82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas (Update: Case Dismissed!)
Current time: 05-30-2017, 02:22 AM
User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Author: Accident
Last Post: Boxer
Replies: 165
Views: 38086

Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas (Update: Case Dismissed!)
02-22-2015, 07:15 AM (This post was last modified: 02-22-2015 07:25 AM by Accident.)
Post: #136
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
(02-22-2015 07:10 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  
(02-22-2015 06:45 AM)Accident Wrote:  UPDATE: I received a letter from the county. It says:

Dear Accident

Please be advised that the above captioned has been set for PRE-TRIAL DISCOVERY hearing on Tuesday, April 7, at 10:00 am, office is located at...........San Patricio County.

Does this mean the judge entered a plea for me?


I also had a chance to speak to a good friend who is a big shot trial attorney. His firm represents one of the largest landholders/corporations in Texas. WOW! He said some of the most amazing things.

He asked me if I was in San Patricio co. when I got the ticket. When I said yes, he said, " well then they have jurisdiction". He also said its assumed (jurisdiction) and If I don't like it I can leave the state. I choose to live here and their laws apply because they are elected. I should just pay the fine. The victim is you, me and everyone in the state. We were all victimized because I was going too fast, safely.

When I asked him about the transportaion statures and explained that I wasn't an 'operator' he looked up the statute. It says:

§ 545.002. OPERATOR. In this chapter, a reference to an
operator includes a reference to the vehicle operated by the
operator if the reference imposes a duty or provides a limitation on
the movement or other operation of that vehicle.

Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 165, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1995.

It uses the word 'operator' to define what an 'operator' is.

When I referenced Black's Law dictionary, he was like, "We don't use that, we use the statutes to define the statutes." WTF??

me-" a cake is a cake like object that looks like a cake and smells like a cake and eats like a cake. Now do you understand what a cake is??"

He also said something very helpful. Responding to the fact that all my motions/notices/unsigned plea of guilty docs were being ignored, he said that if he was the procecutor, he would ignore them too. The prosecutor doesn't have to prove anything to me, only to the judge when we are in the court. So, they basically can attack anyone, anytime for any reason, without any anything of substance.

He did agree with me that government was just like the Mafia. Pay or die.

He said at the end, "Pay the fine, don't speed and follow all the rules".

The law is the law, there is no right or wrong.

Mr. !A. Having my own Adventure in Legal Land.

You be getting edjumacated. Are we having fun yet? Kinda makes you especially proud to be human, don't it? Sigh.
Hang in there! No matter the result you'll be able to comfortably live with yourself.



I agree. Thanx for the support and encouragement.

......and The State of Texas is NOT a corporation. He wouldn't say what it was actually, but it definitely isn't a corporation.

"I have facts that prove I have jurisdiction, but they are a matter of National Security"
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-22-2015, 08:12 AM
Post: #137
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
(02-22-2015 07:15 AM)Accident Wrote:  ......and The State of Texas is NOT a corporation. He wouldn't say what it was actually, but it definitely isn't a corporation.

This issue of groups is complex. As I've been trying to examine in my thread "There is no 'We,'" the fact that it is natural for individuals to gather together and act in concert out of the fear of being alone or whatever the motivation might be does not alter the fact that each individual chooses his or her actions, whether to go along with others or to stand alone. There is no "we." There are only individuals who may or may not choose to mentally accept the responsibility for their own part in all events in which they participate.

The idea that "the law is the law" is such a cowardly abdication of responsibility for one's actions it is hard not to upchuck.

- NonE the severely deluded Sister Sleazious .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
02-23-2015, 04:36 AM
Post: #138
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
(02-22-2015 08:12 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  
(02-22-2015 07:15 AM)Accident Wrote:  ......and The State of Texas is NOT a corporation. He wouldn't say what it was actually, but it definitely isn't a corporation.

This issue of groups is complex. As I've been trying to examine in my thread "There is no 'We,'" the fact that it is natural for individuals to gather together and act in concert out of the fear of being alone or whatever the motivation might be does not alter the fact that each individual chooses his or her actions, whether to go along with others or to stand alone. There is no "we." There are only individuals who may or may not choose to mentally accept the responsibility for their own part in all events in which they participate.

The idea that "the law is the law" is such a cowardly abdication of responsibility for one's actions it is hard not to upchuck.

Awesome. I'm gonna read that thread. Thanx Non

"I have facts that prove I have jurisdiction, but they are a matter of National Security"
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2015, 04:13 AM
Post: #139
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
So, it's set for a Pre-Trial Discovery on April 7. What should I expect from this 'meeting'?

"I have facts that prove I have jurisdiction, but they are a matter of National Security"
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2015, 04:52 AM (This post was last modified: 03-27-2015 04:56 AM by eye2i2hear.)
Post: #140
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
(02-22-2015 08:12 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  As I've been trying to examine in my thread "There is no 'We,'" the fact that ...

The idea that "the law is the law" is such a ...

[Image: ironymeter2.gif] (prompted by seeing the silliness confusing Archy Adherence via "There is no 'We,'" the fact -- instead of-- "There is no 'We'", the fact) Facepalm

[/#snickering at the thought of the NonPride taken in having done such by The Rule... for The Good of "All"]

Poke

Is it voluntary? (because if it isn't, what inherently is it?)
And can it be voluntary, if there's indoctrination, intimidation, coercion, threats & initiation of violence?
[not to be confused with asking: can it be said to be "voluntary" even when such is present.?]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2015, 01:20 PM
Post: #141
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
I'm with you, Bruce, if you can show in rules that they accept that dismissal is the only option then by all means do so.

My question is about writs to a superior court demanding that the lower court rule on the mtd before moving forward.
Also, can a writ force a ruling on the fact that no facts having been presented to prove jurisdiction?

The court can't move forward absent jurisdiction but the judge will just ignore the assertion, how does one force the judge to admit that no facts supporting jurisdiction exist?

Power to the revolution!

Jurisdictionary
Proclaim FBA Rey
Search here, it's private.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2015, 02:16 PM
Post: #142
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
(03-27-2015 01:20 PM)FreeBorn Angel Wrote:  I'm with you, Bruce, if you can show in rules that they accept that dismissal is the only option then by all means do so.

My question is about writs to a superior court demanding that the lower court rule on the mtd before moving forward.
Also, can a writ force a ruling on the fact that no facts having been presented to prove jurisdiction?

The court can't move forward absent jurisdiction but the judge will just ignore the assertion, how does one force the judge to admit that no facts supporting jurisdiction exist?


I would object, then say something like this: "Sir, let me get this perfectly clear and on the record, you are going to go forward with this case with no jurisdiction, no proof of jurisdiction at all???"
What's he gonna say?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2015, 06:12 PM
Post: #143
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
(03-27-2015 02:16 PM)spooky2th Wrote:  
(03-27-2015 01:20 PM)FreeBorn Angel Wrote:  I'm with you, Bruce, if you can show in rules that they accept that dismissal is the only option then by all means do so.

My question is about writs to a superior court demanding that the lower court rule on the mtd before moving forward.
Also, can a writ force a ruling on the fact that no facts having been presented to prove jurisdiction?

The court can't move forward absent jurisdiction but the judge will just ignore the assertion, how does one force the judge to admit that no facts supporting jurisdiction exist?


I would object, then say something like this: "Sir, let me get this perfectly clear and on the record, you are going to go forward with this case with no jurisdiction, no proof of jurisdiction at all???"
What's he gonna say?

"GUILTY! $785.00 fine.

NEXT!"

- NonE the severely deluded Sister Sleazious .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-29-2015, 04:46 AM
Post: #144
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas
(03-27-2015 06:12 PM)NonEntity Wrote:  
(03-27-2015 02:16 PM)spooky2th Wrote:  
(03-27-2015 01:20 PM)FreeBorn Angel Wrote:  I'm with you, Bruce, if you can show in rules that they accept that dismissal is the only option then by all means do so.

My question is about writs to a superior court demanding that the lower court rule on the mtd before moving forward.
Also, can a writ force a ruling on the fact that no facts having been presented to prove jurisdiction?

The court can't move forward absent jurisdiction but the judge will just ignore the assertion, how does one force the judge to admit that no facts supporting jurisdiction exist?


I would object, then say something like this: "Sir, let me get this perfectly clear and on the record, you are going to go forward with this case with no jurisdiction, no proof of jurisdiction at all???"
What's he gonna say?

"GUILTY! $785.00 fine.

NEXT!"

lol, good stuff. Prepares me for the insanity of the psychos. But how did my fine go from $177 to $785?? Whose side are you on? lol

"That's Mr. Accident to you!"

"I have facts that prove I have jurisdiction, but they are a matter of National Security"
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-08-2015, 03:37 AM (This post was last modified: 04-08-2015 03:39 AM by Accident.)
Post: #145
CASE DISMISSED!!
"Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!!" Case dismissed. Went to have the Pre-Trial Discovery hearing yesterday. Objected to everything. Humiliated the unprepared persecutor. Objected to near every word that came out of his mouth. Told the judge "Objection, David Akin is not prepared to move forward today because he has not presented any evidence of jurisdiction to this court" haha. Thanx Marc!! Read it right off the Criminal Script! I did it so many times, he told the judge to make me be quiet. "Objection, now he's telling you how to run your court?" No response. I thought he was gonna cry.

Going in with the mind set that the prosecutor is a lying lowlife scum bag, who is attacking me without cause, was the magic bullet for me. It didn't help him that he was condescending to me on the phone previously. I don't tolerate condescension from assholes. You are gonna pay. He actually wanted to go to trial after lunch and the judge was going to permit it. Ever after admitting that there was no jurisdiction and that the persecutor had failed to make me aware of anything per their laws. Judge was actually patient with me and seemed a little amused at how I was messing with David Akin, but he was clearly giving him every chance to pull something outta his ass. I even heckled David on a break in front of another defendant and his attorney. It was GOLD Jerry, GOLD.

I also told them that Jurisdiction could be challenged at any point from ticket to trial and that I was going to bring it up every 5 minutes. Then David Akin lied and said it was not a PreTrial issue. OBJECTION... he knows that isn't true!! This lasted 20 minutes and I must have objected 20 times. Thought I had the whole thing recorded and got home to discover my spy pen is a piece of crap. Devastating!! I will send Marc all the documents to prove this when I receive the dismissal letter. Thanx to all for the help and support.

Dismissed for lack of evidence because the trooper wouldn't show up? My ass!!

"I have facts that prove I have jurisdiction, but they are a matter of National Security"
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-08-2015, 06:02 AM
Post: #146
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas (Update: Case Dismissed!)
All of that and the only thing you got was a chicken dinner?!? Oh... I forgot that you blew the recording. Chicken dinner sounds fair. Wink

Kudos! Smile

- NonE the severely deluded Sister Sleazious .).

"I just don't understand how this happens." Undecided
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-08-2015, 08:36 AM
Post: #147
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas (Update: Case Dismissed!)
(04-08-2015 03:37 AM)Accident Wrote:  "Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner!!" Case dismissed. Went to have the Pre-Trial Discovery hearing yesterday. Objected to everything. Humiliated the unprepared persecutor. Objected to near every word that came out of his mouth. Told the judge "Objection, David Akin is not prepared to move forward today because he has not presented any evidence of jurisdiction to this court" haha. Thanx Marc!! Read it right off the Criminal Script! I did it so many times, he told the judge to make me be quiet. "Objection, now he's telling you how to run your court?" No response. I thought he was gonna cry.

Going in with the mind set that the prosecutor is a lying lowlife scum bag, who is attacking me without cause, was the magic bullet for me. It didn't help him that he was condescending to me on the phone previously. I don't tolerate condescension from assholes. You are gonna pay. He actually wanted to go to trial after lunch and the judge was going to permit it. Ever after admitting that there was no jurisdiction and that the persecutor had failed to make me aware of anything per their laws. Judge was actually patient with me and seemed a little amused at how I was messing with David Akin, but he was clearly giving him every chance to pull something outta his ass. I even heckled David on a break in front of another defendant and his attorney. It was GOLD Jerry, GOLD.

I also told them that Jurisdiction could be challenged at any point from ticket to trial and that I was going to bring it up every 5 minutes. Then David Akin lied and said it was not a PreTrial issue. OBJECTION... he knows that isn't true!! This lasted 20 minutes and I must have objected 20 times. Thought I had the whole thing recorded and got home to discover my spy pen is a piece of crap. Devastating!! I will send Marc all the documents to prove this when I receive the dismissal letter. Thanx to all for the help and support.

Dismissed for lack of evidence because the trooper wouldn't show up? My ass!!

That is awesome. Will you be submitting the evidence of the dismissal to Marcy (Marky?) Marc and his funky bunch?
Quote this message in a reply
04-08-2015, 02:11 PM
Post: #148
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas (Update: Case Dismissed!)
That is great and congrats, nice job. Hopefully we can record what happened for the show. It's very powerful to just calmly object to their nonsense, they HATE when you stick to the facts they don't have.
[Image: MaCID.gif]

If government services were valuable and the market wanted them, they wouldn't be provided on a compulsory basis.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-08-2015, 06:20 PM
Post: #149
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas (Update: Case Dismissed!)
Congratulations! Thanks for letting us know. You might could obtain the court's audio recording by submitting a public records request. They will probably tell you that you have to order and pay for a transcript. Anyway, Now Do It Again...lol.

American "Freedom" means that you're merely free to obey all the (phony) laws, rules, statutes and regulations.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
04-10-2015, 04:39 AM (This post was last modified: 04-10-2015 04:57 AM by Accident.)
Post: #150
RE: 82 in a 75mph on IH 37 in Odem Texas (Update: Case Dismissed!)
(04-08-2015 06:20 PM)11:11 Wrote:  Congratulations! Thanks for letting us know. You might could obtain the court's audio recording by submitting a public records request. They will probably tell you that you have to order and pay for a transcript. Anyway, Now Do It Again...lol.

They didn't record the hearing, to my knowledge. I will request it today when I call about my copy of the dismissal.

Case Dismissed Thread with additional comments

Enjoy.

!A

(04-08-2015 02:11 PM)Marc Stevens Wrote:  That is great and congrats, nice job. Hopefully we can record what happened for the show. It's very powerful to just calmly object to their nonsense, they HATE when you stick to the facts they don't have.
[Image: MaCID.gif]

Thanx Marc. I will try to call in tomorrow.

Hmmm. I wish you (Marc) had repeated over and over and over and over, in EVERY show, "Prove jurisdiction!! haha. . .... It all made perfect sense after I went through it. Please don't stop saying it. Their P.R. is very effective and it takes alot of deprogramming to exit any cult.

!A

BTW, I didn't save ANY money fighting this ticket. I spent $100 on an hour phone consult with Marc, which was awesome. I purchased 3 or 4 scripts/motions from Marc at $25 each. All voluntary. He never once threatened to beat me up or put me in a cage if I didn't pay. I would gladly pay it all again to help me get out of any attacks by the psychos. Ticket was going to be $177.

My only concern is that the experience in court was so exhilarating that I might subconsciously speed all over just to get another chance to get that RUSH again!

!A

......and that clapping guy is really creepy.

"I have facts that prove I have jurisdiction, but they are a matter of National Security"
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)