As mentioned on the No State Project radio show, Matt had three charges thrown out last week. Matt called in and related to us that after he had mailed a copy of the motion to dismiss I helped him with to the cop who wrote the ticket, he got a call. The cop was not happy about it and told Matt not to send him paperwork, to send it to the “state” instead.
We send a copy to the cop because they are the ones who wrote the tickets, they should be able to defend against it. Here’s some legal advice to those cops who don’t like defending their tickets: Stop giving out tickets. Problem solved. Don’t call us crying about it, just stop giving them out or withdraw them and leave us alone.
The motion is based on the cop’s lack of evidence the constitution and code are applicable, lack of a case and no true adversary. Seventy-five percent of the time we file the motion and send to the cop, the cop doesn’t show, even if the motion is denied. If there was no merit and the motion was pure BS or legalistic gibberish, why would the cops not show?
Matt showed up for trial, and despite being under subpoena and getting overtime to appear in court, the cop didn’t show. It’s just silly to think he looked at the motion, figured it had no merit and decided it’s not worth the overtime to show up. The proof is here, right click to download the PDF.
There is no evidence the constitution and code apply, that’s why these are dismissed; some before any kind of trial. There are no facts and these three accusations being tossed out are just more proof it’s an effective way to defend against the accusations of these psychopaths.
Critics will marginalize or downplay the evidence here on the website and radio show, but they will never present any facts proving what these cops, prosecutors, judges and tax agents consistently cannot do: They cannot present any facts the constitutions and codes apply to us.
Congrats to Matt to standing up to these psychopaths.
January 17th, 2013 at 7:37 pm
Re: three more charges kicked out.
Dear Marc, I had a friend who tried to verbally assert that the constitution did not apply. The judge shut him down saying this is not the venue for that argument. What do you do then?
January 17th, 2013 at 7:55 pm
bloody wonderful well played, As I see it if the want to keep their heads in the sand its easier to kick them in the ass. Wonderful!
January 17th, 2013 at 8:00 pm
My friend ran her minivan off a slippery rainy road on a curve and struck a tree, the airbag deployed, and the minivan was totalled
In traffic court I said, there was no victim, so there was no crime. The tree didn’t show up to testify. The judge said “the crime is you’d be depriving the state of funds”.
Being a coward in front of the law like most simple common folk, she just wanted to get it over and done with, which really weakened my ability to argue for her. I quit right there, and let her walk out paying an insane $400 fine.
I’m still disgusted by it, and its an every day occurance. Everyone else in traffic court, with these victimless crimes, ended up paying the same or worse fines, when nobody was hurt, and usually it wasn’t even the parties fault… for example, lack of insurance on the company car, when they were a clueless employee. And so on.
January 17th, 2013 at 9:41 pm
Marc, at the end of Daniels docs …..they speak of the city of guthrie getting its authority from the constitution………can you comment on that…….
I’l like to know where it is in the constitution that corporations get authority…
January 17th, 2013 at 10:35 pm
@ Matt, don’t make assertions, ask questions: What facts has the prosecutor presented proving the const. & code apply and you have jurisdiction over me?
January 18th, 2013 at 7:04 am
You, Marc, are NO slacktivist! Kampai! I still assert, pound for pound you are doing more real tangible good than any others in the ‘liberty movement’ operating out there today. Hearts and minds are important (which the other activists seem to be addressing it’s good- don’t misunderstand me) but it doesn’t seem to promote freedom by physical action… You sir are providing that action.
Be well, and Vale!
January 18th, 2013 at 8:35 am
“They cannot present any facts the constitutions and codes apply to us.”
That’s right, b/c “the constitutions and codes” apply to THEM. The “Codes” apply to the ADMINISTRATIVE BUREACRATS/SUBJECTS, not “free people” like us.
This is what all the administrative mumbo-jumbo is all about:
Coercing us into their executive administrative jurisdiction.
Just like on the federal level – 4 USC 72:
“All offices attached to the seat of government shall be exercised in the District of Columbia, and not elsewhere, except as otherwise expressly provided by law.”
Are several-state people in DC? Do we need to be legal professionals to see we aren’t?
… Chris
January 18th, 2013 at 10:29 am
Hey Marc. I filed the Demur you sent me, amended with proper info, of course, a day or two before my continued 1st appearance. At the continued 1st appearance I announced that I would take it to trial, unless they would accept my demur and motion for dismissal. They prosecuting attorney flatly stated “NO”, so I get ready for court, prepared to drill the cop that wrote the ticket.
I go this morning to the courthouse to find the courtroom locked and lights off. I proceeded to the district court clerks office and asked what that was about. “You need to talk to the county attorney” they said. Away I went to the county attorney’s office. Where said county attorney was standing as I entered and asked right away. “What’s up with the trial? I’m ready.” They dismissed it without prejudice. He said they “decided not to pursue prosecution in the matter.” And they’ve been pursuing prosecution like mad men since October, when I filed affidavits, and tried an administrative process on the county attorney. When all is said and done… they dismissed the charges; speeding, improper start from a parked position, and improper or failure to use turn signal.
Thanks Marc for you help.
January 18th, 2013 at 11:12 am
I’m a bit confused. You posted that pdf as “proof” of what? The document just states that the city has jurisdiction because it has jurisdiction…
January 18th, 2013 at 11:40 am
Ya I am curious as well. Mr. Shadid is a pro at contradicting himself over and over. I mailed another motion for dismissal to Mr. Shadid, the Judge, and the officer. I hope marc posts it to for everyone to see.
January 18th, 2013 at 12:14 pm
surfer349 Says:
I’m a bit confused. … The document just states that the city has jurisdiction because it has jurisdiction…
————-
Of course! The code applies because the code applies because the code applies because the code applies because the code applies beca…
- NonE
January 18th, 2013 at 1:59 pm
@ matt, Congrats and thanks for posting.
January 18th, 2013 at 2:59 pm
@Panzer: I totally agree…I think what Marc is doing (exposing the illusion of state legitimacy via simple Socratic questioning) has the potential to be more beneficial for humanity than a cure for cancer.
January 18th, 2013 at 7:47 pm
“Staying home, beating the wife and kids” LOL
January 18th, 2013 at 7:59 pm
Ya i caught that part too. Marc has completely changed my thought process. I still have the honor…nay the privilege, of dealing with 100% homegrown freshly squeezed B.S. from local prosecutors. When I had the first trial the judge said he wasn’t going to sleep well that night knowing i thought the state laws did not apply to me. I asked factually what is the state? Continued till the 30th.lol
January 19th, 2013 at 4:23 am
I think its a fact they have jurisdiction over the named legal fiction defendant and that they need you to personify this named legal fiction. no-one working in the court i would think is allowed to admit that fact on record even though its becoming pretty much common knowledge these days. Anyway well done for Marc’s motions doc’s, Truth trumps Fiction
January 19th, 2013 at 4:01 pm
Daniel, you owe him an apology for wreaking havoc on his delusion…
January 19th, 2013 at 9:02 pm
Marc,
I would like to share articles like this and your podcasts with friends on facebook, so if that works for you, could you please put the little click on facebook thing on these – I’m doing my best to get more people to view your material as you suggested in your last group email for this article. Thanks
January 19th, 2013 at 9:53 pm
G’day Marc,
Just wondering whether you’d be kind enough to email me a copy the motion to dismiss that you wrote to get Matt’s three tickets kicked out. I’m in Aus but I know I can apply the same principles. I have to go to court to defend two traffic statute violations and also an “obstructing a police orificer in his duty’ when I failed to “identify” myself to his liking. That’s actually a criminal charge!. Hoping you can help me with these psychopaths and tyrants. I know you’ve been working with Keith from Melbourne so you know what a police state it has become here in Aus. Thanks Marc. Keep up the great work.
January 19th, 2013 at 10:53 pm
Ya i feel just awful about him losing sleep…oh wait that’s right he is trying to steal money from me! I wonder what would happen if i walked in there with a black robe on too and said the same thing?
January 20th, 2013 at 10:16 pm
@ David, they are available for $25 under the store link.
January 21st, 2013 at 2:13 am
Thanks Marc! Cheers.
January 26th, 2013 at 2:49 pm
“They” have jurisdiction, the moment You address court
January 26th, 2013 at 3:04 pm
Whers MIKE’s Blog,, “30 and No conviction” i wanted to drop in some advise, now he has TIME to calm down and listen to someone like me
January 26th, 2013 at 3:17 pm
That’s NOT TRUE Karl, please stop misleading. Lyndon used to think that, and he is not so talkative anymore. The facts contradict your opinions.
January 26th, 2013 at 3:19 pm
An Alabama man, Steve, asked, “How to get out of a Felony Drug Charge”, re-listen to Your answer , it is like watching a dog chase his tail…
“Cross Exam the Cop”
“Pre-trial telephonically”
“WAIT for a JUDGE, to make a decision”
“take to Higher Court, under Writ of Prohibition”
“it is all Immoral”
“Psychopaths”
“FACTS” …
All of the ABOVE are Very Adorable answers…
But, wow!
HINT … All facts are true, and YET at the SAME time, irrelevant …
January 26th, 2013 at 3:21 pm
HINT … All facts are true, and YET at the SAME time, irrelevant …
Ooh and as for my opinions, they are “All true and yet at the same time Fraud”
January 26th, 2013 at 3:22 pm
You are not “getting out” of anything when it comes to drug charges…
January 26th, 2013 at 3:24 pm
Alright, are you just going to comment flood? You are not contributing constructively.
Karl: “Whers MIKE’s Blog,, “30 and No conviction” i wanted to drop in some advise, now he has TIME to calm down and listen to someone like me.” (By the way, why can’t sock puppets spell rite?)
News update for any trolls showing up to the conversation late: Mike got screwed by the judge and prosecutor for bringing up material that Lyndon, Mmeta200, April and Karl are suggesting.
Reminder for those wanting to exercise effective damage control: leave the opinions for Karl and the like and JUST TAKE THE FACTS IN COURT. Do not fall victim to their malicious “advice.”
January 26th, 2013 at 3:59 pm
Karl this deals with my case as well on this board so please keep it that way. If you have a problem with Marc…here is a suggestion. Don’t get on his website. Also you can challenge jurisdiction at anytime.
January 26th, 2013 at 4:10 pm
Thanks Daniel, we won’t have to worry about Karl’s spam any longer. You can now find his latest baseless assertions here. Karl: you can find your latest comments there, so join the forum and flame away.
UPDATE: Must be driving Karl insane that his past 10 copy/paste comments within the past 15-20 minutes have not shown up on the main page, but we appreciate the traffic though. Looks like he finally clicked on the link and found out what’s going on, he hasn’t submitted any comments in the past 5 minutes. (By the way Karl, different usernames or email addresses doesn’t bypass the spam filter.) #nicetry #FAIL
January 26th, 2013 at 6:52 pm
And a word of caution: watch out for those here, on the skype channel, on the forum, or on YouTube that deviate from the FACTS. Poor Mike is an unfortunate example of what happens when you inject other people’s silly opinions in as a replacement for the required FACTS that must be proven in every case.
Karl called into the show and ADMITTED he had NO EVIDENCE to back up his claims/theory, that should tell you how much credibility he deserves.
So if someone approaches you here and says let me REALLY help you, consider yourself warned. Mike is one victim of this, and it is completely unnecessary and avoidable if you know how to spot these trolls (its not too hard).
When hiking through legal-land, facts are your tools of survival, use them. Opinions are your journal logs after battling dragons. Share your journal logs here with us, do not use them in legal land thinking they can defeat a dragon. Make sense?
January 26th, 2013 at 7:18 pm
Karl is such a Factist! He hates facts. Fact HATER!
February 11th, 2013 at 6:46 am
Great News, but unfortunately in Calif, at least in MY small court here in Kern Co, the cops SHOW no matter what is in the Motion because the judges defend them and will find you guilty REGARDLESS. I am appealing my case (orig motion to dismiss pre arraignment DENIED) and in trial, I ask to SEE the complaint-judge said the ticket IS the complaint, so I ask for dismissal and before I could state under what grounds, he yelled DENIED. I ask if he wanted to know my grounds, he said “doesn’t matter-DENIED”. Ca PC 853.6 states IF defendant pleads ‘other than’ guilty or nolo contendere THEN a verified complaint MUST BE FILED. Judge refused to hear it. In cross when I ask ‘what crime was committed or suspected ‘ prior to the ‘arrest’ for probably cause’, the judge refused to allow me to ask CHP this. Said HE would decide what questions I could ask. This court is a joke. Here they call them ‘laws’, congress makes laws not the states. Codes only apply to Corps and without contract do not apply to me.
February 11th, 2013 at 9:29 am
@ Linda – I didn’t say 100% of the time they don’t show, it’s about 75% of the time. Did you also file for judicial notice of issues raised in the demur/motion to dismiss? Sounds like you got a denial of cross.
February 11th, 2013 at 9:48 am
No on the Jud Notice of issues. Have done a JN but not on ‘issues’. Is there an example of one somewhere ? On cross, the judge said I could not ask questions to the ofcr, that I had to tell him (the judge) what my questions were and HE would decide which ones he would be then ask the witness. This is a new commissioner, but has been somewhat tainted my his predassessor who I did a Peremporty Challenge on to kick him off a civil case as he ignored the codes and regularly ruled against me in opposition of the codes. I am considered somewhat of a wave maker there.
March 20th, 2013 at 7:58 pm
Hey marc, you are doing n amazing job helping people get their cases in order and under control like its supposed to be. I have a question. Once somebody at the arraignment said not guilty to driving while suspended, are there any types of motions to dismiss or demurs to file for dismissal before the trial date? Which is almost 2 months away?
March 21st, 2013 at 9:30 am
@ John, thanks. Yes, even if there was an arraignment a motion to dismiss for a lack of jurisdiction should still be filed.