The Enacting Clause
- Saturday 24 January 2009
Real life example:
Over a period of time, on 9 occasions I did not
have change to use a tollroad where the only
access is an automated toll entrance with no
change, and FRNs cannot be used.
One day, I receive an administrative determination
that in addition to the $14 in unpaid tolls, I have
to pay an additional $20 per violation, total due,
As is my right, I demand an administrative hearing.
I read up on the administrative rules and learned that
I have the right to cross-examine witness(es), and
the right to challenge photographic evidence for
which a proper foundation has not been laid in the
Hearing date: [HO = hearing officer]
HO: "Please identify the license plate and vehicle on
the computer screen."
Me: Absolutely not! I object to the images on a
computer screen as improper and irrelevant.
HO: "Objection overruled. For the record, the
Tollway has established a prima facie case against the
Me: Objection! I demand a witness from the Tollway
that I can cross-examine.
Me: I object to the use of these unidentified images
on a computer screen as irrelevant and hearsay.
Long story short, the HO prints out a form and hands
it to me. "OFFICER'S FINAL ORDER"...
"JUDGMENT TOTAL: 194"
Me: Wait a minute! What does "194" mean?
Me: Dollars of what?!
[Understand that this guy does not like me for all
the questions and demands I made throughout this
sham proceding, so he responds in an intended
HO: "Canadian dollars. Now get out of here!"
I just smiled and walked away.
Know that my Notice and Demand to Dismiss includes
the fact that Canadian dollars were demanded of me.
The day after that administrative hearing, I sent
the Tollway Authority a Notice and Demand for
specification as to what it was demanding from me.
Not what I might be able to volunteer, but precisely
what was being lawfully demanded as an exactment?
A monthe later, a "Motion To Dismiss Or In The
Alternative a Specification of Errors" from the
State's Attorney General, authorized to represent
the Tollway, arrives in reponse to my Notice and
Demand To Dismiss.
In the Tollway motion is stated, my "Notice and
Demand for remedy sets forth a unique argument that
plaintiff does not know what a judgment of $194.00
is supposed to mean."
[Now the $ and ".00" has been added]
Two paragraphs later is stated, "The hearing officer's
final order from which that phrase is taken from,
states in the coupon that the 'amount due is $194.00'"
[Now a coupon is referenced to back up a judgment.]
The next sentence concludes, "This clearly means US
Court date, 3 February.
more, but not sure when...