Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Feb 8, 2014 – Co-host: JT and Guest: Bradley from London, England

Posted on February 9th, 2014 by Calvin

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. 😎

Show Topics:

  • 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.

Caller’s Topics:

  • 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.”

11 Comments For This Post

  1. Calvin Says:

    Because Romania became part of the E.U., their laws are applicable?

  2. BONMAN Says:





    Powers and duties — Generally
    Powers and duties — Licensing.

    In addition to other powers and duties granted to the department, the director of licensing shall administer all laws with respect to the examination of applicants for, and the issuance of, licenses to persons to engage in any business, profession, trade, occupation, or activity except for health professions
    “License” defined.

    The word “license” shall be construed to mean and include license, certificate of registration, certificate of qualification, certificate of competency, certificate of authority, and any other instrument, by whatever name designated, authorizing the practice of a profession or calling, the carrying on of a business or occupation, or the doing of any act required by law to be authorized by the state.

    19.02.020 Definitions
    (6) “License” means the whole or part of any agency or local government permit, license, certificate, approval, registration, charter, or any form or permission required by law, including agency rule, to engage in any activity.
    (9) “Person” means any individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, association, cooperative, corporation, nonprofit organization, state or local government agency, and any other organization required to register with the state or a participating local government to do business in the state or the participating local government and to obtain one or more licenses from the state or any of its agencies or the participating local government.

    (10) “Regulatory” means all licensing and other governmental or statutory requirements pertaining to business or professional activities.

    (11) “Regulatory agency” means any state agency, board, commission, division, or local government that regulates one or more professions, occupations, industries, businesses, or activities.

    “Person,” “company.”

    “Person” or “company”, herein used interchangeably, means any individual, receiver, administrator, executor, assignee, trustee in bankruptcy, trust, estate, firm, copartnership, joint venture, club, company, joint stock company, business trust, municipal corporation, political subdivision of the state of Washington, corporation, limited liability company, association, society, or any group of individuals acting as a unit, whether mutual, cooperative, fraternal, nonprofit, or otherwise and the United States or any instrumentality thereof


    “Business” includes all activities engaged in with the object of gain, benefit, or advantage to the taxpayer or to another person or class, directly or indirectly

    “Engaging in business.”

    “Engaging in business” means commencing, conducting, or continuing in business and also the exercise of corporate or franchise powers as well as liquidating a business when the liquidators thereof hold themselves out to the public as conducting such business.

  3. A Says:

    Calvin, would you be able to make the mp3 files list Marc Stevens as artist and album as No State Project, Call of Shame (or whatever it happens to be)? If its not too hard to do and can work automatically by the editing program. I can do it myself, but if you can get it to do it automatically, that would rock.

    Thanks 🙂

  4. A Says:

    Woops I just put it in iTunes and see that you already had it that way. Thanks in retrospect! hahah

  5. AL Says:

    From Al

    I just sent this email to the City Manager of the City that I reside in.

    City Manager XXXX:

    Regarding a parking ticket.

    Please provide, to me, the empirical evidence that the California State Constitution Laws, Chino Hills Laws, ordinances and statutes apply to me and any other person.

    A valid response avoids circular logic and logical fallacy such as “the laws apply because we say so”, or “the ordinances and statutes apply because the ordinance or statutes say they apply”.

    If you feel you are unqualified to provide the evidence I am requesting you are encouraged to refer my request to the appropriate department such as the San Bernardino Sheriff, City Attorney/your legal staff.

    Please note that I am asking for the Evidence and not a Legal Opinion.


    Al LeCou

  6. mitchell moffett Says:

    so im trying to figure out what motion’s to put in to the court on this the time the trial comes up we are way past 180 days.real close to 210 within a day or to.the prosecutor told the judge that some of the berned time was on my side so thay still wave plenty of time.i read the statute,it doesn’t say any thing about who is burning who’s stats from the time of the first arinment.

  7. mitchell moffett Says:

    the arrest was on 7/14/13 the arainment was on8/19/13.the trial is on 3/7/14.i think time is up.

  8. mitchell moffett Says:

    what is going to happen when I drop the jurisdiction bomb I going to get locked up?are people going to freek.i think I can argue it,but it is kind of intens lol.

  9. mitchell moffett Says:

    when I had a lawer he flet sed he would not chaleng jurediction at all end of story.

  10. Grant Says:

    Q: When a “Judge” asks you innocently : “Do you UNDERSTAND the charges?” are you agreeing to be tricked into his jurisdiction?

    The weasel word “understand” has several meanings and can apparently mean, do you stand under these charges and the authority of this particular court/psychopath? A trick question.

    Is the correct answer: “Your honor, we can not continue until the prosecutor can prove jurisdiction and applicability of the code.”

  11. Incubus Says:

    I don’t think the correct answer starts with “Your honor”. There’s nothing honorable about that man or woman.

1 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP - Aug 9, 2014 - Co-host: Calvin - [UPDATE: FULL PODCAST] | Says:

    […] lengthy record of […]

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