Re: GOING TO TRAFFIC COURT
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "John H." <otoman@...> wrote:
>You want to present a strategy for all states and then dismiss
> BUT, I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY TO ALL THAT THE PURPOSE OF MY ORIGINAL
> POST IS TO PUT TOGETHER A STRATEGY FOR THE VICTIMS (DEFENDENTS)
> GOING TO TRAFFIC COURTS IN ALL STATES. WHAT APPLIES IN TEXAS
> DEFINITELY DOES NOT APPLY IN FLORIDA.
what applies in Texas does not apply in Florida? What applies
in Texas likely does have pertinence to what appplies in Florida,
with some slight changes.
> PLEASE LET US ALL BUILD UPON THESE TWO IDEAS WHICH WILL APPLY TOWhat applies in Texas also applies in Illinois,by the way, and there
> ALL STATES.
is no set format that applies everywhere. You seem to be looking
for a silver bullet remedy.
> MAYBE WE CAN COME UP WITH A GAME PLAN THAT WILL KNOCK THE BIASEDThis has been addressed numerous times by FF in the IMOC.
> AND CORRUPT JUDGES (SUCH AS THE ONE I HAD) OFF OF THEIR APPOINTED
> One major problem that we face in traffic court is the fact thatThat is what bystander notes are for. [I have come to better
> most states do not have a recorder in the court room.
appreciate FF's not "we."]
> I had the officer by the tail at times but the judge literallySounds like you did not jump to your own? "Objection, are you acting
> jumped to his defense.
as a witness for this "officer?" [the one you did not disqualify, as
you begin to establish your own record by the objection.]
> The officer even admitted that the calibration could be off on the"Objection! Do you have first hand knowledge of that as a matter
> Laser but the judge jumped in and said that the calibration cert
> was in order and that is all that mattered.
or fact as you act as a witness? This witness just admitted, for
the record, that thecalibration could be off!" [More record
> I got to the point where I brought forth the truth in regards to aIt is not extortion. [You did ask.]
> forced signature on the citation. Basically, the citation states
> that if you do not sign it you may be arrested on the spot and
> charged with a misdemeanor!!! HMMM, IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE THAT
> CAN HONESTLY SAY THAT THAT IS NOT EXTORTION???
> I also discovered that, according to the judge, that the citationNow there's a clue. Then what IS a citation according to your
> is NOT considered evidence.
state law? Something you would want to know in order to defend
yourself, and you may discover why it is not extortion.
> PLEASE do not respond to this email with "you should have doneOkay, then I won't say you should have been more familiar with
> this, or that."
what conistitutes a legitmate cause because you are waiving that
> Idea number One: IF the officers testimony is the only evidenceIdea number one does not belong at the top of the list, as you have
> presented, then is it not logical that if the defendent provided
> the court with a "Statement with Affidavit in Support," stating the
> things I mentioned above
it. Eliminating the officer and judge might be a better number 1.
> ANYWAY, Second idea. Our state legislators need to be inundatedIf only pigs could fly.
> with letters, e-mails, and phone calls from their constituants
> demanding that COURT RECORDERS be present during traffic court.
> NOW, THEY GET AWAY WITH MURDER SINCE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THEIRThat's what bystander notes are for. Oops, I'm repeating myself.
> ACTIONS IN THE COURT ROOM.
How can they commit murder and not leave any evidence in a courtroom?
> (I wish I had the time to organize something like this for myYou are contradicting yourself. You want others to organize and
> state, but I do not). Let's build upon these two and others that
> some of you may come up with.
contact state legislatures, but you do not have the time.
> Citizens are being denied their right to a fair trial due to theI would say that citizens are being denied their right because those
> greed and corruption within these courts.
citizens are waiving rights instead of demanding them. I would also
say you have not done a lot of homework, probably too busy to even
read a lot of what is available here without having to go to a law
library to look up the inforamation you want to know.
Maybe it is just me today, but I cannot muster any sympathy for your
post, and I have been in your shoes fighting the fight.
- 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.)