Co-host: JT and Guest: Bradley from London, England.
For those who claim we don’t discuss the unsuccessful adventures in legal land, this is one of many shows where we do. And for such critics who claim we are wrong or deceptive in what we discuss here, please call into the live show and embarrass us.
Funny though over the course of approximately 8½ years the No STATE Project radio show has been on-air, and a $5,000 prize for anyone who can prove the existence of a STATE or CITIZEN; we’ve yet to receive such a call, I wonder why…
However, it is always exciting to have another success story to report, this time with Bradley from London; congratulations! Goes to show that you can exercise effective damage control no matter which jurisdictional kingdom around the world you happen to occupy. There has to be something to this No STATE Project if people are able to get predictable and replicable results in many different countries… congrats to all that have laid tread in legal land and that have found their voluntaryist zen.
- First-world winter weather problems.
- Government: Indicted temporarily back-ordered, which may affect whether Marc will be able to make it out to Ernest Hancock‘s Freedom Summit.
- IRS Agent has “no idea” about what evidence they have to prove jurisdiction.
- The tactic of calling litigants that challenge the evidence to prove jurisdiction last.
- “Thomas J. Malloy” photo-radar traffic ticket evidentiary domino-effect incident in court.
- Proving the STATE is a fiction and keeping the burden of proof on the complainant/prosecution.
- When you retain an attorney, are you waiving subject-matter jurisdiction?
- An attorney or public defender who refuses to challenge jurisdiction is guaranteeing an appealable error.
- A judge practicing law from the bench is a criminal misdemeanor, good luck getting the court to accept the complaint though.
- The psychopath Betty Thomas was making objections and then sustaining them for herself.
- Objecting to having a witness take the stand who is not qualified to make the determination whether the constitution and codes apply.
- Texas judge [who later ran for district attorney] texting the prosecutor to help with their case during a proceeding.
- Filing written objections, exceptions, and findings of facts to which each objection was sustained.
- Proving the judge is colluding with the prosecutor.
- Delilah’s upcoming court date for oral argument.
- Utilizing every opportunity to object to the judge’s and/or prosecutor’s shenanigans and misconduct.
- Despite the fact the marijuana is now legal in CO, people still use their local counter-economy merchants.
- The idea that two people can be on the same team and yet also be independent of one another is foolishly naive.
- How to respond to the line that “the complaint is the evidence of jurisdiction.”
- Al’s assertion that we still think the system is useful and they’re operating under war powers and jurisdiction is their guns, so why the confusion over these jurisdictional fiascoes?
- Refocusing the burden of prove jurisdiction back on the prosecution when they take you on rhetorical tangents.
- The IRS apparently does not fancy when you characterize their assertion that they have jurisdiction over you as an argument.
- Countering predictable non-responsive answers to your questions.
- Bradley got a “driving without proof of insurance” citation thrown out of court and awarded restitution for ~$540 court expenses utilizing Marc’s script.
- Being confident and assertive when conducting yourself in court.
- Refining your litigation skills through experience.
- The amazing reactions of the judge and prosecutor when one challenges the applicability of the constitution and codes/statutes.
- Opting-out of the bar association and helping other people navigate the judicial system.
- How to use the unsigned plea of guilty.
- Helen’s judgement award for compensation of time and costs, which was filed and based on complaints of the many documented instances of abuse of process during her proceedings.
- How to mentally prepare to be able to effectively litigate pro per.
- Success rate of taking a railroading to the appellate courts.
- Asking questions and requiring a response is the most important thing to remember in court.
- Deriving authority based on religious law versus what’s objectively right/true or wrong/false.
- Defending others who have not “breached the peace.”
- Plea-bargaining with the devil/courts.
- The deceptive nature of bureaucrats, attorneys, statists, and their apologists.
- New case for a citation of committing the terrorist act of “fare evasion” for falling asleep on a train.
- London’s Revenue Protection Officers.
- Low level London prosecutor craps his pants when he realized he’s got a pro se that can see.
- Judges also bail out prosecutors in England, surprised?
- Following your objections with the word “Stop.”
- Asking the judge why he is relieving, or helping, the prosecutor.
- The chilling effect of asking questions of evidence to prove the constitution and codes apply.
- Why would you need to adjourn for five months to determine whether the code applies when it is said to be so “self-evident?”
- When the court fails to ensure the prosecutor proves jurisdiction, a major element of every case, file for an abuse of process cataloging their misconduct.
- Calling prosecutor’s out on what they’re pretending to be doing.
- The judge asking the prosecutor for legal advice.
- The judge claims that an unsigned plea of guilty is not a plea.
- Brandon and Melinda from CA: update on his wife’s preliminary hearing for felony possession <> prosecutor objects during cross-examination when the defendant asks if the officer was the one who “determined that the defendant violated the law” based on the predictable vague grounds of “relevance” <> public defender claims he “cannot file, in good faith, any paperwork questioning jurisdiction” <> attempting to fire a public defender <> the judge stonewalls with robotically repeating “sustained” when the defendant tries to demonstrate relevance to the prosecutor’s objections for irrelevance <> the judge bails out the prosecutor and makes an objection for the prosecution [conflict-of-interest much?] <> the cross-examination of the witness [who wasn’t qualified to give testimony anyway] <> the judge sustained the prosecutor’s objections before the prosecutor was done making their objection <> the judge dismissively and condescendingly stonewalls by answering the defendant’s questions of evidence and applicability with “I cannot give legal advice” <>the judge aided the prosecutor with their ineffective line of questioning <> freshman persecutor needed coaching from a more seasoned liar <> and better preparing for court [try the NSP skype chat and forum].
- David from ME: prosecutor’s response to a filed motion to dismiss <> motion to dismiss was denied by the judge without any stated grounds <> the prosecutor claims she “doesn’t need jurisdiction” <> effectively litigating within a tight deadline <> and calling the sheriff to confirm what he’s already said; that they “don’t need jurisdiction.”