Categorized | NSP Radio Archive

NSP – Feb 20, 2016

Posted on February 24th, 2016 by Calvin

Show Notes:

  • Upcoming video of recent adventures in composting.
  • Remembering the accomplishments and contributions of the late Harper Lee and Antonin Scalia.
  • Anonymous calls for action to occupy Mesa Police Department.
  • Recent interview with a few Irish radio hosts joined by Vincent Byrne.
  • Occupy the Courts to disrupt their revenue generation in response to their ongoing abuses and wrongdoing like in the Worcester Revolution of 1774.
  • Local authoritarians leveraging municipal violations that victimize the most vulnerable in our communities.
  • Bureaucrats that are dangerously blind to their own psychopathy.
  • Measuring talent and artistry a little more objectively.
  • Requesting an abuse of process hearing when the counts of due-process violations and misconduct begin to stack up.
  • A writ is simply used to instruct the court officers to do or not do something.
  • Pro-tip: when they tell you they “don’t need any evidence” or “we don’t have to prove that” in response to your questions of evidence: “oh, you can act in good faith AND withhold evidence from me?” 😉
  • Pro-tip: when getting answers to questions you didn’t ask and not getting answers to the question(s) you did ask, its helpful (for sake of clarity) to ask them “what question do you think you are answering?” and compare that to the question you are actually asking so its easier for them to see where they are missing what you’re asking.
  • Asking them “specifically where in this document is the evidence I am asking for?” when they tell you “its on the website,” “its on the ticket,” ect.
  • Keep it short and to the point when drafting your paperwork, or risk that they’ll skim-and-deny.
  • Setting a motion hearing on the court’s motion day to get direct access to the prosecutor and their (lack of) evidence.
  • Knowing your leverage points and effectively utilizing them.
  • Dan Gould is at a Satoshi Square Trading Event at Maya NY Pizza and Grill who is now accepting Bitcoin for payment!
  • Ticket Kicked in Florida – Congrats Mirko.
  • The benefit of using a motion rather than writing letters is that they are obligated, under due-process, to respond to your motion.
  • Falling back on the Socratic questioning method when you get bogus responses from the judge and/or prosecutor.
  • The only way for the persecution team (prosecutor and co-prosecutor/judge) can legitimately defeat your motion to dismiss is to provide the evidence that the motion claims is lacking, everything else is just a diversion away from their lack of evidence.
  • When the respond to your questions with vague generalities, that’s your cue to follow up with questions of specificity to uncover that their responses are empty and actually have no evidence.
  • Two main questions you should be hammering away at: 1) what evidence to you have to prove your rules apply to me?, and 2) what witnesses have personal firsthand knowledge of such evidence?
  • Don’t allow the prosecutor to shift the burden-of-proof onto you.

Caller’s Topics:

  • Imran, Gary, and Calvin from MO: conversation and luncheon amongst fellow anarchists <> Texas man arrested by seven U.S. Marshals for not paying $1,500 student loan from 1987 <> Judge Orders Former Pastor Arrested For Handing Out Jury Nullification Fliers <> The U.S. Hosts 25 Percent Of The World’s Prison Population <> the lack of multimedia documentation in the supreme court, why don’t they want us seeing their interpretations of their law? <> the bar is administered by a private British guild legal theory <> the comparatively small numbers of people it takes to make social change actually happen <> and taking off to mingle with the locals in Ferguson, MO.
  • Jay and Gary from England: Marc helped with getting Matt’s ticket kicked from court on grounds of a “lack of evidence proving jurisdiction” <> helping a friend out with responding to a legal attack where the court is refusing to provide disclosure <> numerous past complaints dismissed from court <> the court held a hearing/review without the defendant present which resulted in a conviction in absentia; “we don’t have to answer your questions, its in the public interest to continue on with the case” <> naive presumptions of the court’s procedures and intentions <> and directly contacting the head honcho spearheading the legal attack.
  • Scarlett from UT: the judge admitted that they “have no evidence of jurisdiction” right before he quickly forced a trial upon the defendant <> openly asking “why are we proceeding to trial when there is no evidence?” <> what do we call these coerced hearings? <> writing letters to the court seeking clarification on the state of their abnormal proceedings <> the court held a trial and convicted the defendant without the defendant present, even thought he judge admitted they had no evidence to prove jurisdiction from the beginning of the proceedings <> filing a motion to vacate judgement, motion to dismiss for prosecutorial misconduct, motion for a full finding of fact, and motion to correct the record <> getting a copy of the hearing from the court <> and exploring other options for achieving effective damage-control.
  • Jeremy from NV: update on a recent legal attack <> the judge claimed that there was no conflict of interest after the defendant demonstrated they are both being paid from the same agency <> the judge also claim that “the STATE OF IDAHO was the injured party” <> and impeaching the witness.
  • Tai from TX: plead “not guilty” on one case and have not heard from the court since <> no response from another case where the motion and discovery was filed <> and role-playing to better prepare for court.
              

8 Comments For This Post

  1. Billy R. Says:

    I have wrote to the ACLU and ask for the factual evidence they rely on to prove the constitution/laws/codes apply and she said,”yes laws apply to everyone because our constitution established a system for passing laws”.Sounds circular to me.

  2. dan Says:

    Our constitution? What’s this our stuff?

  3. desertspeaks Says:

    In this hidden camera interview, a prominent attorney asserts that the legal profession is effectively immune from the rule of law:

    “They don’t send the lawyers to jail because we run the country. We’re members of a privileged class in this country. We make the laws and when we do so we make them in a way that is advantageous to the lawyers,” the attorney explains.
    http://investmentwatchblog.com/attorney-explains-legal-profession-above-the-law-on-cbs-news-60-minutes-hidden-camera/

  4. Rad Says:

    Billy R: The law applies cuz the law says so in other words.

  5. RAD Says:

    “the judge also claim that “the STATE OF IDAHO was the injured party”

    Another judge testifying to matters of which he has no first hand knowledge.

  6. desertspeaks Says:

    @ Rad, You are correct sir!

  7. RAD Says:

    I think it may be better to approach it on a more root level: Is there any evidence of an injured party? A responsive answer would be no, but of course they will probably just try to come up with a diversionary tactic or else just give a conclusory non-responsive answer like “the injured party is the State”, which you can follow up like “Is there any evidence that that’s true?” which at that point the judge has gone into dishonor since there is no actual evidencial basis for the judge’s testimony. It’s just his own religious delusion that he’s preaching. Or to take it to a more basic level:
    Is anyone claiming that there’s an injured party? If yes, Who’s claiming that? The judge himself? If no, then wtf are we doing here?

  8. Inigo Montoya Says:

    Echos of Lysander Spooner…

    Recently viewed on CSPAN a discussion in the European Parliament regarding the Brexit, or British Exit from the European Union. The question was regarding a vote on the exit — was the outcome ‘once and for all’ or could it be revisited.

    The obvious question was asked: Can one have a vote to bind one’s posterity in a permanent political bond to the European Union?

    Lysander Spooner, of course, wrote in 1870 that the very notion is ridiculous as we all know. Yet, once in a great while, the MSM drops a tiny hint to the real questions at hand.

    A few months ago, a talking head lawyer on CNN pointed out that prosecutors, cops, and judges rely on and interact with each other every day, so possibly there is a conflict of interest!

    Unfortunately, these flashes of common sense are all too rare, and people quickly revert to their ingrained statism.

Leave a Reply

Advertise Here

Upcoming Events

Saturday, 4-7pm EST: 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 broadcast via Ustream.tv. 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