Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Feb 28, 2015

Posted on February 28th, 2015 by Calvin

Show Notes:

Caller’s Topics:

  • Tom from MI: update on the aftermath of his dismissed case <> resistance from the court clerk when requesting records from his own case <> how do you go about filing a claim with the city’s/judge’s insurer? <> relitigating a traffic complaint after a forced plea and conviction <> quasi civil infractions that side step basic legal standards and procedure <> how to file a petition to void judgement <> and what do you do if they ask YOU to prove jurisdiction when you file a complaint against them in court?
  • Phil from the NSP Skype group-chat: is(are) there any court ruling(s) that state ‘indictments aren’t evidence’?
  • Richard from CA: responding to a legal attack triggered by replacing a sliding door without asking for permission from the local HOA control freaks <> HOA shenanigans <> give people a little bit of authority and you will see their true colors <> and exercising patience and persistence with bureaucratic shenanigans.
  • Bradley from England: George Galloway exposing the Iraq and oil for food scandal and owing Senator Norm Coleman <> the few hopeful politicians <> Kieth’s [from Australia] 1000 mile journey <> update on Keith’s case: there’s a one-year stay on the case <> Keith’s adventures trading up <> Bradley has managed to get 80+ parking tickets dismissed from court and 40+ misconduct complaints filed! <> a cop does something peaceful by stopping kids from harassing one another <> effective damage control: 5 charges against Danny Shine got dismissed with Bradley full representing him as a McKenzie friend <> Bradley has maintained a damage-control record of “not one criminal charge proceeding to trial” <> successfully got an abducted child back to their mother <> adventures in fighting home evictions and getting stays <> got a drunk and disorderly charge thrown out for a few old ladies <> exercising effective damage control by realizing that it is impossible for them to follow their own rules and directing your defense accordingly and adaptively <> never submitting a plea before disclosure <> objections are considered an “American thing” by UK judges <> getting disclosure using a subject access request <> utilizing adverse possession to defend your property <> being charged with attempted burglary for filming a dancing security guard to stop him from attending a hearing <> first time experiences of offensive police intimidation <> and the push-back from prosecutors when you try to operate in the capacity of a McKenzie friend.

Editor’s note: there is a lengthy unreleased Call-of-Shame embedded in the updated full podcast that you may find instructive on how to avoid an escalated attack by questioning the local authoritarians before they get a chance to file charges with the court.


17 Comments For This Post

  1. NonEntity Says:

    DRAFT version?!?!
    Damn man, after all the work we did to end the draft… what, you’re trying to bring it back??? Sad. Very very sad. I’m quickly losing my faith in authoritarianism.

  2. Calvin Says:

    @NonE: podcast+ just for you!

    Keep the faith. 😉

  3. NonEntity Says:

    To the British bloke @ about 1hr32min: “Excuse me sir, but am I correct in noting your objection to my ability to object?”

  4. NonEntity Says:

    Thanks Genia! I wasn’t sure I could handle any more of Bradley’s life history. :/

  5. dan Says:

    Shucks, I like Michael Buble.

  6. Michael Scharen Says:

    Regarding Nigel Farage,

    I also like much of what he says, and specifically how he attacks the hypocrisy of the European Parliament. However, I recently saw him on the Cavuto show(yes, I watch to see what the enemy is doing), and I was a bit alarmed. Like many, he shows many libertarian/free market colors — to a point. Specifically, commenting on ‘terror’ and government monitoring of social media, he believes the government should redouble these efforts! Given the daily revelations on GCHQ/NSA/FBI, and the local police, I see no justification at all for this, and have a much more guarded opinion of any of these guys.

    I would go further and point out that government itself continuously undermines and attacks the “Free Market” they profess to believe in. Indeed that is the very purpose of government in keeping us all as human cattle. No one has pointed out the trillions of dollars lost through the industrial espionage duly enabled by the NSA sabotage of cyber security. Of course, this opens the door to sweetheart deals for government contractors and private security firms who will no doubt do nothing at all, as keeping the cyber terror going is good for business.

    The “Free Market”, with real money, and real price signals, does not really exist.

  7. NonEntity Says:

    Michael S. sed: “The “Free Market”, with real money, and real price signals, does not really exist.”

    Well… er… uhm… DUH!

  8. Reeodd Says:

    Richard in California,

    It sounded like the HOA is not enforcing the Bylaws universally. They seem to be picking and choosing which rules to enforce and which rules not to enforce, as well as, who to enforce them on selectively. Nobody has the right to do that, so if you find them selectively enforcing those rules all the rules can be challenged and have them deemed unenforceable. You probably would have to do that by the court in the locale the Bylaws are recorded in though. Just a thought

  9. Gene W Says:

    What fact would prove jurisdiction? Could this only come in the form of a valid contract? In other words, nobody can hold you to any “standard” that you didn’t already agree to in the form of a valid contract. So since this whole system is created based on coercion with no valid contract it is invalidated on that point alone, correct?
    The other one I get alot is “if you don’t like it leave” as if the control freaks somehow obtained said property to begin with. But how do you make the connection that it isn’t about the geographical area you happen to be standing, flying or floating in?>

  10. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Gene, there would have to be some kind of agreement, and like you wrote, since it is all by coercion, there is no agreement or jurisdiction. For the “if you don’t like it leave” ask them a question such as, “Do you have any principles worth standing up for?” So if I broke into your house, you’d just accept it and leave?

  11. Boxer Says:


    I’ve asked the many attorneys I know and the best they can do with regards to evidence is respond that government is based on an adhesion contract (i.e. take it or leave it).

  12. Michael Scharen Says:


    We don’t have the choice to ‘leave it’. We are forced to ‘take it’.

  13. Michael Scharen Says:


    The other one you get is “Why don’t you just move to Somalia!”
    Interesting to note, according to Jeremy Scahill, that the Joint Special Operations Command /CIA was paying all the Somali Warlords over $100,000/month each while maintaining the ‘country’ as a hell hole. Thank government once again.

  14. Boxer Says:

    @Michael Scharen:

    You’re preaching to the choir. My point to Marc is that even when a lawyer is a friend, etc., even they know they can’t give you an honest answer worth believing.

  15. Gene Says:

    @Michael, I find that quite plausible. They sure wouldn’t want anyone to figure out that we can get along without them.

  16. Bill Says:


    I listened to about 10 of you videos and I like your thought process.

    But how would your position of (prove that this law applies because I live in NY). How would it hold up in a case where someone causes great harm to someone?

    Example: John Smith robs Joe Jones, and John Smith says prove that I am liable under this law because I live in NY, and you can not prove applies to me?


  17. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Bill, there is no evidence the laws apply to anyone, so the scenario is irrelevant, whether robbery, trespass etc. And for the critics, this does not mean I advocate aggression, quite the opposite.

4 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP – Feb 28, 2015- [DRAFT VERSION] | Freedom's Floodgates Says:

    […] By Calvin […]

  2. NSP - Mar 28, 2015 - Says:

    […] A judge in Buffalo, NY has given the prosecutor until mid-April to produce evidence of jurisdiction in response to a challenge to the threshold issue of jurisdiction. […]

  3. NSP - Jul 25, 2015 - Co-hosts: Vin James and Matthew - Says:

    […] Tom’s experience with the prosecution team in Norman’s case. […]

  4. NSP - Oct 3, 2015 - Says:

    […] Bradley from England: after the many past successes in UK traffic courts, moving onto challenging the evidence in the dreadful family courts <> and the catastrophic power that social service agents wield when they choose to assert themselves into other people’s lives. […]

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