Categorized | Call of Shame

#CoS – Montana Prosecutors – Dec 3, 2012

Posted on December 3rd, 2012 by Calvin

In this latest Call-of-Shame installment, we fall deeper into the rabbit-hole with more circular logic.

Two prosecutors from Montana fail to see past their circular logic that “the code applies to all individuals who commit a crime in Montana” in response to the question of “what facts and evidence they rely on to prove the code is applicable?”

Enter “Zen and the Art of Objecting to Non-responsiveness”. The difficulty is keeping them responsive to the question you are asking, so when they answer with a vague blanket statement that doesn’t address the issue(s) in question, kindly remind them that “the code applies to everyonedoes not answer whether or not they are basing the applicability of their code on facts and evidence to meet their advertised burden-of-proof.

In a strike of irony, the first prosecutor says Marc is “conflating legal arguments with factual assertions” after giving the circular line; “the code is applicable because the code is applicable.” 😀

The second prosecutor states that the facts and evidence she relied on to prove that the code was applicable was the “reports that the officer submitted” and “the code itself”. Not made up, check the transcript. In attempt to escape a double-bind, she dismissively accuses Marc and his client of being “probably entrenched in other things” while leaving questions of fact and evidence unanswered.

Dismissing questions of basic fact and evidence in pretrial proceedings is usually not a strong position to take before a judge. What would make these bureaucrats so confident despite their seemingly careless behavior and their neglect to support their case with the required factual standards? I wonder, what makes them so confident…

              

35 Comments For This Post

  1. Andy Says:

    Gee whiz lady, if there are facts that the constitution and code is applicable to anyone or everyone in the “state of Montana” that should not be a guarded secret. Rather, those facts should be shouted from the rooftops and be prominently displayed. Is there a valid contract? No.

  2. PatriotOne Says:

    “”YOU ARE NOT AN ATTORNEY SO I WILL NOT TALK TO YOU””
    If this is true why is the persecutor willing (looking forward) to talk to Marc’s ‘client’, who is not an attorney, in “COURT”?

    One could ask; Mr Persecutor does the Constitution and CODE apply to you professionally or personally? What facts do you rely upon that prove the Con&CODE apply to you pro&per? Could it be that your Oath binds you to the Con&CODE?

    I think there MUST be a liability upon the STATE attached/added to the Motion to Dismiss claiming damages for forcing free Men to defend a frivilous claim. (see -> Know Your Constitution – Carl Miller Part 1 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s-zHrNPfkQ , a very good beginner or advanced lesson)

    It isn’t that the Man has a ‘Constitutional’ right(s), it IS that the STATE employee has agreed to be bound within the Constitution. And that Constitution is what separates the Men from the GovCo employee.

    Can a Chrysler manager fire a Ford employee? Is the Ford employee within the STATE of Chrysler?

    I would bring with Me into court a Bible and Alice In Wonderland/AILL/ (any book) and Constitution and ask the persecutor to prove that any of the books apply to Me.

    I had a case in NC. I drove 250 miles to be there. I had my books (^^^) and filed My Motion to Dis 30 days prior. The JUDGE failed to show up. Everyone in the room got a worse offer allowing for dismissal. I would like to believe that the JUDGE failed to appear because I was there and ready. (I do tend to freez, but that day I think I was really ready to impeach every GovCo employee)

    What I did not have was a FEE list of my losses suffered due to being forced to defend a frivilous claim.

    Marc (or anyone), what are your thoughts about including a loss claim within the Motion to Dismiss and within the prepared ORDER?

  3. Al Thompson Says:

    >> I wonder, what makes them so confident…<<

    Calvin,

    They are confident because they think that they can continually get away with fleecing the public in every unseemly way they can. When all logic and reason run away from their lips, they will then have to resort to violence to get there way with people.

    In my opinion, the codes apply only to humans; not to men and women. Humans are a nonexistent beast and as such, they had the demented view that we can be harvested for their own benefit. There is a long history on this and I think that the problem is that attorneys think that they are better and smarter than everyone else. But if you think about it, most people wouldn't even buy a car from them. The problem is that people are being treated as if they were livestock and not men and women.

    All of the codes apply to livestock and not men and women. This may be a part of the reason they won't answer. I have a theory that the income tax may actually be a commodity tax on livestock which comes out of Title 7 and not Title 26 of the US Code Since IRS agents are or used to be paid by the Department of Agriculture, that could certainly imply that they are the modern sheep shearers..think about it. See, once you have been downgraded to the status of a beast, they do what they want with you. This is why I go "ape" when I hear people use the word "human" which means an animal. http://verydumbgovernment.blogspot.com/2011/03/im-not-human.html

    The reason they won't answer is that most of them have no idea what is going on and obviously, if they do understand it, they aren't about to disclose it anytime soon. We now possibly have the reason something as stupid as evolution is taught in the schools; to make people think they are animals. They grow up with this theory, and they've had their minds twisted yet again with another belief system that has no facts to back it up. Stupid conclusions destroy the mind's ability to think clearly.

  4. Al Thompson Says:

    I just listened to this call with the esquire and I have some additional questions Marc could ask.

    Once you ask what facts or evidence do you rely on that the constitution and the codes apply to my client? Of course they will very some kind of stupid answer.

    Ask the attorney this: Do the constitution and the codes apply to you? They will then probably say yes.

    Then ask: Are you an Esquire?
    They will probably say: Yes

    Then say if the constitution applies to you, do you have authorization from Congress to have a title of British nobility?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_of_Nobility_Clause

    She will probably not answer or say no. Which in that case, her only authority comes from violence and not any law. So the gubbermint attorney has about as much authority as a WalMart greeter wearing Depends.

    Continuing:
    To attorney: What facts do you have to show that the constitution and codes apply to my client when they don’t seem to be applicable to you?

  5. Randy Jones Says:

    Hi Marc,

    I still don’t get it…why would the code not be applicable or why is the code not applicable to everyone?

  6. PatriotOne Says:

    @ Al: “”In my opinion, the codes apply only to humans; not to men and women.”” <- What facts do you rely upon that prove that to be Truth (I know you did say opinion)?

    ie; If 'humans' are animals, is the persecutor NOT a 'human'?

    ""Humans are a nonexistent beast and as such,…" <- this is circular as well. If 'humans' are nonexistent how can they also be a 'beast'?

    ""people are being treated as if they were livestock and not men and women."" WHAT is treating People as if thhey were livestock? Other People?

    ""All of the codes apply to livestock and not men and women."" <- What facts do you rely on that prove this to be truth? How can a stranger write a CODE that applies to My cattle-chickens-canabis? Where did the stranger get the ability to control My stuff?

    GovCo is nothing more than a gang of liars and thieves – men and women wearing costumes with guns – claiming they read a book (CODE) that allows them to command me to dance while they point a gun at me.

    You AL can believe GovCo treats You like an animal, but in THEIR world THEY see you as a Man that must follow THEIR orders because THEY re-present GovCO the MASTER. THEY will say that slavery is against the LAW and then say that You must pay them for permission to sustain Your life or they will throw You into a cage.

    Man or animal has no-thing to do with the truth.

  7. Al Thompson Says:

    @PatriotOne

    In their idiot codes the only conclusion that can be had is that these goons consider the rest of the people animals. Of course it is stupid but that’s how they view it. I don’t know what they consider themselves; probably animals too is my guess. I was commenting on what the “code” actually says and I’m putting it in the proper context.

    >>ou AL can believe GovCo treats You like an animal, but in THEIR world THEY see you as a Man that must follow THEIR orders because THEY re-present GovCO the MASTER. THEY will say that slavery is against the LAW and then say that You must pay them for permission to sustain Your life or they will throw You into a cage.<<

    No, in their world they see men as animals and that's why they treat us like slaves. Maybe the whole system would be different if there were no such nonsense as ALL CAPS which is just immature English grammar. Look, there is no end to the evil of the govtards. But it is telling how they write the codes. I don't think they have any authority over anyone. It is the violence they use that is the real authority.

  8. NonE Says:

    Al Thompson Says:”We now possibly have the reason something as stupid as evolution is taught in the schools… Stupid conclusions destroy the mind’s ability to think clearly.”

    I agreee wholeheartedly with your conclusion! 🙂

    – the Very NonHumanBeastieThing

  9. NonE Says:

    Randy Jones Says:
    December 9th, 2012 at 10:29 am

    Hi Marc,

    I still don’t get it…why would the code not be applicable or why is the code not applicable to everyone?
    ———————————
    Randy, Let’s say Dionysus, Bruce, Kel and I get together and decide on how we think people should behave. We carefully put this together in a document and call it “The Code of Humanity.” Do you believe you would be obliged to follow that code or be subject to whatever punnishments, including torture and death, that we deem appropriate to dish out? If not, why not?

    – NonE

  10. dan gould Says:

    @NonE,
    Hey where do I buy a ticket to this shindig to make up all those rules about people’s behavior? Is this an exclusive group?

  11. NonE Says:

    Dan,

    You can grease my palms (or my plantains, for that matter) and that may help. In any case it will help prevent the theft of my remaining coconuts (and/or bananas). And, yes, we ARE excrusive. Very excrusive.

    – NonE

  12. PatriotOne Says:

    @Al,
    What you say makes sence as to what is happening in the process. I’m simply saying that a POLICE looks at you as a Man that the POLICE are permitted to control. The POLICE see you as someone they can punch-kick-taze-shoot if you fail to listen and do the particular way they want you to listen and do.
    They do not see or think animal, they see and think they are the BOSS.
    —————————————–

    I would like to know anyones thoughts about adding, to the Motion To Dismiss, cost and fees for being forced to defend a frivilous claim?

    If the judge rules against Your cost and fees, how could he not also rule against the STATE?

  13. NonE Says:

    PatriotOneder,

    “If the judge rules against Your cost and fees, how could he not also rule against the STATE?”
    —————————-

    Let me guess, you’re somehow under the delusion that these people are logical and ethical? Izzat it?

    – NonE

  14. PatriotOne Says:

    @Non,
    I am under no delusion, but thank you for the kind words.

    It seems that the fraud is so obvious, why doesn’t it stop?

    My thinking is in cornering the Judge in the moment. ‘Judge, how am I wrong but the persecutor is correct?’ Judge answers “because I say so”.

    Such an answer should immediately impose a liability upon the judge.

    Non, do you have any thoughts as to whether cost and fees should be added/attached to a Motion? Do you have an example?

  15. dan gould Says:

    Oh, excrusive… nevermind

  16. NonE Says:

    “Non, do you have any thoughts as to whether cost and fees should be added/attached to a Motion? Do you have an example?”

    I think the idea is laughable. In other words, no, I don’t think you’d get anything in consideration other than total contempt by “your servants.” No I don’t have any specific examples, but I’ve heard numerous stories of people attempting to gain such remuneration and all of them have come to naught, to the best of my recollection. The level of contempt by the legal system for us mundanes, as William Grigg likes to phrase it, is simply astounding.

    – NonE

  17. NonE Says:

    dan gould Says:
    December 9th, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    Oh, excrusive… nevermind
    ——————

    Wimp!

    – NonE

  18. Kel Says:

    Dan, you can have my chair on the Board of Conduct Comittee. I don’t want to be associated with the three aforementioned stooges.

    A damn waste of pies.

  19. PatriotOne Says:

    @NonE,
    I did post this link -> (see -> Know Your Constitution – Carl Miller Part 1 of 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1s-zHrNPfkQ , a very good beginner or advanced lesson)

    CM seems to think that a claim for damages because of being forced to defend a frivilous claim IS a valid cause of action.

    Why would the STATE stop stealing if there is zero penalty? Why would a home robber stop if the owner stood by and watched?

    Why should I need to pay Marc (or anyone) instead of simply paying the STATE? Both ends are a robbery (even though Marc is not forcing me) because I shouldn’t be in court in the first place.

    Marc offers good stuff at a very reasonable rate, this is not a complaint at Marc. But a robbery is taking place one way or the other.

    The injury(s) or damage(s) is evident. GovCo (a gang of men and women) will not leave the People alone until GovCo is forced to pay for their lies.

    If you have the time please watch the video. Carl and Marc are very much alike.

    Andy said, “”Gee whiz lady, if there are facts that the constitution and code is applicable to anyone or everyone in the “state of Montana” that should not be a guarded secret.””

    This “LADY” should suffer a penalty for the fraud she is committing. The alleged Defendant should be compensated for his time and troubles. Whether the STATE is ever honest should not be considered. “LADY” is demanding money at the barrel of a gun.

    How can we stop it, pay Marc instead of the STATE? What are the LAWYERS doing (besides charging 100x Marc’s rate)?
    (I love Marc, but if I wasn’t being robbed we’d have never met, and Marc seems to think the STATE is wrong.)

  20. NonE Says:

    PatriotOneder,

    I get it. You appear to believe that the world owes you a “level playing field,” fair play and loving slavemasters. I suppose you are mad at the car companies for building vehicles that you have to PAY to put fuel in, too. Boo hoo. And I’m sure that you work for free and donate all of the money that you don’t earn to good causes. Sigh.

    Here’s a tip: since you think Marc is part of the evil cabal, GO AWAY! No one is requiring you to be here. Problem solved. 🙂

    – NonE

  21. PatriotOne Says:

    Thanks NonE,
    Lets not be dumb-asses. Please stop insulting me.

    Marc is not the evil one.

    My point is that GovCo are the thieves. If not for GovCo no Man would need to seek out Marc or Rod or Carl or Alfred or 100k other People that are trying to stop the GovCo theft.

    The “world” owes me nothing. But You owe Me the same truth that I owe You, if all things are equal. If you leave me alone and I leave you alone together we are free, at least from each other.

    Sure there are liars and thieves. But I can handle one or two kicking in my door. The courts are GovCo, 1000k men and women wearing costumes claiming to be the state of ______ or the city of _______ or the county of _________ .

    Marc isn’t trying to stop the thief kicking in my door, he is trying to stop GovCo. If it wasn’t for GovCo YOU probably never would have known of Marc. AM I LIEING? AM I LIEING? AM I LIEING? (why do you seek only to pizz me off?)

    There should be a level and honest playing field.
    “” You appear to believe that the world owes you a “level playing field,” fair play and loving slavemasters””. Is a ‘level playing field’ equal to ‘fair play and slavery’? <- here YOU NonE sound exactly like the bureaucrats Marc regularly records.

    NonE, you have proven to me that the people like you are the same kind of people employed by GovCo.

    I simply asked for ideas to apply upon the GovCo liars and thieves in an effort to stop the theft. If "they' can impose a fine without corpus delecti, why shouldn't we impose fees when there IS corpus delecti. GovCo is taking our (my) time-energy-labor without our (my) permission. If YOU did that to me I would have a valid claim against you.

    Marc has asked the COP, "if I did business like you do business would I be arrested?".
    NonE, if you took my car and locked me in your cage and demanded money from me YOU would be stealing my life and I would be justified in ending your life to save my life.
    GovCo is doing the same thing. We should have a remedy and be compensated for injuries and damages.

  22. NonE Says:

    PatriotOneder,

    “There should be a level and honest playing field.”

    Oh really? Factually can you show me that this is so?

    What if you, instead of fantasizing about a magical world that doesn’t exist and never has, instead look at the real world in which we live and then attempt to do your part to make it more like the world that you would like to live in rather than whining that it doesn’t match up to your envisioned fantasy?

    Create some beauty, share some wisdom, crack a joke and give someone a smile.

    “NonE, you have proven to me that the people like you are the same kind of people employed by GovCo.”

    Ya think so? Hmph. That’s a laugh. I couldn’t even fill out the application, much less stoop to the depths of scuminess required to work for the government. But thanks for your support! 🙂

    – NonE

  23. Kel Says:

    Like an old porch dog these days NonE. Just barkin’ at anyone who walks by.

  24. NonE Says:

    Woof.

  25. Andy Says:

    “Like an old porch dog these days NonE. Just barkin’ at anyone who walks by.”

    Laughing my a$$ off!!! You nailed it Kel. Can’t teach and old dog new tricks. Can lead a horse to water but can’t stop it from pi$$ing in it.

  26. PatriotOne Says:

    P1 – “There should be a level and honest playing field.”

    NE – Oh really? Factually can you show me that this is so?

    P1 – Hmmmm, isn’t Marc’s (good Men’s) goal to live in a level playing field? Just because a level playing field isn’t so does not mean that it shouldn’t be so.

    NE – What if you, instead of fantasizing about a magical world that doesn’t exist and never has,

    P1 – I am not fantasizing about any world, I am fully aware that there has always been honest men and dishonest men. And I’m sure you, NE, will request the facts I rely upon to prove there are honest and dishonest men.

    NE – instead look at the real world in which we live and then attempt to do your part to make it more like the world that you would like to live in…

    P1 – I thought I was trying to do just ^^^^ that? I did ask for ideas on how to exact a cost upon the liars and thieves in order to give them a reason to stop. If there is no penalty for theft or rape why would anyone not start stealing and raping?

    NE – rather than whining that it doesn’t match up to your envisioned fantasy?

    P1 – I asked, I did not cry.
    There are a lot of people that call Marc’s show that do not want to end up crying inside a cage. It is too bad that you, NE, don’t seem to care about the torture these people are going through.
    Your answer to them would go; “STFU and do your time, stop fantasizing about a magical world that doesn’t exist and never has”.

    NE – Create some beauty, share some wisdom, crack a joke and give someone a smile.

    P1 – ^^^ RIGHT BACK AT’CHA ^^^

    P1 – “NonE, you have proven to me that the people like you are the same kind of people employed by GovCo.”

    NE – Ya think so? Hmph. That’s a laugh. I couldn’t even fill out the application, much less stoop to the depths of scuminess required to work for the government. But thanks for your support!

    P1 – Really? I think you have stooped to the depths quite well. I’m sure that if you submitted this thread with your application to work for the IRS the IRS would put you in charge of CID on your first day.

  27. NonE Says:

    Woof!

  28. Calvin Says:

    @PatriotOne: I think most of us reading your comments understand the idea of filing a valid complaint in response to their aggressive, baseless legal attacks/opinion violations/”complaints”. However, a moral principal comes into play; is it morally justifiable to use a group of monopolistic, violent men and women to settle disputes/conflict/problems?

    The point is best made when asking the question; is it reasonable to complain TO the corrupt mafia ABOUT the injustices of the mafia?

    Notice when Marc talks about filing complaints with opinion-enforcers, he mentions the intention isn’t for any restitution, but to make it known that us NonE-locals are watching them.

    In short, its all about moral/ethical consistency.

    The ants outnumber us 100[,000,000] to 1…

  29. Pete Says:

    AHHH…so pleasant…like slipping my mind into a nice, steaming hot tub full of bubbling legalese contradictions and blatant, lukewarm evasiveness!

    Calvin and Marc: Thanks for posting another Call of Shame! I take back those bad things I said about you while I was going through COS withdrawal.

  30. NonE Says:

    PatriotOne Says:
    December 10th, 2012 at 4:31 pm

    P1 – “There should be a level and honest playing field.”

    NE – Oh really? Factually can you show me that this is so?

    P1 – Hmmmm, isn’t Marc’s (good Men’s) goal to live in a level playing field? Just because a level playing field isn’t so does not mean that it shouldn’t be so.
    ————————

    It should be so because it should be so because it should be so because it should be so because…

    “Should” means that reality is not an issue, all that matters is what I think. I don’t need to actually change anything, I can just proclaim that things “should” be other than they are and then I can self-righteously walk off in a huff. That makes it OTHER peoples’ faults that my life sucks, not mine.

    – the Very Non Broken Record

  31. PatriotOne Says:

    @Calvin,
    “”The point is best made when asking the question; is it reasonable to complain TO the corrupt mafia ABOUT the injustices of the mafia?””

    Is it reasonable? Aren’t we already there in their court, with their gun pointed, attempting to straiten their circular BS? Haven’t they taken hold of our life, we then attempting to break free?

    Why shouldn’t the individual GovCo employee be required to return to me what I was forced to give to Marc (or the real shyster attorney) in order to impose the truth upon GovCo. Had GovCo simply left me alone I would not be have lost/spent any thing.

    That is why I ask, why seek Marc’s help or pay Marc at all? Why not simply pay the STATE and eliminate Marc (or the real shyster attorney) the “middle man”? Why not simply bow and pay if we’re going to pay anyway?

    Did the persecutor claim to Marc “you are not an attorney so I will not talk to you”? The persecutor doesn’t even (really) talk to the alleged defendant. The persecutor accuses the alleged defendant, and then the pers and alleged talk about each other to the judge.

    When the judge denies the accused, and the accused appeals, then there are two judges required to agree or not agree, it then could go to three more judges, and then to three more, then to nine more (WHAT A PAIN IN THE ASS), now there are seventeen judges that must agree or disagree. And all these judges must comply or eliminate Marbury v Madison (and title 21 – 31 – 1 – 26 – 42 – …).

    Where else is there to go other than to those that have sworn to serve protect and defend? I prefer not to go there…

  32. Andy Says:

    There should be no government. Disregard reality and walk away in a huff. When a dog is a hammer everything looks like a stranger walking by.

    “Argue for limitations and sure enough they’re yours.” ~ Richard Bach

  33. PatriotOne Says:

    @NonE,
    “”It should be so because it should be so because it should be so because it should be so because…”””

    Thank you for re-stating the STATEs circular argument.

    I’ll try to straiten is out. It should be so because….. it would be honest and the truth.

    The truth is that there is no STATE as far as the People are concerned, but there is the STATE as far as trespassers upon the People are concerned.

    The People allegedly created the STATE in an effort to defend their life or liberty or property. The People allegedly did not create the STATE to control or be MASTER over their life or liberty or property.

  34. NonE Says:

    “There should be a level playing field.”

    Facts in evidence?

    “The playing field should be level because it should be level.” (quotishly paraquoted sorta roughly)

    This is too much fun! And you accuse ME of talking like a statist. Rich. Really rich. 🙂

    – NonE

  35. NonE Says:

    @Andy,
    “When a dog is a hammer everything looks like a stranger walking by.” Good one! I like it. Woof, woof. 😉

    – NonE

4 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP – Dec 8, 2012 | MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] New #CoS featuring Montana prosecutors. […]

  2. NSP - Apr 13, 2013 - Guests: Alex Knight III and Steve | MarcStevens.netMarcStevens.net Says:

    […] to prove applicability/jurisdiction supported by empirical evidence (not legal opinion). [Beware of circular-logic referring back to the code with bureaucratic […]

  3. NSP - May 4, 2013 - Co-host: Calvin and Guest: Kolby Granville - [UPDATED PODCAST] | MarcStevens.netMarcStevens.net Says:

    […] circular reasoning of using the law [legal opinion] to factually demonstrate applicability of the law [legal […]

  4. NSP – May 4, 2013 – Co-host: Calvin and Guest: Kolby Granville – [UPDATED PODCAST] - Unofficial Network Says:

    […] circular reasoning of using the law [legal opinion] to factually demonstrate applicability of the law [legal […]

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturday, 4-7pm EST: 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, 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 broadcast via Ustream.tv. 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