8885Re: [tips_and_tricks] challenging bona fides
- Jul 4, 2005----- Original Message -----From: baer@...Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 9:30 AMSubject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] challenging bona fidesBaer said: "I'm guessing that there is a fair chance that your judge will take you to trial and conviction (or its civil counterpart) irrespective of just about anything you say. You may find yourself in a position of not participating at all simply to sustain your challenge. Really, a pretender to a judgeship has no proper access to judicial immunity and his decisions are not enforceable, but be prepared for a fight. You might find that often the optimum formula for success is to put the system at such risk that the system itself will abandon this character.
BaerThanks baer. "not participating at all".....does that mean not to put up any defense or cross-examine? I'm a slow learning country boy that don't mind swimming in the 30' end of the pool. Is there any way to proceed under protest because of necessity, reserving proof of jurisdiction. Can one proceed in what he claims is an improperly set court reserving proof that the court is properly set for the conviction to stick? Lets face it. It does not matter if you go to trial or not they will find you guilty. Frog Farmer has his method down pat but I'd like to try Marc Steven's method as I don't believe I can pull Froggy's method off. To do such requires going to trial. Trying to avoid jurisdiction to me is a futile effort. The mear fact that you are there is sufficient or at least claimed by many. I've had a judge say the same. If you have a license, or have ever had a license they will claim they have jurisdiction so why not go to trial and raise the errors on appeal?
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.8/37 - Release Date: 7/1/2005
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>