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

I got a summons yesterday.

Expand Messages
  • ACS Lab and Field
    I am in the State of New Mexico. About a month ago, on a Friday after 4:00pm, I was pulled over, ostensibly, for speeding. I told the State Patrolman I did
    Message 1 of 9 , Feb 27, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      I am in the State of New Mexico.

      About a month ago, on a Friday after 4:00pm, I was pulled over, ostensibly, for speeding.

      I told the State Patrolman I did not know why I was stopped.

      When told that I would be cited for speeding I was given the (non) choice of paying, signing and agreeing to go to court, or go immediately to jail. Going to jail would entail the towing and confiscation of my vehicle and a weekend as a guest of Santa Fe County. I was told I would not see a judge until 09:00 Monday.

      I told the policeman I would sign. Over my signature I wrote "Coactus Feci" and under the signature I wrote "All rights reserved." and UCC 1-308.

      I never showed up for "court".

      So now I have a summons with the order to appear on Monday morning, 09:00 am. for an "arraignment" .

      I intend to:
      1) Challenge the jurisdiction of the judge.
      2) Point out I was forced to sign the form.
      3) Ask to see the judge's credentials, ie sworn oath.
      4) Demand to see the sworn oath with a notarized signature of the issuing officer.
      5) Demand to know if the judge is a fiduciary in the matter. I want to know if he has a financial interest in the outcome of the hearing.
      6) I will ask if the issuing officer has a financial interest in the outcome.
      7) I will ask if the officer is expected to write tickets. How many? If he says, "None." I will ask what happens if he writes "none".
      8) Very importantly, I will demand to see evidence.

      I would appreciate any guidance from anyone. I don't really know what to expect at an "arraignment".

      Eddie aka Perdido
    • gary2666
      A couple of things you may want to be sure you have researched. Exactly what are the oath requirements for a judge, prosecutor and police officer in your
      Message 2 of 9 , Feb 28, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        A couple of things you may want to be sure you have researched.  Exactly what are the oath requirements for a judge, prosecutor and police officer in your state.  Not all states require a signed oath to be on file.  Be sure you know what ALL the requirements of an arraignment are in your state and make them comply with all of them.
         
        Gary
         
        Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 9:19 PM
        Subject: [tips_and_tricks] I got a summons yesterday.
         
         

        I am in the State of New Mexico.

        About a month ago, on a Friday after 4:00pm, I was pulled over, ostensibly, for speeding.

      • CarlS
        The purpose of an arraignment is simply to enter a plea. I always plead not guilty. It doesn t mean that I didn t do something - it simply means that the
        Message 3 of 9 , Feb 28, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          The purpose of an arraignment is simply to enter a plea. I always plead not guilty. It doesn't mean that I didn't do something - it simply means that the state hasn't proven that I'm guilty, and I'm presumed innocent until they do. Some jurisdictions proceed immediately to a hearing; others will schedule a hearing at a later date. For the former, I would ask for a continuance in order to "prepare an adequate defense." (key phrase)

          Most of the items in your list are things you'll need to include in your request for discovery. I recommend that you do your homework by first reading the statute that you're charged with violating, and read up on the statutes and regulations that govern the use of speed-measuring devices. You'll find that they are very detailed. You'll also find that very often, something wasn't done that's required by those statutes and regulations, in which case you can get the judge or hearing officer to disallow the evidence from the radar (assuming a radar was the speed-measuring device). Without that evidence, the state cannot prove its case.

          Bottom line: the state is trying to use the law to take money from you. Your job is to make sure that the state (via the officer) isn't violating some portion of the law in order to do that. Make sure every "i" is dotted and every "t" is crossed. In my request for discovery, I ask for the officer's training records (not just the records relating to his training and certification to operate the radar unit), especially his training records relating to his ability to "make a visual determination" that you were speeding, as required by the statues in my state, and likely in yours as well. If those training records indicate that his accuracy was never that good in training, I would question his accuracy at the hearing and at least introduce reasonable doubt. I ask for copies of anything and everything that's mentioned in the statutes and regulations. Perhaps the radar unit wasn't calibrated periodically as required.

          I would not ask the judge for a copy of his oath because it will only piss him off. That's something that you would get from the state headquarters or the court clerk. If they are unable to provide it, then I would bring it up at the hearing, but I would caution you against having a belligerant attitude. I would approach everything very calmly and matter-of-fact, like an attorney would. My son actually had a hearing officer compliment him on how well he prepared and presented his case, and even though he found my son guilty, he ordered no points on his license and the minimum fine because of his attitude and his clean driving record. We (my son and I) decided that we could both live with that because we had more important things to do than fight jurisdictions and so forth.

          At the hearing, you'll have the opportunity to ask the officer anything you like. I recommend writing your questions in advance, and just go down the list. I recommend that you attend hearings prior to yours and observe how the attorneys operate, and you'll know what to expect. You want to "get the lay of the land," so to speak.

          Do your homework and make the state (represented by the officer) prove its case and jump through all the hoops. I've seen cases dismissed because the officer didn't show for whatever reason, but you can't count on it. Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. My experience has been that the courts are indeed a neutral arbiter, and they give the greatest latitude possible to the individual, not the state, especially if you go in thoroughly prepared, and you treat the court with respect. Leave your attitude at the door.

          I strongly recommend purchasing the material available at www.jurisdictionary.com. I met the author personally, and he said, "The reason I created this course is to protect you from people in my profession."

          I'm not a lawyer (because I like to sleep at night), so none of this is to be construed as legal advice. It's merely the exercise of my right to free speech, giving the benefit of my experience.

          ~Carl S.



          --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "ACS Lab and Field" <westernwit@...> wrote:
          >
          > I am in the State of New Mexico.
          >
          > About a month ago, on a Friday after 4:00pm, I was pulled over, ostensibly, for speeding.
          >
          > I told the State Patrolman I did not know why I was stopped.
          >
        • Walin
          I know the reason you were asked to sign could be a 5th amendment question, as they use it to say that it is you who was stopped, but they use it as an
          Message 4 of 9 , Mar 1, 2013
          • 0 Attachment

            I know the reason you were asked to sign could be a 5th amendment question, as they use it to say that it is you who was stopped, but they use it as an admission you needed to be pulled over.  You might also look at the "Right" to travel question.
             
            I was once told that just showing up says they have jurisdiction.  Fraud is everywhere.  Wally

            --- On Wed, 2/27/13, ACS Lab and Field <westernwit@...> wrote:

            From: ACS Lab and Field <westernwit@...>
            Subject: [tips_and_tricks] I got a summons yesterday.
            To: tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com
            Date: Wednesday, February 27, 2013, 10:19 PM

             
          • bsafirebird1969
            ... ******Not exactly... a Plea give the Court Jurisdiction, personam jurisdiction for a start, and that You agree there is a controversy**** I always plead
            Message 5 of 9 , Mar 2, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "CarlS" <Carl@...> wrote:
              >
              > The purpose of an arraignment is simply to enter a plea.

              ******Not exactly... a Plea give the Court Jurisdiction, personam jurisdiction for a start, and that You agree there is a controversy****

              I always plead not guilty.

              **** I can not Plea, until I understand the Nature and Cause of the proceeding ******

              - it simply means that the state hasn't proven that I'm guilty, and I'm presumed innocent until they do. Some jurisdictions proceed immediately to a hearing;

              ****** Am I presumed Innocent of every Element of the Crime ..?
              one Element is the Jurisdiction of the Court ********

              by first reading the statute that you're charged with violating,

              **** what Facts in Evidence does the Prosecution have showing that this Statute is applicable to Me ..?? ******

              You'll find that they are very detailed. You'll also find that very often, something wasn't done that's required by those statutes and regulations, in which case you can get the judge or hearing officer to disallow the evidence

              ***** once you argue the Merits of the Case, You will lose ***********

              Your job is to make sure that the state (via the officer) isn't violating some portion of the law in order to do that.

              ***** Your job is to show there is no Evidence showing that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction ***

              at this opportunity to ask the officer anything you like.

              ***** Impeach the Officer, as incompetent to offer a legal opinion ***

              My experience has been that the courts are indeed a neutral arbiter, and they give the greatest latitude possible to the individual, not the state,

              *** my experience is a Traffic Court is there to take your Money **** >
              > I strongly recommend purchasing the material available at www.jurisdictionary.com.

              *** will provide nothing of use for a traffic issue under rules of criminal procedure ****

              I'm not a lawyer

              ** obvious ***
              >
              > ~Carl S.

              BSA
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "ACS Lab and Field" <westernwit@> wrote:
              > >
              > > I am in the State of New Mexico.
              > >
              > > About a month ago, on a Friday after 4:00pm, I was pulled over, ostensibly, for speeding.
              > >
              > > I told the State Patrolman I did not know why I was stopped.
              > >
              >
            • Jane
              Don’t let them tell you: “We do that all the time here.” I had one judge tell me they don’t need signatures. The other said if they had to get
              Message 6 of 9 , Mar 2, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                Don’t let them tell you:  “We do that all the time here.”
                I had one judge tell me they don’t need signatures. 
                The other said if they had to get signatures they would not have defendants. 
                This was for a misdemeanor Battery for “throwing pen and hitting Melissa on arm” 
                 
                The citation came in the mail.  The judge found no probable cause.
                I had no previous knowledge nor did I authorize the SS# that was stolen to create it.  
                I completely objected. 
                 
                The judge allowed it and allowed the citation with my full SS# lack of my signature and my fill birth date into the public record. 
                Everyone wants jurisdiction of the alleged pen throwing but  no one wants jurisdiction of the identity theft that rendered fictional pen thrower.
                At some point it just becomes damage control for them at the expense of our rights.
                 
                Get your paperwork right and tell them “I stand by my paperwork.” 
                Once you get past that BAR if you are not used to it.....all reason goes down the tubes.
                 
              • originalfrogfrmr
                ... In California, an arraignment is our chance to require that all the elements of an arraignment are dealt with, before any plea can be entered. Most times
                Message 7 of 9 , Mar 2, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  > The purpose of an arraignment is simply to enter a plea. I always plead
                  > not guilty. It doesn't mean that I didn't do something - it simply means
                  > that the state hasn't proven that I'm guilty, and I'm presumed innocent
                  > until they do. Some jurisdictions proceed immediately to a hearing;
                  > others will schedule a hearing at a later date. For the former, I would
                  > ask for a continuance in order to "prepare an adequate defense." (key
                  > phrase)

                  In California, an arraignment is our chance to require that all the
                  elements of an arraignment are dealt with, before any plea can be entered.
                  Most times people waive all the requirements so that they can be convicted
                  and tender their fines and do their sentences earlier than necessary. If
                  they were to take advantage of all the law provides, they might never get
                  convicted at all! Permitting easy prosecution can help to make one a
                  recognized revenue resource in the locality.

                  Waiving rights and asking for continuances grants jurisdiction, which is a
                  primary defense for those wishing to avoid penalties.

                  > You'll also find that very
                  > often, something wasn't done that's required by those statutes and
                  > regulations, in which case you can get the judge or hearing officer to
                  > disallow the evidence from the radar (assuming a radar was the
                  > speed-measuring device). Without that evidence, the state cannot prove
                  > its case.

                  Without a properly set court, and a proper arraignment, it requires a
                  dedicated rights-waiver to get convicted.

                  > Bottom line: the state is trying to use the law to take money from you.

                  Actually, they want a promise of debt. Debt may be used as money with
                  those ignorant of the properties of money. But debt cannot BE money.
                  That fact can itself be used to win most cases, if they proceed that far.

                  > Your job is to make sure that the state (via the officer) isn't violating
                  > some portion of the law in order to do that. Make sure every "i" is
                  > dotted and every "t" is crossed.

                  If one were to do that, one might find no officer exists in the situation,
                  but only multiple pretenders taking advantage of the wide-spead American
                  Ignorance.

                  > In my request for discovery, I ask for
                  > the officer's training records (not just the records relating to his
                  > training and certification to operate the radar unit), especially his
                  > training records relating to his ability to "make a visual determination"
                  > that you were speeding, as required by the statues in my state, and likely
                  > in yours as well. If those training records indicate that his accuracy
                  > was never that good in training, I would question his accuracy at the
                  > hearing and at least introduce reasonable doubt. I ask for copies of
                  > anything and everything that's mentioned in the statutes and regulations.
                  > Perhaps the radar unit wasn't calibrated periodically as required.

                  These are good to do only after many other prerequisites have been
                  satisfied. Those who know better in my neighborhood never get that far
                  down the slippery slope. More people seldom bother to read the law to see
                  what has to be done to give them three hots and a cot, or a nice cut in
                  their accounts.

                  > I would not ask the judge for a copy of his oath because it will only piss
                  > him off. That's something that you would get from the state headquarters
                  > or the court clerk. If they are unable to provide it, then I would bring
                  > it up at the hearing, but I would caution you against having a belligerant
                  > attitude.

                  The time to get oaths is as soon as you know you have a problem. If they
                  are found out of order, there is a process for disqualification. Most
                  fools can be tricked into qualifying somebody out of their own mouths in
                  front of witnesses (like talking to them about their lack of oaths and
                  waiting for an explanation). That is terminal to the disqualification.
                  Most people fail to disqualify all the pertinent parties. Most people
                  exhibit symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome in the presence of their captors,
                  seeking to please ahead of any sense of self-preservation.

                  > I would approach everything very calmly and matter-of-fact,
                  > like an attorney would. My son actually had a hearing officer compliment
                  > him on how well he prepared and presented his case, and even though he
                  > found my son guilty, he ordered no points on his license and the minimum
                  > fine because of his attitude and his clean driving record.

                  Not even a judge! Why was THAT waiver made? And no appeal made? And no
                  money issue raised?

                  > We (my son and
                  > I) decided that we could both live with that because we had more important
                  > things to do than fight jurisdictions and so forth.

                  Americans can adapt to live as serfs, no doubt!

                  > Do your homework and make the state (represented by the officer) prove its
                  > case and jump through all the hoops.

                  But that would mean no case, at least here in California. Here, it is
                  impossible to be convicted (let alone prosecuted!) if one makes their
                  adversaries "jump through all the hoops".

                  > I've seen cases dismissed because
                  > the officer didn't show for whatever reason, but you can't count on it.

                  One thing me and my friends count on is "no officers" and "no case". We
                  feel so sad watching the other people waive one right after another.
                  Somehow they either don't know they are doing it, or they think it will
                  help them somehow.

                  > Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. My experience has been that
                  > the courts are indeed a neutral arbiter, and they give the greatest
                  > latitude possible to the individual, not the state, especially if you go
                  > in thoroughly prepared, and you treat the court with respect. Leave your
                  > attitude at the door.

                  If you find yourself being prosecuted, and you have not acted to
                  disqualify a number of people, you have not prepared for the worst.

                  > I strongly recommend purchasing the material available at
                  > www.jurisdictionary.com. I met the author personally, and he said, "The
                  > reason I created this course is to protect you from people in my
                  > profession."

                  I too recommend that course for one who is totally otherwise unprepared.
                  But having gotten the course, I have to say it presumes that too much
                  going on is still legitimate. It is a good course, for back when law
                  meant something to people. Unfortunately, we're well beyond that point
                  now.

                  Regards,

                  FF
                • Larry Milby
                  I am in the State of New Mexico. About a month ago, on a Friday after 4:00pm, I was pulled over, ostensibly, for speeding. I told the policeman I would sign.
                  Message 8 of 9 , Mar 3, 2013
                  I am in the State of New Mexico.

                  About a month ago, on a Friday after 4:00pm,  I was pulled over, ostensibly, for
                  speeding.

                  I told the policeman I would sign.  Over my signature I wrote "Coactus Feci" and
                  under the signature I wrote "All rights reserved." and UCC 1-308.

                  I never showed up for "court".

                  So now I have a summons with the order to appear on Monday morning, 09:00 am.
                  for an "arraignment" .

                   
                   
                  I may be a little late to do you much good at the arraignment hearing.  There is little one can do at arraignment for traffic violations other than just listen and try not to give them any more evidence that they can use against you.  What Carl wrote was good but I get the feeling you are wanting to fight this with both hands and feet.
                   
                  So to begin with, I will presume you have drivers license, registration and insurance.  If you don't that is OK, I think it is better in the long run if you have none of these, but if you do you must first agree that you have consented to being regulated and live with that fact.
                   
                  The court room is not the place for discovery.  All the questions you have listed are good discovery questions and should be asked, but I would not ask them at arraignment, not even at trial, all of these questions should be agreed to or disagreed to before trial.  I have personally won traffic felony charges, no drivers license, no insurance, counterfeit plates, forgery, concealment, no registration.  I will send you sample filings from my case in Md.  I must warn you, I am not a lawyer, I do not have a silver bullet for you to load into your gun.  My court filings are tools I have used to win my case.  The filings will not win your case, they are merely tools that you must learn to us to prove your position.  Think of your filing in this way, the documents become witnesses that you will place on the witness stand that will testify in your defense.  Justice is blind, it is not about justice, it is about who is the better chess player.
                   
                  Regardless of where your case is, file a Demand For Jury Trial, and a Demand For Speedy Trial.  These are not motions they are Demands written much like a motion but are not.  File all Demands and Motions separately so each has to be addressed separately.  This will buy to time to do some book study.  In most states six months later would be a early trial because of the back log of cases.  Next you will file a "Motion" For Discovery.  Discovery should be limited to the facts that support the charges against you and those persons who will testify against you.  Keep it simple, you are wanting to start a good working relationship with the DA's office or the Police Department etc.  You want them to comply with discovery.  You can always do follow up questions after discovery has commenced.
                   
                  Next and maybe the most important part of your defense will be to fill a "Bill Of Particulars or Request For Particulars."  Some states, use different terms so you must get out the rules book and do your home work.  The questions you have listed have nothing to do with the facts of the case, so none of them will be asked in discovery.  You will ask these and others in your Bill of Particulars.  I will send you a sample attached Demand for Jury Trial and Demand for Speedy Trial and a Bill Of Particulars.  The Bill will educate you more than I have time for.  You will study the flow of the questions and add your questions accordingly.  You need to direct case related questions to the DA, and certain question regarding Oaths of Office to the Clerk of the Court.  Do not insult the judge by asking him directly in a court room.  It is the Clerks job to assign judges to cases, the judge does not get to pick and chose.  After reading what I have attached, let me know if I can help you further.   Larry Milby Bravo18TC@...


                   
                • originalfrogfrmr
                  ... In California, signing a traffic ticket waives several rights, one of the best that they can never hardly fulfill is the right to a formal verified
                  Message 9 of 9 , Mar 3, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > I told the policeman I would sign. Over my signature I wrote "Coactus
                    > Feci" and
                    > under the signature I wrote "All rights reserved." and UCC 1-308.

                    In California, signing a traffic ticket waives several rights, one of the
                    best that they can never hardly fulfill is the right to a formal verified
                    complaint. Accepting the ticket is the alternative most often chosen by
                    the accused. Waiving that makes it much easier on them. It also waives
                    the important right to be taken immediately before a magistrate, where the
                    so-called officer could be instantly disqualified, and then the magisrate
                    as well, rendering the whole affair a nullity.

                    > There is little one can do at arraignment for traffic violations other
                    > than just listen and try not to give them any more evidence that they can
                    > use against you.

                    Here, it is different. Here, first off, you can bring up the pending
                    official disqualifications you have initiated and then if they can
                    properly set the court (bet against that!) you can demand a formal
                    verified complaint (which they NEVER have) (because they count on EVERYONE
                    to waive it!) and demand a competent party to do the arraignment (whom
                    they also almost never have) and you can demand the list of witnesses
                    (none) and also you can get time to answer (but few seldom use this time
                    for what it's for).

                    > So to begin with, I will presume you have drivers license, registration
                    > and insurance. If you don't that is OK, I think it is better in the long
                    > run if you have none of these, but if you do you must first agree that you
                    > have consented to being regulated and live with that fact.

                    I never had those, but won the issues three times three different ways.

                    > Regardless of where your case is, file a Demand For Jury Trial, and a
                    > Demand For Speedy Trial. These are not motions they are Demands written
                    > much like a motion but are not.

                    Motions grant jurisdiction while demands do not. Most people are too
                    timid to make demands. Asking for a continuance grants jurisdiction and
                    waives the right to a speedy trial. The speedy trial right is very
                    powerful because today it is nearly impossible for them to prepare fast
                    enough.

                    > You need to direct case related questions to the DA, and certain question
                    > regarding Oaths of Office to the Clerk of the Court. Do not insult the
                    > judge by asking him directly in a court room.

                    I ALWAYS ask to confer with the judge and DA "in chambers" specifically to
                    spare them embarrassment in front of the Peanut Gallery. If they ask
                    "why?" I say, "to discuss several pending disqualications". And even
                    Clerks and DA's need oaths and bonds, so you may need to hunt up a
                    competent clerk if yours is a phony. You find this out by going and
                    getting the oaths and bonds before you actually need them, or as soon afer
                    the incident as possible.

                    > assign judges to cases, the judge does not get to pick and chose.

                    Any judge may recuse himself to spare the embarrassment of having you do it.

                    Regards,

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