- Update on traffic court racketeering complaint.
- Activism at traffic courts: giving out flyers letting people know about the crimes those D.B.A. the court are committing against them.
- Disgruntled employees are the most likely to commit violent acts within organizations, yet in court they give the most likely perpetrators unsecured back-door access.
- Toronto prosecutor, Ann Walker, engaging in circular logic.
- California cop, Richard Rocchi, believes accusing someone of violating the code is evidence the code is applicable.
- Taking attorney’s vague statements and getting specific answers to questions of evidence and fact.
- Letting municipal court judges rack up points of denial of due-process and taking it up with the appellate court.
- Using a writ of mandate in attempt to get the judge to do what he’s mandated to do.
- Effective methods of damage control to limit the damage bureaucrats want to inflict upon you by questioning what facts they rely on; do not allow them to proceed with a false presumption of legitimacy.
- Penny from Lubbock, Texas: speeding ticket, and how does judge presume innocence while assuming jurisdiction.
- Jerome from Baltimore: information about who wrote the complaint, and the lie that lawyers can only speak to other lawyers.
- Vince from Nebraska: motion for reversal of summary judgment; cannot grant summery judgement when there are “genuine issues of fact” and no “meeting of the minds” counterclaim for fraud.
- Bo from Austin: trial in Austin Municipal court, prosecutor wanted to make a deal, facts the code applicable? Rolls eyes, and says “I promise you if you spent 5 minutes in law library you’d see the code is applicable, I’ll bring the officer in, he does it everyday and he’ll be able to tell you”, denial of discovery, and the prosecutor is supposed to investigate and disclose facts he relied on to make his allegations.
- Rich from Austin: not on docket even with a summons for first appearance, won’t talk to judge without court reporter, slithery black robe with female judge Brandy Mueller, and prosecutor did not have file and date re-set.
- Tiger Lily from Vegas: helmet choice activist, dismissive north Las Vegas judges: “the law does not matter in my court” and “aaahhhh, you’re not a lawyer”, appealing to people’s sense of morality to get them to think twice about what they are doing; “it’s a helmet today and an oven tomorrow, so what you’re telling me is you are just following orders”, https://youtube.com/GuerrillaLawfare.
- Pete from San Francisco: first trial for a speeding ticket; attempted to impeach witness because they aren’t qualified to give legal opinions and judge claims a valid cause of action does not apply. Denial of cross-examination; we can all challenge the competency and credibility of the witnesses against us.
- Peter from Montana: substitute judge didn’t rule on motion to vacate in Peter’s omnibus hearing Tuesday, instead of omnibus hearing date he gets a trial date; who would’ve thought a judge would lie? Double-booking court proceedings.
Questions from Katie answered during the last segment of the show today:
Q: Can you rattle off a short list of questions I should ask to get started?
A: 1) Has the prosecutor presented any fact to prove the code is applicable and the court has jurisdiction (the prosecutor has the burden of proof, not the judge)? 2) Am I entitled to a fair trail and can I get a fair trial if there was a conflict of interest? 3) Is there a valid cause for action and how many elements are in a valid cause for action and where are they in the complaint?
Q: Is it okay to inquire about corpus delecti at this first hearing, or is that more for trial?
A: Yes, you can raise the issue before and during pretrial proceedings and the court can rule on the lack of the essential, factual elements of corpus delecti. There has to be a valid case or controversy before the court.
Q: Can I ask where it said it was okay to impound my car?
A: Sure, but how much do they care considering that they stole your car? What answer would you expect from thieves?
Q: When do I ask if it is civil or criminal case? What questions pertain to each?
A: At the earliest possible stage. Ask for the burden of proof to determine the nature of the case. The script has the questions divided and formatted for criminal or civil.
Q: Is there a law library online that you would recommend?
A: Any one you don’t have to register for, just StartPage “online legal resources”.
Q: Was giving my information consent to enforce statutes against me?
A: No, there is no evidence that shows that is the case. The facts and evidence demonstrate it to be brute force and ignorance.
This video is a screen recording of the first segment of the No State Project today. It’s an update regarding traffic courts in Arizona; we are threatened with paying the day the fine is imposed when the “law” allows thirty days.
I spoke with a Mary Summus, a manager at the East Mesa justice court Friday, Nov. 30, 2012. She did not care the “law” permits thirty days to pay traffic fines, she insisted they had to be paid the same day. There was even some attempted intimidation from a security guard because he thought I was asking the same question too many times. I told him I haven’t gotten an answer yet. Apparently asking questions is sufficient reason to throw you out of the building.
Links from the video: