Categorized | Articles

Habeas Petition for Ademo Freeman of copblock.org

Posted on July 24th, 2012 by Marc Stevens

Below is a short video about the habeas corpus petition I filed with the superior court in Manchester, New Hampshire. I’m doing it because Ademo is friend and liberty activist who has not done anything harmful. He was put in jail and not given a trial de novo because his court date notifications were sent to the wrong address.

I will be posting regular updates and videos covering this process. I hope to at least be able to help get Ademo out earlier than the 60 days. If it goes the way it went in Keene, I may only have one status conference to make it happen.

You wouldn’t think men & women calling themselves the “STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE” would be so adverse to discussing what they mean when they say they represent the “STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE”. But, when there is no state, it’s just a fiction, a dba, it makes sense.

That doesn’t even take into account confronting them on the facts they rely on proving the laws of the “STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE” apply to you. So in addition to the deliberate court error, the other big issue is jurisdiction i.e., the lack of evidence of presence within the plaintiff state and applicability of the laws.

              

39 Comments For This Post

  1. minos Says:

    Hi Marc,

    thanks for your great dedication. Much respect. Please email me what ever you need so I can support for the cause. Thanks again. Mucho mucho respect. 🙂

  2. Alice Shea Says:

    Hello Marc does Corpus Delecti apply in Canada like it does in America??

    aliceshea@shaw.ca

    Thank You

    Alice Shea

  3. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Alice, yes, it comes from English law. Anywhere the court system is advertised as “adversarial” and limited to only cases.

  4. bruce sloane Says:

    I have a gentleman in jail right now, for an “unregistered” auto in his driveway
    Habeas denied, as the Judge expressed ” He belongs in Jail ”

    off to Federal Court, I guess… seeing this was not an ” Arrestable ” offense

  5. Bucky Says:

    Excuse my ignorance, but what does ‘dba’ stand for?

  6. Lyndon Says:

    Bucky: d/b/a = doing business as

  7. Robert Says:

    “dba” is an abbreviation for “Doing Business As”.

  8. Lyndon Says:

    Bruce: how is allowing an unregistered motor driven conveyance to be parked on one’s land an “offence” so severe that it is worthy of jail time?

  9. minos Says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEV5AFFcZ-s

  10. indio007 Says:

    You better include an affidavit or they are going to give you a big fat “without merit” finding. They play the fact game too. no affidavit = no facts.

  11. StimuL8 Says:

    Love it Marc appreciate all you do, everything I’ve watched and read on Ademo shows he a standup guy fighting for liberty and justice. This is a plain and simple Railroading by a bunch of corrupt “Terrorists” OED- Definition wearing black dresses and hiding their real crimes behind the fiction known as “THE STATE.”
    Any updates on Mary? I’m kinda worried bout her.

  12. You did what?! Says:

    Dude, you can’t file a habeas petition on behalf of someone else. Also, he has to exhaust all his appeals within the state before a habeas petition can be reviewed. If the Court thinks he was in on it, they will bar him from submitting a successive petition in the event that he’s sent to prison for a long time, which is possible considering that he has wire charges pending.

    You also could have fucked up his ability to file another habeas petition at all, because a petitioner has to bring all claims related to a particular judgment in a single petition, he can’t file another one without getting permission from the circuit court.

    I seriously hope you didn’t file that…

  13. You did what?! Says:

    By the way, your conflict of interest argument, and your statement about the state not being able to prove that he was in the state, is quite frivolous. I couldn’t bear watching the video from there.

    For God’s sake, Marc, quit practicing law without a license. If you think any of this is good law, you have problems.

  14. Andy Says:

    This looks to be entertaining. Someone please pass the popcorn.

  15. Lyndon Says:

    “You did what?”:

    So you think it is “frivolous” for statutory rules to only apply within the state they are applicable to? Hmm? So the statutory rules of ONTARIO apply in FLORIDA? Or, the statutory rules of FLORIDA apply in ONTARIO? And you think that is frivolous? And being on the physical land mass called Ontario means that one is in the corporation of ONTARIO? You really think that is frivolous? Then what is “frivolous?” You sound like a real good statists boy/girl.

  16. Incubus Says:

    @You did what?!

    “…your statement about the state not being able to prove that he was in the state, is quite frivolous.”

    Factually what is the state?

  17. indio007 Says:

    You did what… Your giving Marc advice and you don’t even know third parties can file habeas petitions? I hope your not a lawyer.

    Also you don’t have to exhaust appeals when the challenge is jurisdictional.

    Thirdly. I guess you never heard of “minimum sufficient contacts”.

  18. indio007 Says:

    A pleading is frivolous only where there Is clearly no,defense set up in it. If a defense can be spelled out from the pleading, or any part of it, It Is not frivolous. Moody v. Belden, 15 N. Y. Supp. 119, 60 Hun, 582.

  19. Keith Says:

    Addressed to ‘You Did what’.

    Do you have experience in conducting an application for a Writ of Habeas Corpus? If yes, please enlighten us with the case citation(s).

    Your statements conflict with what I have personally witnessed in court. I have seen a Writ of Habeas Corpus case initiated by a third party without the applicant needing to prove he had the consent of the prisoner and without having to prove he was a lawyer (which he wasn’t).

    1. On which legal authority do you base your claim only the prisoner can apply for a Writ of Habeas Corpus?

    2. If the prisoner is denied the opportunity to lodge a Writ of Habeas Corpus by his jailors, such as what occurred in Guantanamo Bay in the past few years, how does the prisoner get a chance at a Habeas Corpus hearing if a third party cannot apply for the Writ?

    3. On which legal authority do you base your claim the prisoner must exhaust all legal avenues before applying for the Writ?

    4.On which legal authority to do claim if the prisoner is ‘in on it’ the court will bar him from successive applications for the Writ?

    4.On which legal authority do you base your claim the applicant must bring all claims to a single petition?

    5.Do you agree or disagree with this statement, ‘the applicant has to produce only enough evidence to convince the court the prisoner was denied due process (or natural justice) and the standard of proof required by the applicant is ‘on the preponderance of evidence’ or ‘on the balance of probabilities’?

    6. By frivolous do you mean ‘without merit’? if no, please state your meaning.

    To Marc: Even though ‘You did what’ provided no legal authorities nor case precedent nor any evidence to back up his statements, your permitting his opinions to be included in this debate/forum demonstrates a commitment to freedom of speech by yourself.

    Such expressions of opinions can then be examined by clear thinking people for any merit of which I found none. This lead me to ask the questions above which, if they remain unanswered, will expose the writer for what he /she really is.

    First rate video presentation again Marc. Keep up the good work and I appreciate you including dissenting points of view such as those of ‘You did what’ even though he/she failed to establish his claims with facts. What I saw of your Writ seemed well thought out and lucid.

  20. Lyndon Says:

    To All: any successful Habeas Corpus is dependent and contingent on the party hearing the petition to grant the writ, and release of the prisoner, based on the interpretation of the rules alledgedly known to the hearer. If the captors do not want to release the prisoner there is no magical dance one can do to force the captors to follow their own rules. And for God’s sake, DUDE, who ever claimed ONLY a prisoner can file a Habeas Corpus??? The essence of the writ is for someone of one jurisdiction asking someone from another jurisdiction to “give us back the body”.

    Where do these guys/gals come from???

  21. WorBlux Says:

    You did what?! Says:
    July 25th, 2012 at 8:10 am
    By the way, your conflict of interest argument, and your statement about the state not being able to prove that he was in the state, is quite frivolous

    Frivolous how?

    Is presence in the state not an element of the alleged crime?

    Does the prosecution not bear a burden of proof regarding every factual element of the crime?

    Or do you believe such evidence has been presented? In such case the argument would be wrong, however it’s not frivolous an requires and answer pointing to where such evidence was presented. But to determine what is and isn’t evidence to that effect you need to answer a question:

    Factually what is the state? I’m betting you’ll have a tough time answering this one, though it’s really a simple question, and cuts through mountains of bullshit.

    I invite you to come join the forum, it’s boring without a bit of dissent.

  22. indio007 Says:

    Factually what is the STATE?
    It’s the “juridical person” created to run the government on behalf of the organized public.
    THE STATE IS NOT THE GOVERNMENT.
    The STATE is a legal entity created to exercise certain govermental powers on of behalf the “organized public” .
    The organized public being a distinct body politic with restricted membership.

    What really confuses people about the STATE is most don’t know that the STATE has many legal capacities.

    The other thing people don’t know is one of the most important things the judge determines. That is the nature of the relation of the parties.

    In the case of the STATE, this determines the legal capacity under which it acts.

  23. bruce sloane Says:

    @Lyndon ..
    “unregistered auto ” on your land, is not an arrestable offense
    simply a witch hunt against the gentleman
    tell me .. if a auto was once registered, how may it become “un-registered ” ..??

  24. Lyndon Says:

    Bruce Sloan asked: “… if a auto was once registered, how may it become “un-registered ” ..??

    My comprehension of registration is that one requests another party to have one’s property acknowledged by the description of the property being put on a list. The primary recorder is the registrar. If one desires to have one’s property taken off the registry, the man or woman one needs to communicate with is the registrar. Typically one communicates with a registrar via registered mail. Send in a request. Why would a registrar refuse the de-listing of a vehicle? I think the only claim the gov-co road masters make is that they demand a vehicle be registered with them if the vehicle is used on public roads. I have never seen evidence of the road masters demanding vehicles not used on public roads be registered with them. I have seen and experienced the opposite: the road masters where I am from show no interest or inquirey whatsoever in vehicles used or stored on private land.

  25. Secret Address Says:

    I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed reading Habeas Petition for Ademo Freeman of copblock.org | MarcStevens.net I Tweeted it to hopefully give you more readers.I will certainly come back to read future posts. Private Postal Address UK

  26. bernard Says:

    A person classified as mentally ill without court appearance, without being a risk to self or others transfered from a psychiatric ward at a hospital to a Forensic facility without due process other than the stroke of a psychiatrist pen..which itself is illegal. Since a psychiatrist can not classify a patient as a forensic patient. Is it possible to use Habeaus Corpus? Synopsis of this saga may be found on Google “Free Garth”. It is a situation in Melbourne Australia. Any experts down under able to assist email :freegarth@gmail.com

  27. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ bernard I would think so, the psychiatrist is probably operating pursuance to “law”.

  28. bruce sloane Says:

    @lyndon

    I make a distinction between ” de-registered “, and ” un-registered ”

    to my mind, an “expired” sticker does not make an automobile ” un-registered “

  29. Bucky Says:

    Anyone see Ademo’s trial today? I did. It was over 3 hours long. Ademo did great. He was calm and articulate in the words he used. The robot-jury was told by the judge not to think about what sentencing Ademo could be facing or to allow emotions to be a part of their decision making – to base their decisions solely on what the law said. The judge never mentioned to the jury the jury nullification process that Ademo asked to be explained to the brain-dead zombies.

    Just another day of business as usual. Just another day in hell. Just another paycheck for the demons who instigate this needless violence.

  30. Lyndon Says:

    Bruce Sloan:

    You are correct. A vehicle is not removed from the vehicle registry when a road license sticker expires. The VIN# stays on the list unless requested to be removed (which likely means it goes onto another list as those goons do not like to lose something they may use to control).

  31. Lyndon Says:

    Bucky: I wish Ademo well, but he should have spent some time learning Voir Dire. If he had, the worst he could have done is make the jury more alert as to what is happening.

    And, he has never lost his ability to politely demand how the law is applicable to him and for the crooks to prove what law is applicable that the jury is supposed to decide on. “Law” applicability is always interpretation of words…

  32. NonE Says:

    @Lyndon,

    No offense to you intended, Lyndon, but when I read your post about what Ademo “should” have done I immediately pictured someone lecturing a rape victim on what she “should” have done. You are right, of course, that there were other things that might have helped win a different conclusion for him, but the bottom line is that HE IS THE VICTIM here. Also, consider that he was in jail, which makes studying the law a tad more difficult than those of us who are slightly more free.

    – the Very Good NonE

  33. Lyndon Says:

    NonE: No offence taken. My expression was more exasperation as when last I heard from Ademo, on Marc’s show, he seemed to not want to heed any advice from Marc, and he seemed to be hell-bent on doing things his way (of which he has a choice of course)regardless of the consequences.

  34. Andy Says:

    Using questions ask them them to prove every element of the charge and every thing they assume in their PR. Chose the most pressing questions as you will have limited time. Put forth as many as necessary in motions. A person can be ignorant of reality but the person can’t ignore the consequence of their ignorance of reality.

    In the just-us system nothing is as it is put forth to appear to be. Welcome to Lewis Carroll’s Lewis Carrol’s, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

    Years from now, looking back to this era will be akin to watching the Twilight Zone.

  35. bitmap Says:

    Does Ademo have his court date and time set yet?

  36. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ bitmap Ademo was convicted on Monday. He’s in jail and I’m reworking the habeas petition.

  37. Lyndon Says:

    Marc: What was he convicted of? What was the sentence?

  38. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ lyndon wiretapping, 1 year, part is suspended, he’ll be in jail for a few months.

  39. bruce sloane Says:

    where did Ademo go wrong with the Glick defense ..??

    “” Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting “the free discussion of governmental affairs.” Mills v. Alabama, 384 U.S. 214, 218 (1966).

    Moreover, as the Court has noted, “[f]reedom of expression has particular significance with respect to government because ‘[i]t is here that the state has a special incentive to repress opposition and often wields a more effective power of suppression.'” First Nat’l Bank, 435 U.S. at 777 n.11 (alteration in original) (quoting Thomas Emerson, Toward a General Theory of the First Amendment (1966)). This is particularly true of law enforcement officials, who are granted substantial discretion that may be misused to deprive individuals of their liberties. “”

5 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. Marc Stevens' Habeas Petition for Ademo Freeman of CopBlock.org | Cop Block Says:

    […] text below was posted by Marc Stevens on his website, MarcStevens.net, on July 24th, 2012 about Ademo’s current stint in Hillsborough County Jail: Below is a short […]

  2. Ademo's Wrongful Caging - Can You Pledge to Help? | Cop Block Says:

    […] UPDATE (JULY 24th): Marc Stevens’ Habeas Petition for Ademo Freeman of CopBlock.org [video/post] by Marc Stevens originally posted to MarcStevens.net […]

  3. Marc Stevens’ Habeas Petition for Ademo Freeman of CopBlock.org | OccuWorld Says:

    […] text below was posted by Marc Stevens on his website, MarcStevens.net, on July 24th, 2012 about Ademo’s current stint in Hillsborough County Jail: Below is a short […]

  4. NSP – Jul 21, 2012 – Co-host: JT | MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] -|- RIP Jon Lord from Deep Purple -|- Ademo’s 60 day caging by a lawyer named Lyons -|- Marc’s petition for habeas corpus -|- upcoming events: the Jackalope Freedom Festival [Aug 3-5, 2012] and Libertopia [Oct 11-14, […]

  5. FREE ADEMO! - We Are Mad As Hell! Says:

    […] July 24th, 2012: Marc Stevens’ Habeas Petition for Ademo Freeman of CopBlock.org by Marc Stevens originally posted to MarcStevens.net video/post: Marc Stevens’ Habeas Petition for Ademo Freeman of CopBlock.org by Marc Stevens originally posted to MarcStevens.net […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

: Tune-in to the LIVE No STATE Project broadcast as we report on the weekly happenings in legal-land and current events. You may call-in to the show at (218) 632-9399 passcode is 2020#, 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.

Wednesday, 6-7pm EST: Tune-in to the new No STATE Project midweek commercial-free video-stream now broadcast via youtube.com. You can join Marc live, or contact Marc to ask a question if you cannot make it on live. You can find archives of the Wednesday broadcast here on the website and on YouTube.

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.





Contact update: If you email me a wall of text, then I probably will not read it. If you email me telling me to call you right away I won't. You'll have to set up a phone consult so we can set an appointment.

Mailing address has changed as of 1 October 2016. The new mailing address is: G.M. or Occupant 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.






Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here