Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Aug 15, 2015 – Co-host: Vin James

Posted on August 16th, 2015 by Calvin

Vin James, from No STATE Project UK and The Bunker Show, joins to update us on the outcome of his recent appeals hearing & to discuss non-violent, non-cooperation protests and we take your phone calls and questions.

Show Notes:

Caller’s Topics:

  • Mike from WA: prosecutor-less proceedings <> hundreds of appearances in court, including a recent hearing where a denial of disclosure and discovery led to a dismissal! <> appeal to tradition logical fallacies from the court staff: “that’s the way we’ve always done it.” <> “I don’t practice law, I apply it.” <> determining applicability of the law <> the lack of morality in the courtroom <> and “you don’t have to go to law school to be a lawyer.”

60 Comments For This Post

  1. Andy Says:

    @ Calvin, Great work. Thanks so much for getting the NSP show uploaded so fast, AND the show notes.

  2. Richard Says:

    Making arguments outside the facts and evidence, is my answer to the pop quiz.

  3. Eyal Lior Says:

    refusing to drop the attack or produce the evidence: MALICIOUS PROSECUTION

  4. NonEntity Says:

    Damn it Calvin! Could you at least give me time for my morning cup of coffee before you post this stuff?!?

  5. desertspeaks Says:

    an irrefutable presumption of jurisdiction/applicability is a violation of due process

  6. desertspeaks Says:

    hmm don’t know that irrefutable is the right word..

  7. desertspeaks Says:

    IRREBUTTABLE Presumption is a violation of due process! ie the irrebuttable presumption of jurisdiction/applicability.

  8. desertspeaks Says:

    Some judicial opinions in answer to the judge in the video in the email that marc interviewed.

    Fiat justitia ruat caelum “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”

    Supreme court; Vlandis v Kline..
    Statutes creating permanent irrebuttable presumptions are violative of due process!

    Heiner v. Donnan,285 U. S. 312 conclusive presumption
    holding that this irrefutable assumption was so arbitrary and unreasonable as to deprive the of due process. Court stated that it had “held more than once that a statute creating a presumption which operates to deny a fair opportunity to rebut it violates the due process.

    Likewise, in Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U. S. 645 (1972), the Court struck down, as violative of the Due Process Clause, Illinois’ irrebuttable statutory presumption.

    “A fact which constitutes an essential element of a cause of action cannot be left to inference.” Roberts v. Roberts, 81 C.A.2d 871, 185 P.2d 381

    “Matters of substance must be presented by direct averment and not by way of recital.” Stefani v. Southern Pacific Co. (1932), 119 C.A. 69, 5 P.2d 946

    The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized in Caperton v. A.T. Massey & Co.,
    129 S. Ct. (2009) that disqualification is warranted where the appearance of a bias or conflict of interest exists even if the judge subjectively believes he has no actual bias.

    Under 28 U.S.C. Section 455(a), a judge “shall disqualify himself in any
    proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” (Emphasis
    added). The purpose of this provision “is to promote confidence in the judiciary
    by avoiding even the appearance of impropriety whenever possible.” Liljeberg,
    supra, 486 U.S. 847, 865. Thus, whether “a judge actually has a bias, or actually knows of grounds requiring recusal is irrelevant–section 455(a) sets an objective standard that does not require scienter.” Moran v. Clarke, 296 F.3d 638, 648

  9. yan Says:

    Pop Quiz: what due process violation is that? <<violaton of legalsleeze?…

    If im the plaintiff, and am suing the defendAnt, but have no evidence of my claim,I have no evidence of jurisdiction (my lawh applies) to sue them, therefore no standing, and no evidence of any REAL injured party, is that not a (plantiff) prosecutoral misconduct violation? .?. if right do i win a prize? a paid trip to Arizona? to have coffee with Marc, Calvin and JT.?

  10. Calvin Says:

    Richard was the first to correctly answer; “making arguments outside the facts and evidence,” however there is more than one correct answer.

    Eyal posted a correct answer just 45 minutes after Richard; “refusing to drop the attack or produce the evidence: MALICIOUS PROSECUTION.”

    And desertspeaks noted another due process violation that also qualifies; “an irrefutable presumption of jurisdiction/applicability is a violation of due process.”

    You see, under careful scrutiny, you can demonstrate how these attorneys can’t hold convictions of victimless crime without committing serious due process violations that you need to be aware of and document if you are to prevail using effective damage control.

  11. desertspeaks Says:

    you win the coffee but you have to make it yourself and as far as a paid trip to Arizona.. yes, as long as you pay for it yourself, presuming marc, calvin and jt would meet with you!

  12. Inigo Montoya Says:

    Just a side note on the subject of State bureaucrats having a callous disregard for others. This now includes their own animals.

    Police Kill More K9’s Than Anyone Else
    from Copblock

    Police have killed 7 of their own highly trained dogs just in 2015.

  13. thad Says:

    what due process violation is that?: “which proceeds not arbitrarily or capriciously, but upon inquiry, and renders judgment only after trial”

  14. TOM MIXX Says:

    ‘I love it when I nail a good jerk”
    Me too

  15. TOM MIXX Says:

    a “clean jerk ” is tough thow

  16. Darrell Says:

    Marc when you said dont flip off a cop or do anything to bring attention to yourself, I would go one step further. Dont talk in any way to a cop. Even if you think you are doing the right thing. You never know where the police are supplementing their income and doing the right thing may put you into a situation where you can get over your head very quickly. These are pack animals treat them accordingly.

  17. desertspeaks Says:

    due process violation negates any judgement upon appeal, do you need to know more?

  18. summer apple Says:

    desert, yes please. Please tell us more.

  19. NonEntity Says:

    “desert, yes please. Please tell us more.” … and summer slowly but inexorably gets sucked into the in crowd. 😉

  20. RAD Says:

    I’ve actually gotten better results being very confrontational toward cops and I think if you can do it effectively it is the way to go. The thing is you have to keep it socratic or at least logical or else appeal to their narcissism(but in reverse). For example, part of the typical cop shpiel is they write the ticket and say, “So do you have any questions for me”(not always). Great spot to interject Marc’s, “If I did business like you guys by forcing people to pay me, would you consider me a criminal?”. I think there is a right way to confront them on the street and I have actually found it effective.

  21. RAD Says:

    For example, if a cop tries to talk to me, right away I demand to see their ID. Believe it or not they will actually show you.

  22. desertspeaks Says:

    summer, i’d take you seriously but I strongly suspect you’re being facetious and again disingenuous,. like when you claimed you had no idea who clint richards was and didnt have internet for a month BUT on June 27, you posted and mark talked about clint extensively and you posted, July 4th, clint was talked about and you posted,.. July 24th, 2015 was the clint richards challenge, where summer posted, Then on Aug 1st show, she denies knowing who clint is on Aug 6th and tells us she had no internet for a month.
    everyone is free to make their own conclusions !

  23. summer apple Says:

    A proceeding is not valid unless personal liability of defendant is determined. Liability may not be conclusively presumed. It must be determined. (If the judginator presumes you are liable based on something not brought into evidence by his buddy prosecutor, then what?)

    Answering denotes liability.

    Just some quick thoughts that came to mind.

  24. summer apple Says:

    desert, I said I just had my internet turned back on for about a month. Excuse me if I don’t read or listen to every thing that is posted on this site. I skim and I glean from several different sources.

  25. desertspeaks Says:

    You seemingly don’t listen to or read any of the shows, Marc spoke about or mentioned clint the entire time you’ve had your internet on, from at least June 27th.

    summer apple Says:
    August 15th, 2015 at 8:46 pm
    desert, I don’t listen religiously to Every show and there are times when I have not had access to the internet. I just got it turned on again last month.

    lil more than a month, no?

  26. summer apple Says:

    desert, FUCK Clint. Move on.

  27. desertspeaks Says:

    integrity, congeniality not your strong suits!

  28. summer apple Says:

    Sorry for not being Miss Congeniality. I’ll try harder next time.

  29. desertspeaks Says:

    I notice you didn’t offer to work on your integrity. personality flaw??

  30. NonEntity Says:

    “work on integrity” Hmm. Tryin’a wrap my mind around this concept. Hmm.

  31. desertspeaks Says:

    foreign concepts are often difficult to assimilate!

  32. Kenneth Tennant Says:

    see cases against my wife,Maria Roldan (FirstMerit Bank) and daughter Priscilla Tennant (In the Matter of) and son Gregory Francis (State v Greg). Scott Co. Dist Ct Chief Judge, Marlita Greve filed an action against my daughter for FTA (Failure To Appear for Jury Duty). These courts do not answer pro se pleadings. We filed jurisdictional challenges, a sui juris status and questioned the PRISCILLA all caps vs Priscilla…the courts ignore it all. We filed a move to continue to give them more time to answer, their response was issuing an ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE set for Sept 30, 2015. How to handle this with no oversight anywhere ? Son’s case is pending appeal. Now we get a jury summons for MARIA ROLDAN.
    We are black listed, so we can’t find a lawyer to file an action against the State of Iowa. How to proceed in LAWLESS AMERICA ? call me (563) 343-5565 or KTennantDC at gmail com PLEASE

  33. summer apple Says:

    desert, If you did not notice – my post after yours on this thread agreed with your post. That is what prompted me to make the post in the first place. I just worded it differently in hopes to get some thoughts bouncing around.

    But instead, personal disagreements ensued.

  34. summer apple Says:

    More specifically: “due process violation negates any judgement upon appeal, do you need to know more”?

    I made a not-so-nice comment first. “desert, yes please. Please tell us more”.

    Counter productive I can be.

  35. NonEntity Says:

    desertspeaks sed: “foreign concepts are often difficult to assimilate!”

    Okay, here’s my thinking. I may be wrong, but this is the thought process: just as a (totally) blind person would seemingly be physically incapable of conceptualizing the color blue, similarly one who lacks empathic ability cannot possibly grasp (or learn) the concept of integrity. Sure, such person might learn a set of rules intended to reflect integrity, but memorizing a set of rules is vastly different from internalizing the what and why of integrity. For this one needs to be able to put one’s self into the internal mind space of another.

    And so it seems to me that perhaps integrity and empathy are directly tied to each other and are inherent in the individual. Just as a totally blind person cannot learn the sense of “blueness,” a person lacking in empathy cannot grasp the sense that makes up integrity.

    Open for discussion. (Perhaps if there is interest in discussing this it should be in a thread in the forum.)

  36. desertspeaks Says:

    Non, the color blue was demonstrated to the blind with a piece of ice held in the hand, the color white was soft cotton, orange as you might imagine used an orange. there were others but I don’t recall them at the moment.

    Summer, I’m thinking over whether to answer your question. You’re sincerity and integrity is in question.

  37. NonEntity Says:

    Desert, your reference is to the movie Mask, one of my favorites. Cotton was to show fluffy clouds, not white. Good movie and reference but a metaphor is still only a metaphor.

  38. desertspeaks Says:

    Um no, I had once worked at the arizona state school for the deaf and blind in Tucson and can tell you it did not originate in a movie!

  39. NonEntity Says:

    Ah. Okay. But it’s a great movie anyway.. I sit corrected. But itz still mrta4ical. 😉 I have a friend in Tucson right who is trying to figure out how to teach Tai Chi to the blind. Its quite the challenge and I really hope he can get it going. The school you referenced is no help as it is way to governmental and bureaucratic. 🙁

  40. desertspeaks Says:

    visualization for the blind, interesting challenge.

  41. desertspeaks Says:

    Non, taichiforkids dot com/kids-with-special-needs, they seem to be having some success with blind students.

  42. NonEntity Says:

    Thanks desert. I’ll pass it on to my friend. … Thinking more on this subject I must say I still disagree with what I think you’re saying. Think about the emotional qualities certain color have. Green is supposed to be calming. I can’t imagine that saying “green” to a (profoundly) blind person, for instance, will have the same calming quality as the actual vibrations of that part of the light spectrum. You see my point?

  43. desertspeaks Says:

    want to experience green, lay on a lush green lawn, green.. calming, relaxing, luxurious. preferably without ants etc lol

  44. NonEntity Says:

    What if the ants are green? 😉 And envy, isn’t there something about “green with envy?” Admit it, Dude, you’re stretched beyond all recognition here. :p

  45. desertspeaks Says:

    would you not envy someone laying in the grass while you’re stuck at work or doing something you dislike?

  46. NonEntity Says:

    Oh, I see it now. I’d totally forgotten about that time when I blue out all of the candles on my birthday cake and suddenly I felt just like the sky and birds were flying past me and clouds were everywhere around me whispering “cotton, cotton” in my ears and there were ice cubes and everything! Yes yes… it’s all coming back to me now. You’re right! 😉

  47. desertspeaks Says:

    you must have been such a joy to all those around you, much like you are now LOL

  48. NonEntity Says:

    I’m trying. I’m trying. (I wuz gonna say “I try,” but I thought you’d enjoy this phraseology more better. 😉

  49. desertspeaks Says:

    do or do not, there is no try 😛

  50. dan Says:

    The internal mind space of NonEntity? Oh my, that is a spooky thought!

  51. desertspeaks Says:

    lol dan

  52. Incubus Says:

    I assume what occupies the internal mind space of NonEntity is something to that effect.

  53. desertspeaks Says:

    Inc, I think you’re giving entirely too much credit to contents of the vast space available for rent within non’s head!

  54. wasistdust Says:

    Marc check out eternallyaware on youtube ciao RB

  55. Belle Says:

    Q: Applicability. If a “judge” swears an oath to uphold and support the Constitution. Does the Constitution apply to him AND his court room actions?

    I.e. Can the judge be then made to prove that he has any right to actually to be in the court room. Impartial Juries, sure. Judges, nope.

    Just askin

  56. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ Belle, the PR is that it does. The judge has no such burden that I would attack, I would keep the burden on the prosecutor to prove the judge has jurisdiction.

  57. NonEntity Says:

    Marc sed: “I would keep the burden on the prosecutor to prove the judge has jurisdiction.”
    ??? The judge? I thought the issue was always about demanding evidence from the judge that the PROSECUTION had provided evidence of jurisfiction (excuse the Freudian typo… I liked it so much I decided not to correct it. Hell, I may PATENT it!) So would you care to ‘splain yourself, Lucy?

  58. desertspeaks Says:

    Onus Probandi
    [Latin, The burden of proof.] In the strict sense, a term used to indicate that if no evidence is set forth by the party who has the Burden of Proof to establish the existence of facts in support of an issue, then the issue must be found against that party.

    Jurisdiction, once challenged, is to be proven, not by the court, but by the party attempting to assert jurisdiction. The burden of proof of jurisdiction lies with the asserter. The court is only to rule on the sufficiency of the proof tendered. Se McNutt v. GMAC, 298 US 178

    re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 367 (1970), the Supreme Court rejected the theory that there is only a “tenuous difference” between the “preponderance of the evidence” standard and the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard.

    In Cage v. Louisiana, 498 U.S. 39, 41 (1990), the Court did hold that “reasonable doubt” which, when present, would lead to a finding of not guilty

  59. NonEntity Says:

    desertspeaks Sed: Onus Probandi…

    Are you sure you’re not confusing that with Opus’ Probiscus? It’s a very commonly made mistake.

  60. desertspeaks Says:

    does it read as though it’s wrong?? NOPE!

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