RE: [tips_and_tricks] Re: Slammed In Traffic Court
> In most CRIMINAL cases, I believe that the state is ALLEGING that theThere has to be an original injured party who signs the complainant's
> PEOPLE are the INJURED PARTY.
complaint. There should be witnesses and evidence as well. This is
amply illustrated in the text of the codes (which nonetheless may be
disqualified as law in California, but that's another issue).
> California & probably most other states SPECIFICALLY allow for theSo they trick people into refusing to plead. If you hear of anyone
> Judge to enter a PLEA for a DEFENDANT who REFUSES to PLEA.
using any of the options that would preclude refusing to plead (and
still not entering a plea), let me know. I've used them, but know of
nobody else to use them. They are right there in the Penal Code
(Section 990 time to answer; demurrer; writ of prohibition...)
> Which REQUIRES them to have FIRST ESTABLISHED PERSONAL jurisdictionReally! Give that man a cigar! And then find out that really there was
> (i.e. you did NOT make a SPECIAL APPEARANCE by filing a MOTION to
> QUASH for LACK of PERSONAL JURISDICTION).
probably NOTHING to quash but the RUMOR of a complaint; which, after
they find out if you are a normal sucker or not, after you plead to the
rumor, THEN they produce the fake to make the record conform to the
outcome. This can all be avoided by requiring that they dot all "I"s
and cross all "T"s (by requiring all arraignment elements to be
performed EXACTLY, which I've NEVER seen done right in over 25 years of
waiting to see it!!! No, I do not go every day or even every week, so
you tell me if you see one done right and I'll shut up about it.)
> Lastly, IF the judge did NOT ORDER him to PAY in FRNs,Most are smart enough not to do that since they've been dealing with
patriot issues like these for over a quarter of a century that I know
about. We did however trick a clerk into demanding FRNs on tape in the
office. But when the story of that got to the judge, he was very cool
and asked me if I was going to try to pay with doubloons and I said I
was not. I said that I was interested in what he might order me to pay,
knowing that the term "dollar" was a term of measurement and what was it
that was being measured? And he answered, "Case dismissed."
> HOW can youThat judge ordered payment in so many dollars of US currency. We now
> charge his with ACTING under COLOR OF LAW or COLOR OF OFFICE?
know from the Kahre case that there are two systems with dollars of
unequal values, which is unlawful if not illegal under current law and
original intent. But most people do not enforce the law and leave it to
others to do. It might not get done. We all have the right to enforce
the law where we are involved. Police only have the powers given to
them by the people. When that judge said to pay so many dollars and
take up the money issue with the clerk, it was the right advice. The
judge has to assume that the law regarding money is being generally
followed until somebody makes the record show otherwise, and that would
be the job of the person for whom it is an issue. Some people who do
not realize the consequences and ramifications of using FRNs have no
issue with them at all. I personally find the "money issue" to be my
favorite and the most entertaining and fun-producing one to use on
usurping power-mad trough feeders.
> That is IF they even have a VALID OATH OF OFFICE on file as REQUIREDDream on!!
> by law.
So, you have to wonder what makes people play the game. Is it that we
all have to play SOME game and theirs is the only one in town? No,
because it is NOT the only one in town! It is only the most popular game
in town. The other games are harder to find, but they are there. There
IS a non-frn/non-bank-electronic-credit economy out there. I have been
moving more and more into it. My last three big value trades never even
had FRN prices mentioned, as if FRNs were already non-existent memories
equal to confederate scrip. The day when that becomes a reality for
everyone is coming closer and WILL occur. Layers of the fraud are being
exposed everyday now. America's arrogant criminal financial elite is
now a topic of international discussion. Don't be the last on your
block to be stuck with FRNs!
- On Oct 19, 2010, at 8:30 AM, Snowman wrote: My brief was rejected 4 times: Didn't serve DA, couldn't submit exhibit not accepted at trial, Type not large enough, one day late.Well they did notify you of the defects, but putting this in the beginning of your filings can help sometimes…
MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE
THIS IS NOTICE THAT THE CONTROLLING CASE, IN ALL MY COMMUNICATIONS
WITH THE COURT, WILL BE
HAINES V.KERNER 404 U.S. 519,520,(1972).
In All My Communication with the court Haines V. Kerner 404 U.S.519,520(1972), In re Haines: pro se litigants are held to less stringent
pleading standards than bar licensed attorneys.
Platsky vs CIA. 953 F. 2nd 26 (C.A.2(N.Y.),1991)In re Platsky: courterrs if court dismisses the pro se litigant without instruction of how
pleadings are deficient and how to repair pleadings.
, Anastasoff v. United States,223 F.3rd 898(8th circuit) (2000)In reAnastasoff: litigants' constitutional rights are violated when courts depart
from precedent where parties are similarly situated.
- will be the controlling cases in regards to any deficiency in mypleadings.
(actually Spooner would rip them a darn sight stronger, but let's remember
his name , anyway.)