NSP – Dec 1, 2012

Posted on December 1st, 2012 by Calvin

Show Topics:

  • 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.

Caller’s Topics:

  • 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: Where can I find cases sourced within the motion to dismiss? What are some good legal resources?
A: The standing cross-reference, local law libraries, Justia.com, and FindLaw.com.

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:

http://law.justia.com/codes/arizona/2011/title28/section28-1601/
http://law.justia.com/codes/arizona/2011/title12/section12-116/
http://cjp.ca.gov/file_a_complaint.htm
http://justicecourts.maricopa.gov/CaseTypes/traffic.aspx

              

34 Comments For This Post

  1. Incubus Says:

    Author of the “soon to be released, Government Indicted”. Cute! I know a lot of your jokes don’t always land, but that was a GOOD ONE. 🙂

  2. Randy Says:

    If this kinda shyte happens at the state level, then you/we need to bump it up to US District court and file a Title 42 Section 1983 complaint against them. If this ever happens to me this is what I am doing ala Charlie Sprinkle’s case.

    Peace

    — Randy

  3. Randy Says:

    Ask the “guard” if these courts belong to the people? Threatening me will result in SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES. Possibly the loss of your job. HA!

    Cheers

    — Randy

  4. Calvin Says:

    WHOOPS, I did not mean to leak this early, the podcast is coming later tonight in a much higher quality level than what we’ve had in the past. Stay tuned.

  5. Incubus Says:

    I was wondering why the actual show itself had not been posted.

    And leaking early is nothing to be ashamed of. It happens to the best of us. 😉

  6. Pete Says:

    While we are patiently waiting for the December 1st show to be posted, I would like to draw everyone’s attention to the following DISTURBING fact:

    MARC STEVENS HAS NOT POSTED A CALL OF SHAME SINCE AUGUST, 2012!

    Rumors have swirled for years now about a secret website with scores of unreleased CALLS OF SHAME posted for the exclusive enjoyment of high ranking NSP insiders like Calvin and JT. We’ve all heard the Lurid, Led-Zepplinesque tales of all-night CALL OF SHAME parties, including bathtubs filled with baked beans, plus lines of pure, white crystalline CALLS OF SHAME laid out on swanky hotel-room tables for the wild-eyed anarchist insiders.

    Our message should be clear and simple: STEVENS, QUIT BEING SO STINGY…STOP BOGARTING THE CALLS OF SHAME!

  7. Calvin Says:

    @Pete: alright, alright. I couldn’t help but give some extra attention to this one as its the first time I’ve played with a recording from “the source” (mix-board). The quality level will be noticeably better and the conversational flow is pristine. Happy listening!

    I would also like to see some new content for the always edu-taining Call-of-Shame section; standing-by.

    With the newly simplified production process, we’ll be able to post podcasts sooner than NonE can chide my arbitrary publication deadlines. 😉

  8. Bruce Sloane Says:

    Man, that ” Penny from Lubbock, Tx. ” sure gets around
    She has hit 3 radio shows, in the last 2 days….

  9. NonE Says:

    Incubus Says:
    December 1st, 2012 at 7:44 pm

    Author of the “soon to be released, Government Indicted”. Cute! I know a lot of your jokes don’t always land, but that was a GOOD ONE.
    ——————————-
    SWEET! 🙂

    – the Very Not Incubus (but aspiring)

  10. NonE Says:

    Bruce Sloane Says:
    December 2nd, 2012 at 7:39 am

    Man, that ” Penny from Lubbock, Tx. ” sure gets around
    She has hit 3 radio shows, in the last 2 days….
    —————————-

    No WONDER Bruce doesn’t have time to put periods on his sentences, he’s too busy chasing radio shows! (Kudos on the period after “Tx” though, man. There may be hope for you yet!)

    I haven’t listened to all of this show, but it sure seems that Penny hadn’t really spent time digesting what Marc had offered her in the last show. Of course I’ve had ten years (or so) to digest his stuff, so perhaps I’m not being fair.

    – the very Excellent and Spechul NonE

  11. Blessings Says:

    @Calvin

    The quality is great! You’re right the flow is really smooth. Editing out all the pre-show stuff and the bumper music is great. It’s kind of eerie that Marc says he’s “going to break” and “coming back from a break” and there’s no musical indication anymore, but I’ll get used to it.

    – Robert

  12. NonE Says:

    You edited out all of that great music? Whutz the point in listening to the show now? Bummer, dude.

    – NonE (still trying to download the damned thing with my connection running at about 2 KBps!!! damned Hughes.)

  13. Jonathan Says:

    I personally think that Penny from Tx should simply pay the fine this time ’round; get angry about it; then take the time to get her head around the material. If she has an appearance on Tuesday, the predators will spot her from a mile off.

  14. NonE Says:

    Jonathan,

    I respectfully disagree. The biggest issue to overcome is fear. Sure, they may railroad her and she may end up paying anyway, but “the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.” Penny’s willing to take that step and to begin the process of overcoming her fear and gaining skills at “speaking truth.” Ain’t no way but to jump into the pool and start swimming. (Besides, after this she will have a better understanding of the need to role play and practice.)

    – NonE

  15. Randy Says:

    Very well said NonE! Absolutely.

    –Randy

  16. indio007 Says:

    I went the other day for my nephew who is in the process of coming face to face with the debauchery.

    Here’s a representative sample of one case.
    Girl comes in on a driving after suspension charge. This is a criminal charge with jail time.
    The prosecutor says “The State is looking for a $200 fine.
    The judge says to the girl , “The state wants to settle this for $200.”
    He never asks her about a lawyer or anything. This is the only exchange.
    The girl says, “My license isn’t suspended.”
    The judge says, “So you don’t want to pay the $200?”
    Girl: “No.”
    Judge: “I’m assessing you a $150 lawyer fee. Your case is continued to blah blah blah … next case.”

    Girl walks away dumbfounded.

  17. Jonathan Says:

    So long as a possible carnage doesn’t break her resolve. How many times have you fronted the beak, NonE?

  18. NonE Says:

    Jonathan,

    I have no idea what your question means. It sounds like you want to engage in a pissing contest. I don’t think I would see much value in that. (But I’m drinking lots of water just in case!)

    – NonE

  19. Kel Says:

    I didn’t think graduating from Clown College magna cum laude absolved you of giving responsive answers. I have much to learn! :p

    Seriously though, I think you know exactly what Jonathan was asking you. How many times have you been to court? How much personal experience do you have in the “lion’s den”? It’s a legitimate question and I don’t think it is an affront to whatever manhood you feel has been challenged.

    It’s easy for all of us to say what we think Penny should or should not do, especially when NonE of us are Penny. I think Penny should do what she’s most comfortable with. My opinion, of course.

  20. NonE Says:

    Kelishness,

    Note, please, whut I said: “Penny’s willing to take that step and to begin the process of overcoming her fear and gaining skills at “speaking truth.””

    I didn’t tell her what to do. She has chosen her path, and I was simply supporting her in her choice. Jonathan, on the other paw, wuz suggesting that she turn tail and run and reinforce her victim status, for the purpose of… well, I guess cuz he’s scared. I’m not sure. (Oh DAMNITNOW! I’ve wet my pants. I have to go change. I’ll be back later.)

    – NonEnvironmentally Correct

  21. NonE Says:

    P.S. (Not to be confused with PISS, which belongs in a different thread.) I think it is important to note that Marc has often pointed out that gaining clarity of the facts of reality and overcoming one’s fear are greatly personally empowering things. I agree with him on this. It does not matter, in my mind, where on the scale you start out, ANY movement towards greater awareness and personal sense of control and understanding over one’s life is hugely beneficial. So the number of times one has done this or that is irrelevant to any given individual’s choice. Each person is an individual and only he or she can make the decision as to what to do in any given instance.

    Marc, for instance, always points out that it is better to say “yes sir, no sir” while on the side of the road rather than risk becoming worm food in support of the “Law Enforcement Officer’s” fragile ego. TigerLily, on the other hand, has shown that it is often effective for her to try and gently “get in their face” to see if she can awaken some sense of reason and compassion. Not to be TOO much of a sexist here, but “she IS a girl,” so that may be part of the difference in effectiveness she sees versus Marc’s view of the matter. But maybe if Marc had Gandhi’s personality he could pull off a “TigerLily” on them, too. Who knows. Personally, I’d be worm food in an instant.

    – the Very NonLily

  22. Kel Says:

    I’m aware of what you said. I agree to the extent that it is a matter of personal choice, but I agree with Jonathan also in picking ones battles wisely. Being ill prepared and experiencing a train wreck can be a learning experience, but it could also be a real deterrent and very discouraging.

    I just don’t understand why it so quickly became a “pissing contest” in your eyes.

    Aspiring to be like Ghandi isn’t exactly noble and I wouldn’t put Marc in the same category out of respect to Marc. Ghandi was a racist bigot who slept naked with teenage girls. Not exactly the image I think Marc wants to convey.

    Ghandi didn’t teach peaceful resistance, he taught pacifism; lay down and take it, don’t defend yourself and others, because that’s infinitely more “honorable”.

  23. NonE Says:

    Who among us has not slept naked with teenage girls?

    I’ve heard some things about Gandhi which make me question the public image, so I guess I need to study up on him.

    But I return to the pissing contest part… I don’t see that the number of times I’ve been to court or whatever has any bearing on what TigerLily should choose for herself. That’s why it appeared to have “pissing contest” written all over it. If you want to argue the merits of the situation as it pertains to TigerLily, that’s a different issue. I think she knows her mind and can well choose her path for herself. That doesn’t mean it’ll be the right one, but that’s how we learn. It certainly appears she likes “stirring the pot,” so I say, go for it!

    – the Very Good NonE

  24. Kel Says:

    I thought we were talking about Penny?

  25. NonE Says:

    Oh, I SEE HOW IT IS! Now you want me to actually be COHERENT! That’s not fair. It’s just plain not fair. 😛

    Okay, point taken. But though the specifics may differ, aren’t the principles the same? I mean, on the one hand Penny is supposed to be okay with ONE GROUP of people telling her what to do (the psychopaths) while she is not supposed to be able to choose to listen to another group of people (the incoherents) and decide for herself what to do? How is one supposed to understand which group it’s okay to listen to and which it’s not? Prayer? Ouiga boards?

    – the Very NonCoherent (wearing nice clean and freshly pressed pants)

  26. Kel Says:

    Eek! The Great Eye In The Sky not only slipping in his grammar, but now coherency too? Truly the end of daze.

    Penny, do the whatever the hell you want! I mean that in the most supportive way possible. That’s not a command either, only a suggestion.

  27. NonE Says:

    Kel sed: Penny, do the whatever the hell you want! I mean that in the most supportive way possible. That’s not a command either, only a suggestion.

    Love it! But what should LILA do?

    – NonEntirelySaneOrTogether(orSeparateEitherForThatMatter)

  28. Kel Says:

    I must admit LILA flew right over my head.

    But at least you didn’t notice the extra ‘the’ I threw in by mistake on my last comment. THAT would have been embarrassing.

  29. NonE Says:

    I saw it but I got myself so confused when I wrote down LILA instead of Lily that I almost pissed in my pants again and so I completely forgot to to to well you know. (You’re buyin’ all this, hook line and sinker, right?)

    – the the Very the the the THE!

  30. Quasi-law Says:

    what makes Mary and her friends so smart? Well, she must have a piece of paper(from a distink-guished gov. owned university inc.) hanging on the wall at home telling her how smart she is….ugh. I don’t know how much mary and her friends spent. But everyone since has being paying for it. Those pieces of paper cause more trouble than anything else.

  31. MickeyG Says:

    Marc, do you encourage people that go to traffic court to negate any assumption of a contractual agreement, or of an incorporated entity to end any such assumption? It seems most if not all traffic courts are administrative or legislative created courts and those courts have no business hearing a case against a man or woman. Every rules of evidence or civil procedure that I read says assumptions stand unless overcome and within any commercial venue, evidence is required to prove the assumption negative.

  32. Marc Stevens Says:

    @ MickeyG There is no contract, if you think there is, then just ask them. If they claim there is, then ask for facts to support that. You’re assuming they look at it as a contract, I would ask so you know for sure.

  33. MickeyG Says:

    Arguing statutes with them seems pointless. The plaintiff has no standing because there are no injuries. Not only that, but all these courts are divisions of the state. The state can not make anything a payment of debt other than gold and silver coin. That is directly from the Constitution for The United States, THE supreme law of the land. The highest law of the land trumps all of their statutes and courts, as they are in direct conflict with constitutional law and therefore null and void. Why would you argue void statutes with them?

  34. Incubus Says:

    “That is directly from the Constitution for The United States, THE supreme law of the land. The highest law of the land trumps all of their statutes and courts, as they are in direct conflict with constitutional law and therefore null and void.”

    Bahahahahaha! Are you a comedian by any chance?

    “Why would you argue void statutes with them?”

    Marc doesn’t argue anything, especially statutes. He asks questions and those questions only pertain to facts. I think you’re mistaken.

1 Trackbacks For This Post

  1. NSP – Dec 1, 2012 - Unofficial Network Says:

    […] Click here to view the embedded video. […]

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