Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Apr 19, 2014 – Co-host: JT and Guest: John from MN

Posted on April 20th, 2014 by Calvin

Co-host: JT and Guest: John Myser from MN. John, who contributed two SoLWT reports [Mar 4, 2014, Mar 18, 2014] from local public city council hearings, joins the show today to give us an update on his AiLL with the psychopath Rex Stacey presiding.

Show Notes:

  • The peaceful objectives of challenging bureaucrats on their lack of evidence in effort to bring about a voluntary society.
  • April 1st update on Marc’s correspondence with Gerald Wilhelm and future plans to appeal.
  • An attorney making legal arguments without any evidence to back it up is NOT misconduct?!”
  • Would it be criminal if us non-bureaucrats conducted ourselves in the same coercive manner as government?
  • Exposing the STATE department double-standard of required evidence.
  • He’s heading right for us” statist defense.
  • From the pre-Galialian file: the [provable] psychopath Rex Stacey labels John Myser “crazy” for asking questions of evidence.
  • Strange plane landings in Denver and Iran.
  • Update on James’, from Buffalo, more serious traffic complaint with the special type of “I don’t give a damn” bureaucrats.
  • The psychopath ticket-fixer Rex Stacey: “You’re trying my patience by asking for evidence.”
  • Evidence is “a game,” “the constitution doesn’t apply to cops,” and “jurisdiction because I say so” according to lower-level judges such as Rex Stacey.
  • Procedural shenanigans from the office of the court clerk when attempting to properly file paperwork.
  • Pointing out attorney’s logical fallacies to them to put them on-notice that you are wise to their desperate techniques of deception in attempt to maintain their facade of legitimacy.
  • Factually determining applicability of the CONstitution and its subsequent codes and statutes.
  • Avoiding the legal minutia of citing statute or code.
  • William Straight’sangry” and “shocked” reaction to John’s filed complaint of prosecutorial misconduct.
  • “When a prosecutor makes arguments outside of the evidence,” you have an instance of prosecutorial misconduct.
  • Its a “denial of a fair hearing” if there’s an “irrefutable presumption or argument” where you cannot subject all the prosecutor’s assertions to challenge. -Vlandis v. Kline
  • The Doors’ “Soft Parade
  • The judge claims that “addressing the question applicability of jurisdiction is a ‘political question‘.”
  • The hostile courtroom environment triggered by the actions of a defendant asking questions of evidence so that they can properly defend themselves and for using the process of accountability for judges who have engaged in misconduct.
  • A bit of preparatory on-air role-play.

  • Challenging the witnesses’ competency to testify to whether there’s evidence to prove the the constitution and codes he’s enforcing applies.
  • Much of the effective damage control in legal-land is centered around going from the vague to the specific.
  • Anything can be stricken if its not proper.
  • Utilizing the voir dire process to weed out bias of irrefutable presumptions held by many of the jurors
  • The irony of a judge including the line “you can’t just make up your own rules” as part of his ruling statement.
  • “Those who attack the rationale of the game, and not the players, are its most formidable adversaries.” – James J. Martin
  • A denial of the voir dire process or denial of cross-examination are both violations of due-process for lack of a fair hearing.
  • The importance of developing a strong and persuasive opening for your hearings.
  • Overcoming people’s indoctrination of the dogma of the STATE.
  • Addressing the conflict-of-interest between the judge and prosecutor and the judge’s use of force exercised to compel the defendant to the respond to prosecutor’s complaint within the voir dire process.
  • You can, and should, object to the prosecutor’s opening statement.
  • The use of a whiteboard to outline and bullet-point all the facts you’ve brought forth to show that the prosecutor has failed to produce the required evidence to even bring the complaint to court.
  • Because a statement sounds self-evidence, that doesn’t mean that it couldn’t, and shouldn’t, be easily articulated.
  • The great advantage/leverage of being able to predict and articulate the prosecutions next [deceptive] move(s).
  • You have much greater latitude to ask leading questions during cross-examination versus direct examination.
  • “If the information is in the question, then its a leading question.”
  • Next week’s pre-recorded show will focus on making more assertive objections and learning to recognize and counter the most common logical fallacies thrown out there by psychopath attorneys in the courtroom.
              

10 Comments For This Post

  1. Chris Says:

    Guest suggestion: Virginia Croppie

  2. NonE Says:

    “Next week’s pre-recorded show will get…”

    These live call in shows are way cool, aren’t they? :p

    – NonPainInTheButt

  3. NonE Says:

    Shows like this one (and I presume next week’s) appear to me to have SUCH great value as mini-classroom-like things that I’m, well first of all I’m wanting to give Marc kudos for making them and releasing them free to the world, and secondly I’m a bit frustrated that they are probably not as accessible as they might be. Calvin is doing an absolutely masterful job of handling the technical issues but even more so the documenting and referencing and linking of each show in such a comprehensive manner. What I’m wondering is if anyone knows of a way that this great resource of well documented shows might be easily searched by people looking to find information on specific topics. Sure, people can look through the show notes on each and every show, but there must be a better way. Perhaps the Google search machine can be directed to only the show notes to these shows, or something like that*. So what I’m asking is if anyone else thinks that we need to provide better access to this incredible resource, and maybe has an idea of how to do it… please step up. If it could be tied into the WIKI that would even be much more betterer. ;)

    – NonE

    * if so, can someone create a simple template that the great unwashed can use?

  4. indio007 Says:

    In a nut shell this is what Rex Stacey is doing.
    He’s betting you don’t know how to stop him and/or hold him accountable.

    He has no jurisdiction. He has no immunity yet you let he carry on with a void process.

    He even admitted he is an officer de facto! He handed it to you on a silver platter.

    In regard to Stacey’s BS about citing cases. Judicial precedent is EVIDENCE of what the law is. It is binding on the courts not anyone else.

    He is just rubbing it in your faces. Basically saying, “Ya I’m gonna break the law. If your so smart, stop me.”

  5. dan Says:

    NonE, you can use sitecomber.com

  6. Bangalore Says:

    Recent fun article by an ex copy confirming what a scam they run:

    “Police really are the enforcement class of violence and theft. Yes, they have quotas, they are trained to lie, and are above the law:

    Former cop here. Throw away for obvious reasons.
    “Yeah, we have “quotas”. They are ‘unoffical’ but you get shit duties if you dont pull in so much money for the department per month.”

    more at:
    http://www.anarchorob.com/blog/2014/05/a-former-cop-tells-the-truth.html

  7. Mark Says:

    I am a little confused here. Marc engages the judge with questions as to why the motion was dismissed by addressing each point. That makes the judge the prosecutor.

    Shouldnt the question to the judge be more like “Ok Judge, you are the unbiased trier of fact in this case, correct? So could you please explain to me on what evidence the prosecution – the trier of the case – presented to you that was accepted by this court to deny my motion, and in particular, point #1, #2, etc…”

  8. NonE Says:

    Mark, Marc’s latest position (as best I understand it) is to ask the judge what evidence THE PROSECUTION has presented which proves jurisdiction. I hope this helps. Keep listening to the podcasts and stuff and you’ll gain clarity on this, I think.

    – NonE

  9. Joe danihel Says:

    I have filed fed lawsuit 14 1330 against 24 codefendants see YouTube WHY I AM SUING THE GOVERNMENT I COULD USE HELP.the govt sold me a property that they knew would be confiscated then evicted me from the property turning off the whole neighborhood(no power or water)forcing people to move then after promising to buy the property.the govt chang ed title withou tpaying a dime

  10. Joe danihel Says:

    Please contact joethemechanic5@ gmail or call2675157128 THANK YOU

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events


Saturday, November 29th, 4-7pm EST: Marc will be back for another LIVE show this week and we'll be taking your calls about tickets, tyrants, and assessments.

If you are being attacked by those with arbitrary titles and shiny badges, or if you have an interesting observation or criticism; then you can call into the LIVE show at (218)632-9399 or we can skype you in during a break. 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 role play to refine your litigation and boost your confidence if you have a court hearing coming up.

Here is a comprehensive list of ways you can interact with the No STATE Project community should you feel compelled to fall even deeper down the rabbit-hole.











Join Marc Stevens' Newsletter


Advertise Here