Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Aug 16, 2014

Posted on August 16th, 2014 by Calvin

Show Notes:

  • A big ‘thank you’ to the NSP Skype group chat members for their efforts to assist one another on role-playing and litigation prep that have helped with such great results of damage-control and AiLL success stories.
  • Marc’s recent series of communications with shifty Maricopa county bureaucrats whom avoid answering questions of evidence to prove their own assertions via the infamous “STATE department two-step.”
  • Pushing back against the STATE-induced Stockholm Syndrome.
  • Participate and celebrate ‘three days of peace and markets’ at Agora Fest August 22-24 in Frontenac, MN.
  • The purpose of the call, and the audience we’re actually speaking to, when we report on non-responsive bureaucrats.
  • First listen and analysis of the newest Call-of-Shame with Maricopa County Treasurer Charles Hoskins.
  • Maricopa county forcibly takes over four hundred million dollars from the community every year; all without a shred of evidence to prove their laws apply to any of their victims.
  • What’s with the use of the term ‘domestic terrorism‘ when referring to the investigative journalism/research/activism?
  • Showing malicious intent in cases of overzealous persecution.
  • Next week’s the week after next week’s show will be pre-recorded with all new content to be aired on, so please remember we will not be taking calls as we will not be live.
  • Evidence is a set of facts, or fact pattern, to prove a presumption or argument.
  • Anticipating and countering non-responsive answers.
  • Just because the prosecutor withdraws; it doesn’t mean the judge is going to grant it.
  • The pioneering pro se template that is built here within the NSP space by asking meaningful and effective questions of evidence.
  • International AiLL Successes.
  • Canadian Attorney General Spokesman Unable to Provide Evidence Laws Apply.
  • Issues of law are subject to interpretation, whereas issues of fact must overcome a much higher burden to disqualify, making them a superior issues to challenge.
  • Openly pointing out inconsistencies, contradictions, and violations of their practice of their own law.
  • Using Ian Freeman’s Administrative DMV hearing as a template on how to deal with hot-head bureaucrats and how to best voice objections.
  • Prepping for court by confronting city council members and asking them what evidence do they have to prove their constitution can codes apply.
  • Jeff Healey’s “See The Light” circa 1988 with Dr. John, Marcus Miller, and Steve Jordan.
  • Using a motion to quash the warrant and a writ of habeas corpus to get a wrongfully arrested person out of jail.

Caller’s Topics:

  • Des from England: good news: criminal charges withdrawn! <> utilizing ‘bargaining tools,’ with the assistance of Bradley, when challenging the validity and obligations of shadowy loans <> trouble with getting the judge’s decisions in writing <> property seizure legal battles <> and gaining support and building confidence from peers.
  • Dan from Baca’s Meadow: attempted ambush call and possible outing as the tech-gremlin.
  • Herman from NJ: what is the difference between evidence and facts? <> and a friend gets 4 charges recommended for dismissal just for simply challenging the prosecutor’s assertions; judge was not happy.
  • Tom from MI: complements on the incrementally improving show quality <> update on the vague ‘disturbing the peace‘ complaint <> minimizing the wasted time lost going to court numerous times <> preparing for the revamped speeding complaint hearing <> merciful bureaucrats <> putting the ball back in the judge’s court when the judge tries to have you argue the motion <> the judge erroneously believes the ticket is evidence of jurisdiction <> and bombarding the prosecution with a flurry of motions.
  • Adeola from Ontario, Canada: does the Marcratic method work for parking tickets in Canada? <> and thoughts on using the “Canada’s charter rights only apply to Parliament” legal defense theory.
  • Kevin from the Skype group chat: when is a law not a law?
  • Terry from MI: helping his son with a D.U.I. bureaucratic attack <> the judge jailed the defendant for simply asking questions of evidence <> the judge flips out after a motion to recuse is filed on grounds of compromised fairness and impartiality <> the chief judge steps in and denies a motion to recuse the original judge <> the prosecution has had to say no more than a few sentences over the course of 5 hearings because the judge is doing all the prosecutions work and arguing <>
  • Matt from NJ: how and why someone could think Marc is wrong <> challenging a $40 parking ticket <> how do you make up for the ancillary damages and loses incurred while exercising damage control <> unforeseen collateral due to pleading guilty to a failure to comply complaint/ bureaucratic attack.
  • Kim from NC: how can she attempt to get her husband, who was arrested for expired tags and a alleged warrant on the way to an out-of-state rodeo, out of jail?


10 Comments For This Post

  1. Joey Says:

    Just to clarify with what Tom and I were talking about. In michigan in given a civil infraction ticket the first thing they do if you don’t just pay up is schedule an informal hearing with a magistrate and cop. All the informal hearing allows you to do it possibly work out a plea deal. The cop has no burden of proof and if no deal is made they make you post bail in the amount of the ticket, and schedule a formal hearing. I got a parking ticket and told the court clerk I did not want to have an informal hearing and go straight to a formal hearing. There really was no arraignment because it was civil and not criminal.

  2. citta Says:

    When you are physically in the State, the Laws apply because you are within the range of their guns.

  3. Chris Says:

    Re the (not so) civil case of the car taken by the police in Brighton in the UK, this may help.

    I don’t see how the caller is forced to claim ownership to get the vehicle back. If no one else is claiming it – i.e. the finance company – then it should be returned. Plus wording such as “returned to the care of registered keeper” could be used couldn’t it ?

  4. NonE Says:

    Marc, a question: at one point in this show you propose the idea that murder is not actionable (if that’s the right word) because it is against the law, but rather because it is simply wrong in itself alone, in its very nature. I have to challenge you on this. It is not that I challenge the idea that murder is wrong, but rather I challenge the idea that this is somehow different from other things, like maybe taxation, or zoning, or business licenses, etc. I contend that these things are wrong in themselves alone, regardless of law, just as you suggest that murder is wrong. What makes murder wrong is exactly the same thing that makes zoning wrong – no one has a right to violently interfere in the life of another for any reason besides defense against attack. ANY such interference is as bad as murder, in my opinion. ANY interference in my life is a usurpation of my life force and as such is subject to the same concept of self defense up to and including mortal interference with the interfering offender. That is the only logical, consistent manner in which this concept can be judged, in my opinion. Otherwise, if it is acceptable for one person to “zone” another’s use of his property it is equally acceptable to kill that person as both are simply different levels of interference with the peaceable application of the life force of that person.

    End of dissertation. Da ball’s in your court…

    – NonE

  5. NonE Says:

    A slight expansion, perhaps, upon my prior post: Marc, your refinement in thinking has resolved down to the concept of “jurisdiction” at this point. Let me suggest that the issue of jurisdiction is solely activated by the willful interference by one person into the life of another. How else might one legitimately gain the right to direct and control the life of another than that of a redress of a violation of one’s peaceable life choices? With that in mind, perhaps the very word “jurisdiction” is but an obfuscation of the idea of the right of a superior person (in that person’s mind) having the right to control the life of an inferior person. This is more clearly known by the (perhaps more) proper term: slavery.

    – NonE

  6. JR Says:

    THIS! This episode, absolutely the best one ever. The most chilling Call of Shame yet, curious dilemma with the Pommy guy and his daughters car, surprise call from NonE, brutal and criminal treatment continues in Michigan, excellent damage control in Detroit (the re-filing as a charge if Nuisance) AND when Marc turned up the riffage during Hallowed Be Thy Name, I was cleaning a toilet at work and just had to start headbanging in the cubicle!
    Ideally, this episode is the one to send to the Emmys for considerstion! ‘Best contribution to freedom societal health goes to… NSP!’

    You need a producer! If you had music running underneath the dialogue of the main show, you’d really have something. I’ve heard it on other podcasts and it works brilliantly, as a more whole product of entertainment and education. It will reach more minds if its also enjoyable to listen to.

    So well done everyone. And if you havent added me on skype, please do, i requested entrance to the skype chat months ago from both marc and calvin and never got a response.

    Thanks, guys. Stay dissident.

    P.S. And thanks Calvin for your insight on the statist’s position being Stockholm syndrome, I will be bringing that one up at parties & family gatherings!

  7. RAD Says:

    “With that in mind, perhaps the very word “jurisdiction” is but an obfuscation of the idea of the right of a superior person (in that person’s mind) having the right to control the life of an inferior person. This is more clearly known by the (perhaps more) proper term: slavery.”

    Ya I think thats exactly it. Mark says what distinguishes them is that they force you to pay them. In practical terms that is true but I think a more precise way to think of it is that they are using violence/threats to appropriate your labor capital. So whether they claim a percentage of your labor capital as in taxation or just claim a 100% of your labor capital as in slavery it is essentially the same.

  8. Andy Says:

    If stealing 100% of the product of someone’s labor is slavery, at what percentage is it not slavery.

  9. RAD Says:

    Yup it’s just a matter of degree really.

  10. NonEntity Says:

    RAD Says: Yup it’s just a matter of degree really.
    — Yep! Just like being pregnant!

    – NonE

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 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