NSP – Nov 16, 2013

Posted on November 17th, 2013 by Calvin

Show Topics:

  • Look forward to regular video uploads of the first hour of the NSP radio show on Marc’s YouTube channel, however we can do the full show if someone wants to do a barter for a terabyte external hard drive.
  • Government: Indicted, the attempt to “rid the world of the worship of psychopaths,” is finally released and ready for purchase.
  • GI book excerpt: “Paying taxes is the moral equivalent of driving your kids to a pedophile’s house.”
  • New videos this week: Dinner With an Agorist – Yeoman’s Business Without Asking Permission [check out his hearings in the CoS] and AiLL Lesson Nugget: Plea of Guilty – Tool For Getting Tickets Kicked Out.
  • Request Marc for a workshop in your community in the comments section.
  • Marc’s response to a YouTube critic that believes jurisdiction is only a pretrial issue and therefore cannot be brought up at any point during litigation, and that you are arguing law when using an unsigned plea of guilt to ask for the prosecutor’s evidence of jurisdiction and/or other factual requirements before they are to even supposed to be allowed to bring a case before the courts.
  • How to show when judges are lying when they claim you are refusing to plea and enter a plea for you by keeping the function of the unsigned plea of guilt in mind. 😉
  • How to counter when attorneys conflate issues of evidence as an issue of law (opinion).
  • Issues of evidence can be brought up during pretrial proceedings and can at least be argued during trial via motion to dismiss.
  • Marc’s response to a YouTube critic that believes that there are STATES and CITIZENS despite the lack of evidence to support such prevailing opinion.
  • Helen’s traffic ticket dismissed and she was awarded ~$1,400 for the “troubles” of an abuse of process on the prosecutor’s behalf; congratulations!
  • Helen got the court to commit to a deadline for the prosecutor to produce evidence of jurisdiction.
  • Within the span of nine hearings, professional prosecutors could not produce any evidence prove the LAW applies to the person they are attacking using their LAW.
  • How the same issues that led to Helen’s traffic ticket being dismissed are the same issues that she is raising in her council tax hearings.
  • New CoS where the client had mentioned to a lawyer that they are “just writing things down and applying it to me; there is no evidence.”
  • Beaurucrats that demand respect for their authortah.
  • Helen’s success was not just from selectively listening to small bits of the NSP show and repeating what sounds good in court.
  • Was it worth it to challenge the prosecution’s [lack of] evidence and work hard to seek the truth in court, and would you do it again?
  • A prosecutor ironically says “you can’t make up your own rules” to Marc during a call.
  • Objecting to a summery denial of motions when they don’t address each issue raised without stating specific grounds for denial.
  • Demonstrating how judges are wrongfully preemptively assuming guilt when they are supposed to be presuming you innocent.
  • How to counter a forced plea from the judge with a motion to disqualify the judge for lack of impartiality and fairness and that it would be impossible to get a fair hearing when he is presuming you guilty of an element of the crime.
  • Not waiving your right to a speedy trial by requesting a continuance.
  • Asking the single most important questions: “can you confirm that the prosecution and/or witnesses has presented evidence proving that the code and constitution apply to me and that there is evidence of jurisdiction over me?”
  • Keeping the burden of proof on the prosecutor.
  • The psychological trauma caused by the systematic indoctrination of “legal” and “illegal” instead of what’s actually right or wrong.
  • Intending on pleading “responsible” to get your foot in the door to ask some questions on the nature and cause of the charges and proceedings be brought forward.
  • Props to Dan Gould, and all other media-reps, that make it out to court to support other NSP activists.
  • Keeping focused on your questions when judges shift into evasive mode.
  • Seeking specific grounds for denial or asking if they are going to just rule arbitrarily against you if they refuse to provide the grounds for their decision.
  • When asking judges what the mean by the STATE, you will hear silly responses such as “sir, don’t start with me, just don’t start with me.”
  • The specifics and technicalities of an intended plea of guilt and stopping the process long enough to get out the fact they have no evidence to constitute a justiciable case.
  • Using the NSP chat for role-plays and paying for a personal consultation to better prepare for court.
  • Factually breaking down the Title of Nobility Amendment.
  • Contacting risk management to seek accountability in a courtroom off the rails.
  • The horrors of Madison Street jail.
  • Signing a ticket is not a contract because it is not voluntary, its sign or go to jail.
  • Objecting to the witness taking the stand to testify because they are not qualified to submit testimony on whether the constitution and codes apply.
  • The prosecution has to disclose all evidence they plan to use during trial.
  • Attorneys that refer to the STATE as if it were alive.

Caller’s Topics:

  • Helen and Fabrice from England: Helen’s traffic ticket kicked and she was awarded £900 for her “troubles” <~> Helen was offered an abuse of process hearing for prosecutorial misconduct, but declined to just call the matter settled and be left alone <~> the calling of the witnesses to testify against Helen was “overlooked<~> the sudden change of tone with Helen’s media rep; Fabrice <~> the big difference in the traffic hearing vs the council tax hearing: the judge’s willingness to answer questions responsively <~> comparing the non-applicability of church law to the non-applicability of STATE law <~> the effectiveness of not taking a position and just simply and professionally asking for the evidence <~> the difference role-playing in the NSP chat made to help prepare for court to effectively exercise damage control <~> apologies from angry bureaucrats <~> and weighing the pros and cons of challenging the prosecution’s [lack of] evidence.
  • Steven from CA: whether to file a “request for action” or a “motion to dismiss” <~> how to avoid a forced plea before you get some initial issues raised and resolved <~> cop writes a ticket for “texting while driving,” even though Steven provably wasn’t texting <~> and the journey coming to the understanding the fiction of the STATE.
  • Laura from AZ: challenging citations for “driving a vehicle with a suspended license plate” and “no proof in insurance<~> role-playing on how to initially proceed in court by filing a motion to dismiss and getting a decision on that before submitting any kind of plea <~> using media-reps in court <~> using a friend for assistance in court <~> you don’t actually have to be a lawyer to be a Justice of the Peace in AZ <~> and proving personal insurance to get one of the charges dropped.
  • Dylan from TX: doesn’t follow the logic in one of Marc’s videos about the intention of pleading guilty depending on whether the prosecution has evidence of ________ <~> [not] signing an intended plea of guilt <~> how to initially proceed in court <~> and learning courtroom procedure.
  • Dr. DP from CA: “when the student is ready the teacher will appear” <~> and invoking the hidden 13th amendment.
  • Kea from AZ: update on her Avondale hearing <~> Dan Gould’s intimidation factor as a media-rep in court in Phoenix <~> court started their railroading trial without the defendant <~> the judge was trowing insults and paperwork at the defendant during the proceeding <~> suspicion that the police officers submitting testimony switched identities <~> the hearing venue was moved to Phoenix <~> the prosecution would not produce the evidence of the complaint for “criminal trespass” and “criminal endangerment” <~> the court claims that the “case is closed” because “funds were transferred” <~> physical abuse and robbery from law enforcement officers <~> all charges dropped and Kea was when she finally provided ID information only to come home to her kids being kidnapped by the STATE <~> the police chief in Avondale has recently resigned and no one has yet replaced him <~> and seeking accountability with a police department that investigates itself.
  • Johnny from TX: input on role-playing on the issues of jurisdiction <~> challenging jurisdiction and standing based on their rules <~> are the courts using secret rulings? <~> a judge claims that “jurisdiction cannot be challenged until after you are convicted” <~> once the issue of jurisdiction is raised, it must be proven on the record of the court <~> and “the whole municipal court system is designed to violate due process at every step of the way.”
  • Skip from MO: a humored defense attorney takes Skip outside right in the middle of a hearing because he asked if he could get a “fair and meaningful hearing” <~> judge tells the defendant to “move on” when asking for evidence of jurisdiction <~> getting discovery from the prosecution <~> continuing to raise the issue of evidence of jurisdiction <~> and using the term “the plaintiff STATE.”

Meta-content Credits:


11 Comments For This Post

  1. Eyal Says:

    What happened to Skip, happened 1 to 1 in my traffic case. Exactly the same thing.

  2. Eyal Says:

    What happened to Skip with the defense attorney, happened in my traffic case. Exactly the same thing. You return to the room and the judge already entered a plea for you, and started another trial so you lost your opportunity to call him on it.. so don’t ever leave the room until it’s done!

  3. Cris Says:

    Helen’s case a very very nice win. Once they argued “within the realm” they sank themselves IMO. Besides being quite nebulous ‘the realm’ does not include the City of London so they could not elucidate ‘the realm’ without opening a huge can of worms, a can they will not acknowledge even exists much less open it.
    We will see what happens in the council tax matter which as you know is administrative (not judicial) and run by the Local Authority. In council tax cases the court is under contract with the Local authority to issue the Liability Orders.
    Good move Helen on having the costs ready – that is the only way, always have them documented and ready (in the UK) no matter what the case looks like. The fact that they did not refer the costs to a Tax Master shows they knew they had abused Helen. And she let them off which was the right thing to do (forgive us our sins) and made the cost award a matter of course. They were awarded from central funds so they didn’t show in a ‘blame account’.
    Fabrice knows his stuff from what I have heard of him. Does he post on a UK website ?

    Cris (in the UK)

  4. NonE Says:

    Regarding Helen’s location, I’m confused. Only in Israel would Suffix be on the West. Anywhere else that would be Prefix. West Suffix appears to be a contradiction in terms. But aside from that, GREAT win, Helen, and excellent show, Marc. 🙂 – NonE

  5. indio007 Says:

    From the Risk Management Administrative Policy AP – 14
    Contact the Risk Manager at 623-687-4966

  6. indio007 Says:

    That’s Avondale BTW.

  7. Helen Says:

    I’m in the UK, West Sussex, South-East England. Thanks for the support guys 🙂

  8. Raul Says:

    @ Marc Stevens – You brought up a good point in your show. There are many people who believe that just saying what you say will work in court. I have assisted a few people and you can see that the people who actually prepare are successful. I have worked with “patriots” or “freemen” they just don’t understand and are not successful. I have experienced this first-hand. This was a great point to bring up and I think you should bring this up more.

  9. Ellis Says:

    Q: Is it true that Judges and/or Prosecutor’s lose their immunity if they knowingly proceed without jurisdiction and can be sued personally or claims made against their insurance/bond?

    Q: If one files a claim against a Judge’s insurance bond, how is the “truth” of the lack of Jurisdiction claim determined absent going through the dicey legal system? I.e. does the simple lack of evidence win the day with the insurer?

    “When a judge knows that he lacks jurisdiction, or acts in the face of clearly valid statutes expressly depriving him of jurisdiction, judicial immunity is lost. Rankin v. Howard, (1980) 633 F.2d 844, cert den. Zeller v. Rankin, 101 S.Ct. 2020, 451 U.S. 939, 68 L.Ed 2d 326”

  10. eye2i Says:

    @Ellis: just consider, if you wish to go the Argue route, it’s often not enough to find one Case/Opinion (or even several) that supports your Argument; rather, one best have checked *all* such Opinions –as Argument is much like a poker game, where not only your cards are a critical factor, so are your opponent’s. [including having personally examined in detail any “cards” in your hand, first hand, top to bottom aka checked context]. It ties in with the wisdom of not asking a question you don’t yourself *know* aka understand the answer to. If you wish to Argue with Professionals, you best know *every*thing that They have on Their Side of the Table.

  11. Mike Says:


4 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP – Nov 16, 2013 - Unofficial Network Says:

    […] Click here to view the embedded video. […]

  2. Page not found | Earth Freedom News Says:

    […] NSP – Nov 16, 2013 […]

  3. NSP - Nov 23, 2013 - [UPDATED PODCAST] | MarcStevens.netMarcStevens.net Says:

    […] and Laura from AZ: Paul’s $5,000 prize for anyone who could provide evidence of a CITIZEN or STATE […]

  4. NSP - May 30, 2015 - MarcStevens.net Says:

    […] In Helen’s case, the court was very despicable and vile up until the day they ruled in her favor. […]

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 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 now broadcast via youtube.com. 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