Categorized | Articles

Standing – Just a Baseless Notion

Posted on May 10th, 2012 by Marc Stevens

More dishonesty from a lawyer, there’s a shock.  That’s what the legal cult does, they lie; sometimes they lie well, and sometimes they lie really bad.  Still all lies nonetheless.  And if you still doubt there’s no evidence bar associations are cults, check out the video at 6:47  to see where a lawyer is praying to another lawyer.  If people praying to each other is not evidence of a cult, then I may not understand what a cult is.

In this video, there’s more evidence of a lawyer saying anything to protect the billion dollar racket that is the traffic court system.  As I point out in the video, when you sign a court document, you are certifying that everything is factually and legally accurate.  As usual, no amount of laws will get in the way of these professional predators taking our money.

If Kristen Corn  wanted to be honest, she would have written: In practice, standing is a baseless notion.  When the pretended “state” is the aggressor, then things like standing are a baseless notion and no defense.




8 Comments For This Post

  1. Al Thompson Says:

    I think the government and the courts are just very evil religious organizations.
    Of course, I think it is just bad religion. This is why I object to the oath because it really does put the proceedings on the darkside. Why should any client swear to tell the truth to a bunch of liars? Why should we the slaves go so far as to put ourselves into more bondage? Yet, due to learned habits from childhood, we were always swearing about this or that, and never even knew that something like swearing oaths can be bad. The courts don’t tell the truth, yet they are sworn. I’ll tell you, when any public officer swears an oath, he is telling the public that he is a flaming liar and the evidence for its veracity is self-evident.

    Marc, when you mentioned in your article about the “prayer” I believe you are accurate about thinking it is some kind of cult. And even if a person doesn’t believe in God, the evilness of the oath should be clearly seen.

    I’ve had a couple of interesting exchanges between myself and judges about this issue. One got really pissed at me and said: “You know what that means?”
    “It means that if you lie with your testimony, we can’t prosecute you for perjury!” That just about broke my heart. As a matter of fact, they were considering it after the trial to prosecute me for putting up a defense. It turns out they couldn’t do it because of the oath issue.

    I talk about this frequently, but I’m not sure that I’m getting through to people. It’s one of those things were people will look at me and wonder if I have any meat in my taco.

  2. Jonathan Says:

    “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’ 34But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. 36And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. 37Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

  3. janice Says:

    bush and cheney know what an oath means. That is why they refused to speak under oath with respect to the 911 enquiry. Instead they went into a little room with their interogators…lol and lied like hell

  4. Al Thompson Says:

    Liars sure got a lot of people killed didn’t they. They are a lot more trouble than their worth. Send them back to England and let them lie over there. The best way to know when a judge or a lawyer is lying is when they are moving their lips.

  5. Jake Witmer Says:

    Dear Marc, and friends of freedom everywhere:

    I encourage you all to investigate the linked website. The lady who runs the company at that link is trying to make a technology that can help make people much freer. I would like to speak with you about making useful connections, agoric systems, and associated finders’ fees.

    The revolver map on your website is a great inspiration to me. Whenever I see that people are tuning in, it makes me think that there are minds being turned on, and pointed against the police state. I would like to speak with you sometime soon, to see if more people are tuning in to your site, from Illinois. I have some reason to believe they might be.

    Peace and love going out to all fellow human beings who decry and disavow the initiation of force.

    Now, as to the meat of the video above:
    1) I find it fascinating that the sociopath (or sociopath-directed conformist) doing business as the “City of Frankin” comes right out and says that she’s willing to violate someone’s individual rights because “mala prohibita” is legitimate. In a free country, “mala prohibita” is actually not legitimate. I guess after 161 years of “voir dire” stacking juries against people guilty of nothing more than “mala prohibita,” the system has become so recursively corrupted that “mala prohibita” is well established as legitimate. Amazing how bold they are about it, these days.
    2) Amazing that she’s basically admitting that the purpose of the court, and “justice system” is not to protect individual rights or prevent escalation of controversy.

    I guess it’s just the wild west then, with these authoritarians. LOL “Survival of the fittest.” “Dog eat dog.” You know, all the things they misattribute to proper jury-restrained and progressively smaller minarchy and (when men are ready for it) anarchy. 🙂


  6. Ivan Says:

    A cop sees 4 lawyers in a car go over a cliff. By the time he gets to the bottom a farmer has just finished burying them, car and all. “They were all dead?”, the cop asked. ‘Well’, said the farmer, ‘2 of ’em said they weren’t, but, you know, all they do is lie”.

    What’s a real drag? …Give up? A bus load of lawyers going over a cliff and 2 of the seats are empty. ;o)


  7. Gaylan Says:

    I am curious. I see a lot of what you are doing here and really enjoy the ‘entertainment’ because it is an eye opener. My question is this. Does this work in court, when you have lawyers and judges lying all the time? Do you have wins and are they consistent?

    This also reminds me of a “Fictitious Plaintiff”.

    Now another question. When and how does one apply maxims of law? If maxims are the chiefest, and no other can supersede maxims, and maxims says “no one can sue in the name of another” how can these courts violate the maxims? Or an opinion supersede the supreme court?


  8. Incubus Says:

    One does not apply a maxim of law. One must remember a law is merely an opinion backed by a gun. Opinions supersede one another all the time, especially when guns are involved.

    That said, the angry man in the night gown is the one who lays down “the law” in “his courtroom”. The idea is to get him to contradict himself and in doing so expose the facade of so called “fairness”. He either has to drop the pretense of good faith and reveal the inherent violence, or let a guppy go to maintain the illusion.

    In either case, “win” or “lose”, one must remember there are no facts the law is applicable to anyone. This is Marc’s bread and butter. Asking for the facts.

1 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. Another Ticket Kicked out – Standing Not Such a “baseless notion” After All | Says:

    […] want to thank Lorin for posting the video below.  He was the one from my previous article and video.  Lorin went to court yesterday over a traffic ticket and even though the prosecutor and cop were […]

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 he can 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 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. 1496 N. Higley Rd., Suite 102-37 Gilbert, Arizona 85234.

Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter

Advertise Here