Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: outlaw judge

Expand Messages
  • tthor.geo
    I do not know how Texas courts are structured. IF California is any indication, the first court [trial level] ONLY is conducted to establish the FACTS of
    Message 1 of 9 , Sep 20, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      I do not know how Texas 'courts' are structured.

      IF California is any indication, the first 'court [trial level] ONLY
      is conducted to establish the FACTS of the case. The appellate level
      is where one 'argues' the law as applied to those facts [a step most
      *pro pers* ignore/forego]. The appellate level is also where you can
      establish precedent [help for others in a similar situation]. You
      need to start researching the Rules for Appeals [probably in your
      State-level Rules of Court].

      Your planned expedition to the Grand Jury is way premature [and will
      be viewed as 'vindictive/'vexatious'; guess who honchos the grand
      Jury?] until you have established [at the appellate level] that the
      judge actually did something illegal [not just error(s) of
      judgment/law].

      Q <philo_farnsworth@...> wrote:
      >
      [clipped]
       
      > To begin with, I filed motions to dismiss citing multiple
      violations of law and lack of jurisdiction.  Judge refused to let me
      argue motions, said he had already denied them in private.  I am
      surprised that he did let me say just about anything I wanted
      regarding the constitution and the law. I presented everything to
      the jury, showing that this trial was being held illegally, as the
      defective complaint did not give the court jurisdiction, also that
      the prosecutor was prohibited by law from also being the
      complainant.  I even got in a FIJA jury instruction, informing them
      they they had the right and responsibility to judge both the facts
      and the law. After all that, including seeing numerous shouting
      matches between me and the judge regarding him running a kangaroo
      court by ignoring the law, the obedient little sheep returned a
      guilty verdict.  A friend of mine struck up a conversation with them
      after court and asked how they came to their
      > verdict.  The answer basically came to "the cop said he wasn't
      wearing a seat belt", even though the cop that wrote the ticket was
      not the one who witnessed the violation, another violation of law
      that was pointed out to them.  When asked about the other factors,
      such as the violations of law cited, the answer basically was that
      they didn't really understand or know about it, and the judge would
      have said something if that really wasn't legal.  So I have filed an
      appeal to county court, and am preparing a criminal complaint
      against the judge for violations of Penal Code 39.02, Abuse of
      Official Capacity and 39.03 Official Oppression.  I will present
      this directly to the foreman of the grand jury, but would like some
      critique, advice, suggestions for the best ways to move forward from
      here. 

      [clipped, a bit]
    • Q
      Thanks, I appreciate the advice, I ll hold off on the grand jury until this is resolved.  In this instance, it will be a trial de novo, everything starts over
      Message 2 of 9 , Sep 22, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks, I appreciate the advice, I'll hold off on the grand jury until this is resolved.  In this instance, it will be a trial de novo, everything starts over at zero.  However in this case, I should have (theoretically) a better chance to prove the judge ignored the law.  My motion to dismiss was vast and extensive in facts of law and precedent, it left no wiggle room.  The only way it could be denied is by another corrupt judge, which is in the realm of possibility.  If that is the case, then I can easily take that "error" to the court of appeals, which doesn't play around and has already ruled (and set precedent) that an oath of office is required.  If it makes it that far, then statewide precedent will be set again, and every case this prosecutor has ever handled will be null and void.  That will be my victory.

        ---
        On Sat, 9/20/08, tthor.geo <tthor.geo@...> wrote:

        I do not know how Texas 'courts' are structured.

        IF California is any indication, the first 'court [trial level] ONLY
        is conducted to establish the FACTS of the case. The appellate level
        is where one 'argues' the law as applied to those facts [a step most
        *pro pers* ignore/forego] . The appellate level is also where you can
        establish precedent [help for others in a similar situation]. You
        need to start researching the Rules for Appeals [probably in your
        State-level Rules of Court].

        Your planned expedition to the Grand Jury is way premature [and will
        be viewed as 'vindictive/ 'vexatious' ; guess who honchos the grand
        Jury?] until you have established [at the appellate level] that the
        judge actually did something illegal [not just error(s) of
        judgment/law] .

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.