Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Mar 9, 2013 – Co-hosts: JT and Calvin

Posted on March 10th, 2013 by Calvin

Co-hosts: JT and Calvin [@YouTube].

Show Notes:

  • Marc’s reputation of questioning evidence in New York, as overheard while on hold.
  • Insisting the prosecution maintain their burden of proof regarding their baseless assertions.
  • The multinational applicability of all the elements of a valid cause of action or damnum absque injuria.
  • The meaning of different pleas in court.
  • Including judicial/prosecutorial misconduct in a motion to dismiss.
  • Kurt’s excellent Call-of-Shame by sticking to questioning the factual evidence the prosecutor needs to prove applicability.
  • The prosecutor’s obligation to provide evidence to prove all the elements of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt before appearing before the court.
  • Texas prosecutor’s willingness to put another man in jail before speaking to any of his witnesses to verify the complaint.
  • The Prison-Industrial Complex in Amerika: Victimless Crimes Are 86% of the Federal Prison Population.
  • The point of going to trial is to subject the prosecutor’s assertions to evidence with a very high burden of proof and scrutiny.
  • Baby-stepping the prosecutor through the (lack of) evidence.
  • Exploring the lack of the required “meeting of the mindselement of a invalid contract.
  • Reducing the issue of how the court establishes jurisdiction to its foundation: code violations of the CONstitution (which doesn’t apply to you).
  • Making the clarification in court of the judge’s and prosecutor’s misinterpretation that “the law doesn’t apply,” they leave out the most important part; “there IS NO EVIDENCE that the law applies.”
  • Jurisdiction is the burden of the one who moves the court; the plaintiff, that must be supported by proof and evidence.
  • Maintaining a 1:1 response ratio with non-responsive prosecutors.
  • Bureaucratic attacks that are based upon their “feelings.”
  • Res judicata: a matter already decided/judged.
  • Objecting to facts and/or opinion that do not prove the CONstitution applies to you.
  • Jurisdiction is ALWAYS on the plaintiff, regardless if the complaint is criminal or civil.
  • Lowering the standard of proof in court when a Washington state prosecutor attempts to claim the code is applicable exclusively because of geography because “it just is.”
  • Finding a point where the agent can and would put a hold on an assessment.
  • Big thanks to Chris and Shree at the Truth Frequency Radio Network, and all of the other affiliates, for simulcasting the No STATE Project and tune-in to Vin James’ No STATE Project UK following the NSP Reloaded rebroadcast every Sunday 1pm GMT on Dark City Radio.
  • Politically active litigants using criminal complaints against abusive bureaucrats to keep the abuse in check.
  • The Pirate Bay files a copyright claim into the courts to demonstrate the absurdity of the selective applicability of the law.
  • Myth-busting the assumptions that prosecutors don’t have to talk to non-lawyers and that they don’t have to provide discovery before trial.
  • Asking for confirmation of factual evidence needed to prove jurisdiction.
  • Bringing back non-responsive prosecutors to the issue(s) at hand.

Caller’s Topics:

  • Helen and Fabrice from Sussex, England: Hellen’s speeding AiLL: the prosecutor’s admission that there is NO INJURY [= NO ADVERSARY], the courts threat of higher fines for asking damning questions, the court’s forced plea on the defendant’s behalf, questioning the evidence of jurisdiction of the court, the “factual law” of speeding, judge ends the court hearing for Helen demonstrating the conflict of interest between the prosecutor and judge, the prosecutor’s willingness to escalate the case despite her lack of evidence, and people standing up for one another in court to show power in numbers.
  • Scott from Long Island, NY: license plate light out BINGO ticket incident while refueling, responding to the prosecutor’s nonsense responses on jurisdiction, and using walkman recorders and miniature microphones to record your hearings.
  • Armando from McAllen, TX: keeping the burden of proof of “residency” on the one making the claim during a hearing on a filed motion to dismiss, objecting to the judge and prosecutor tricking a swearing in process, judges claim that jurisdiction established by public notary, the judge’s intentional misinterpretation of the motion to dismiss, and the court wrongfully shifting the burden on the defendant, and responding to the prosecutor’s request for admissions.
  • Kimbra from Indianapolis, IN: working through a legally complicated foreclosure lawsuit, using a “private administrative process” to challenge the initial parties claim, and responding to a summary judgement after using the UCC-redemption theory.
  • Penny from Lubbock, TX: the effective use of whiteboards in court, “human error” prevailing in the defendants favor, blurry video evidence, refining an opening statement, receiving a ticket for dodging a negligent motorcyclist traveling without lights on at night, and requesting a role-playing session from the NSP skype chat participants.
  • Michael from MD: their (not your) burden of proof in criminal and civil proceedings, unnecessarily subjecting yourself to cross-examination by swearing in especially before jurisdiction is established, bureaucrats attempting to use residency documents (drivers license or utility bills) to prove jurisdiction, “baby-stepping” bureaucrats through questioning the evidence of their legal attack, and using bitcoin and privatized banking as an alternative to using the predatory monopolized monetary system.
  • John from TX: appealing to the court/judge (instead of the prosecutor) to provide proof of every element jurisdiction, ignoring the prosecutor as a legitimate adversary in court, and reminding the court of criminal charges that could be applied and filed against them for judicial/prosecutorial incompetence and/or misconduct.
  • Richard from IL: Marc and Richard’s call to Mr. Ronald Sandler concerning (the lack of) evidence of a code violation, questioning the lack of a stated cause of action, prosecutor and judge shutting down the discovery process, going to jail for two days for asking if the kangaroo proceedings are a joke because of a lack of evidence presented by the prosecutor, and filing a complaint against the judge through a writ of prohibition.
  • Alex from Atlanta, GA: handling multiple traffic tickets and getting a motion to dismiss template.
  • Delilah from San Diego, CA: judge granting an ex parte proceeding to hear a stay of proceedings, and filing an affidavit using witnesses, transcripts, and recordings for an appeal.
  • Anthony from Austin, TX: what to do after filing a motion to dismiss in an invalid driver’s license violation, filing a Brady request with the cop, and asking questions of evidence in a pretrial setting.
  • Matthew from Queensland, Australia: using a media rep in court, second appearance in court titled a “hearing mention,” properly preparing to appear before the court, submitting a plea to the court to begin to ask questions to be informed of the nature and cause of the charges and proceedings being brought forward, and dealing with the overwhelming legalese in court.

12 Comments For This Post

  1. Crazy Says:

    I after listing this show I came up with an idea. It seems that this was a shake down and why couldn’t we call it what it is. Offer the prosecutor and judge fifty bucks to just go away with no record. If they don’t accept beat the crap out of them in court. I would even tell the judge that it would be in their best interest to accept or tell them exactly whats going to happen. Tell them the judge that at your trial the judge is going to impeach the officer and that after you win you are going to sue the officer for damages and you are going to tell the officer that (looking at the judge) You sold the officer down the river. I’ll place my argument in the forum.

  2. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Crazy, I would not be that aggressive with them. You can ask questions and ask for clarifications and imply you’re building a case for damages later. You do what you’re suggesting and you’ll probably be held in contempt.

  3. Mr. Mike Says:

    Re-post of reply at: “Make a Bureaucrat Run…”

    Marc Stevens et al.,

    Consider me a newer addition to the et al. This stuff is GREAT! A master of the Socratic Method couldn’t provide better examples.

    I wish to add to the education of all from my extensive Military and Technological History background. The vast majority of people do not understand the difference between strategy and tactics. Nor do they know what the “Scientific Method” is really about.

    Succinctly, Strategy is what you use to win a war; Tactics are what you use to win battles. In this specific case, your strategy is “Damage Control” with psychos/bureaucrats. Your tactics in achieving that goal are asking leading questions (more generally known as the Socratic Method). Granted, there are few more tactics to be applied but, the point here is to keep things short and simple.

    As for the Scientific Method, Richard Feynman (a physicist on par with Albert Einstein) sums it up best in this 1:03 long video:
    In this case, the Scientific Method is only remotely/tenuously connected to “Damage Control.”

    Hopefully, this bit of background will help everyone develop laser like focusing abilities that send ‘officials’ scurrying for cover…and help reclaim our freedom.

  4. Pab Lo Says:

    Marc Stevens: Good Morning buddy. I am fairly new to all of this information and while researching the unconstitutionality of our courts I became a victim of their little game. I was charges for bogus charges; Public Intoxication & Interfere with a peace officer. what could i do?

  5. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Pab I’d start with the motion to dismiss for a lack of jurisdiction.

  6. Pab Lo Says:

    Is there a certain amount of time before the initial appearance that i submit it or just as long as its before. This all just happened Monday 2:00a. The police report isn’t even available. Could you point me in the right direction of what case law and or constitutional articles to embed into the motion?

  7. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ pab, submit the motion this week, use the ticket #. You don’t need the police report. I have a motion template available under the store.

  8. Pab Lo Says:

    Excuse my ignorance but would this be a civil or criminal matter. I’m guessing Criminal. Whats all included with the motions?

  9. janice Says:

    i was hoping you would have christopher king, a lawyer, on your show tonight. I know he’s emailed you. He’s fighting the same things you are. You could learn a lot from him. He’s not typical in hiding their tactics from the public.

  10. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Janice, he contacted me and I invited him to call the show today. He’s welcome to come on.

  11. janice Says:

    he told me he was on the call and waiting. He’s going away for a month now. It would be nice if you could prearrange something. He’s got a website KINGCAST.NET He’s been looking for justice for people killed by police officers. People that live in fear because of the police that supposedly uphold “justice” I would love it if you would get a hold of him and schedule something. He’s after corrupt mayors, judges and police. I have no particular interest in him. I live in Canada where the same rampant injustice occurs. I learned about canada through what is happening in the u.s. and how they work together for the sake of the corporate corruption. Whatever effects america will effect canada. Often it happens in canada first cause hockey and beer do a lot to placate the
    Please contact him and arrange something. Talk to him ahead of time if you feel the need to screen him. I assure you he’s a good guy.

  12. janice Says:

    apparently he’s not going away for a month. Well, he may be but is still available. I really want to hear him on your show. He will speak from a lawyers standpoint and not from the standpoint of a prosecutor who has only one purpose…to prosecute. He’s a defence lawyer too.

3 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP – Mar 9, 2013 – Co-hosts: JT and Calvin - Unofficial Network Says:

    […] View original article. […]

  2. NSP – Mar 23, 2013 - Unofficial Network Says:

    […] in TX: friendly constructive criticism on a call from a previous show regarding foreclosure: private administrative process role with debt validation requests, qualified written requests, and […]

  3. NSP - Jul 19, 2014 - Co-host: JT - [UPDATED: FULL PODCAST] | Says:

    […] experience with getting confirmation or denial on what evidence the prosecution has to prove the constitution […]

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