- Dealing with bureaucratic psychopaths and limiting the damage they intend on doing to us.
- Derrick J’s Victimless Crime Spree: “540 days in jail for dancing, smoking, going to court, and riding a bike.”
- Vin James’ “No STATE Project Reloaded” on Awake Radio and his foreclosure “case” in court.
- The non-existence of “rights” as they are only mental/legal constructs/concepts.
- Butler Shaffer‘s points that “property is based on social mutual voluntary agreement” and “what you own what you are willing to kill for.”
- Disqualifying a witness who has a lack of personal firsthand knowledge by challenging and focusing on 1)relevance, 2)competence, and 3)credibility.
- Raising the issue of prosecutorial misconduct/overreach when prosecutors intentionally ignore discovery (or any other) requests.
- Attributes of a real psychopath that should be pointed out when applicable: a callus disregard for others, a lack of conscience, and incessant lying.
- Objecting to circular reasoning in legal proceedings.
- Incessantly questioning the prosecutor on thier burden of proof and going from the vague to specific with their responses.
- Objecting when the judge asks if the parties are ready to proceed and mention the prosecution has not presented any evidence to show that the constitution and code are, in fact, applicable; which is required for invoking the court’s jurisdiction.
- Using a whiteboard to keep track of notable points that you want the audience to keep in mind as you run through your questions, especially for elements of the crime that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. [see Lanny Breuer’s comment on PBS Frontline: The Untouchables (if you can find it) at about the 4:20 mark, seriously, and then consider yourself “untouchable” also.] 😉
- Smear campaigns to cover for their lack of evidence.
- Filing for a Brady request.
- KNOWING who/what you are up against: unaccountable psychopaths.
- More STATE-department two-step from the MD AG who “instructed and ordered” the MD Comptroller’s office to “not take Marc’s call” for asking about witnesses.
- The applicability of the code goes to being presumed innocent of the crime; either you are presumed innocent of every element of the crime and the prosecution has to prove applicability beyond a reasonable doubt, or you are not presumed innocent of every element of the crime and they can therefore presume applicability/jurisdiction.
- Challenging the jurisdiction without citing legal opinion by challenging it on a factual basis and asking them for the evidence of applicability.
- Use of court interpreters.
- Matt from Austin, TX: private firm prosecuting traffic violations.
- Michael from MD: where to find the listen lines for the No STATE Project, driver’s license compliance always under threat of force, roadside LEO mandate challenges, NonEntity’s article discussing love as an agreement, and declaring duress & coercion to documents that people are forced to sign.
- Dan from Guthrie, OK: trial de novo on February 14th [media-reps], entry of evidence in a trial de novo, motion dismiss denied because judge admits to not being qualified, cop impeached and prosecutor still calling as witness, misconduct to knowingly bring unqualified witness, and the judge neglecting evidence from the defendant.
- Penny from Lubbock, TX: her upcoming jury trial, preparing for court by role-playing, and the relevance of witnesses with personal firsthand knowledge.
- David from MA: convicted in psychopathic “tax evasion” circus, don’t use lawyers because they will not raise essential factual issues to defend their client against unjusticiable bureaucratic attacks, and prosecutor lied during opening/closing arguments.
- Scott from Portland, OR: trial Monday for a “no registration” violation [media-reps], constantly hammering away at the lack of evidence, and getting over fear of dealing with bureaucrats.
- Tiger Lily from Las Vegas, NV: going to jail for rolling eyes in court [and the like], three trials, prosecutor doesn’t have to give disclosure, questioning “the code is applicable” and objecting in spite of fear, judge answering discovery for prosecutor, and appealing to police officer’s sense of morality and virtue.
- Jeff from PA: his unique “right to travel” case resulting in injury from jailhouse chains after challenging jurisdiction at arraignment.
- Peter from MT: dealing with two psychopathic circuses; trial Monday and convicted with no evidence code applied, the judge ignored objections and spoke over Peter, the judge impeached the witness and kept their testimony anyway, and a lecture by the judge in place of evidentiary pretrial hearing resulting in a no fishing restriction.
On the chat there was a claim the constitution is for the “government” and not for us. This is a common misconception though, it’s just rhetoric and ignores what is happening. The constitution is the tool the bureaucrats use to justify their violence, their pretended jurisdiction. Everything they do, by their own admission, comes down to their “law”, law they believes applies to us and gives them jurisdiction.
Remember, there is no evidence to prove it. If you doubt this, prove it to yourself. Investigate and ask politicians and bureaucrats the evidence they rely on.