument the laws apply and there is jurisdiction has no factual support. Here the judge did the right thing, though sustaining the demur was more appropriate.
Congrats to Al and his wife, and thanks for providing me with the documentary proof.
Two new dismissals and one from last year reported below. Everyone filed the motion to dismiss based on a lack of evidence proving the constitution and code applied and there was jurisdiction. While most of the time there are howls of “frivolous” and one word denials, there is never any evidence presented to overcome the motion.
We even have a picture of the judge who dismissed the complaint against Ted, David Ruzumna.
Congrats to Garrett, Ted and Rob for standing up to the psychopaths and getting three more bogus complaints kicked out. And thanks for sending me the documentary proof.
It was another good week regarding bogus traffic tickets; three tickets kicked out. These are all from the east coast, Maine, New York, and New Jersey. Each filed a motion to dismiss based on a lack of evidence proving the constitution and code apply and there was jurisdiction and no valid cause of action.
None of the accusers were able to provide a single fact proving the constitution and code apply and none of them even tried; though in Maine they did try scaring Scott into not going to trial.
Congrats and thanks to everyone for providing the documentary proof below.
A big congrats to Joshua for standing up to the parasites and getting a ticket kicked out. And a big thanks for sending me the evidence posted below.
While critics argue this does not “count” as traffic courts are not “real courts” and that real issues are not raised, they’re wrong. The same issues are raised as would be, and have been raised, in “real” courts that involve felony and misdemeanor charges. Keep in mind critics just can’t accept the truth: there are no governments, just men and women forcing us to give them money; they are criminals despite calling themselves “honorable”.
The main issue raised in the motion to dismiss/demur is the prosecutor has not presented any evidence the constitution and laws of the plaintiff “state” apply and there is any jurisdiction. This groundless argument (the laws apply to us) is the basis of a traffic ticket and a felony possession charge. So the venue is not important, the same argument is made against you, so it’s logical to attack that same argument. Pay no attention to the critics’ logical fallacies and distractions.
That’s what Joshua did and it resulted in the ticket being kicked out. Another example where someone stood up for himself and didn’t hire an attorney (officer of the court) and argue issues of law hoping the lawyer with the robe agreed with him. No, he stuck to issues of fact and pointed out the prosecution had not presented facts. That cannot just be “denied”, the facts must appear on the record. Yes, the judge can avoid the issue, but that doesn’t make the facts magically appear.
If you are being attacked by those called government, it would be smart and effective for y ou to challenge their arguments, the foundation being: the constitution and laws apply and they have jurisdiction over you.
It is not in your best interest to give the people attacking you a free pass. There are no sacred cows, all arguments are subject to challenge. If you think this argument should not be challenged, please call the show and enlighten us with your reasoning.
Joey called in the No State Project this past week and related to us what happened when he and his wife went to defend against a bogus traffic ticket. Congrats to Jennie for standing up to these bullies and not just paying and making it easier for the machine.
As pointed out below, even though the prosecutors told the cop the motion would never hold up in court, the cop withdrew the charges. Because the only logical thing to do when a motion with no merit is filed is to quietly withdraw.
But there is a caveat: according to critics and internet gurus, traffic courts are not “real courts” and getting traffic tickets doesn’t count. So take the information, as well as everything, with a healthy dose of skepticism and verify everything for yourself.
I received an email from Raul in Florida; a friend was fighting a bogus ticket in Florida. Raul helped by filing a motion to dismiss for a lack of evidence proving the constitution and laws of the state of Florida (a fiction) applied. Also there is no valid case or true adversary.
Raul’s friend got a call from the prosecutor who offered a deal, it was rejected and they attended a hearing on the motion to dismiss. When it was their turn, the prosecutor stood up and stated nolle prosequi, that he was not pursuing prosecution. As shown below, the judge signed off of threw the ticket out.
Congrats to Raul and his friend for standing up to predators and calling their bluff. Another example where a prosecutor, despite insisting the laws applied had no evidence to prove it. So he withdrew.
If there was evidence proving the constitution and laws applied, then they would just provide it.
A big congrats to our mate Keith in Melbourne, Australia. Keith is participating in the NSP parking ticket study and though it took a year, the ticket was essentially kicked out, or dropped whichever you prefer.
Keith got the ticket and was notified by people claiming to be the “City of Melbourne” of an alleged “infringement”. Keith challenged this “summary offense” with six letters asking for evidence. All he got were a few pictures; nothing to prove his presence with the City and jurisdiction.
As the one year deadline to formally lodge the application against Keith has run out, the matter is now closed. While we wanted to confront the people dba the “City of Melbourne” on their many fictions, Keith still got to challenge them on paper and they were of course, unable or unwilling, to provide any facts.
Saturday, October 1st, 2016, 4-7pm EST: Tune-in for a live broadcast of the No STATE Project radio show. You may join the show at (218) 632-9399 or Skype-in with your thoughts on tickets, tyrants, assessments, activism, anarchy, agorism, or, of course; any and all criticisms. If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then feel free to call-in to the LIVE show at (218) 632-9399 or you'll need to contact Marc on Skype by searching for username: frankrizzo3, and we can also add you to the NSP skype group chat where you can engage in some courtroom role-play exercises to refine your litigation skills and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up. Also, here is a comprehensive list of the many ways you can interact with the No STATE Project broadcast and community.
If you want to join the forum, you must email me a username so I can create the account. This is to stop the flood of spambots.