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

Traffic Court & Outcome

Expand Messages
  • E Junker
    This is to address an earlier post regarding a Traffic Citation. The location of the incident is New Mexico. I was issued a Speeding Ticket in February and
    Message 1 of 3 , Jun 4, 2013
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      This is to address an earlier post regarding a Traffic Citation.
      The location of the incident is New Mexico.

      I was issued a Speeding Ticket in February and asked this august group for advice on how or whether to proceed with  resistance.  I am grateful to all of whom participated.

      Upon suggestion I went to a website called TicketSlayer, paid my dues and received the materials promised timely.  I did not file any of the paperwork suggested. However, I did use some of the tactical advice therein.

      First, I filed three (3) continuances.   The third continuance granted was shortened to only two weeks.
      At this point I talked to the  Clerk of the County and asked him, "Who is the prosecutor?".

      It got interesting from that point.

      I showed the Clerk the paper that was the Continuance and pointed out the fact that no prosecutor was listed, but the Judge was and so was the State Policeman.  I also pointed out that I would need the exact title of the presiding judge.  And I would need the Clerk's name  as well.
      The Clerk kindly told me that, "The policeman is the prosecutor."
      I, in my most incredulous face, asked, "You mean that all the State Policemen have Law Degrees and BAR cards?  They're required to be attorneys? !!"
      Long pause.
      "Well, uh, no" he replies, "You just go in and hash it out and if you can't come to an agreement then the judge sets a jury trial."
      "So, no prosecutor, actually?" I ask.
      No answer.

      I went to the Clerk on the appointed day  of trial, sought the Clerk and asked again if they were going to "dismiss this hearing" without me spending time in the courtroom. 
      "Nope, you gotta see the judge." sez the Clerk.

      As I go into the "Courtroom" I notice boldly pasted on the door the following admonition:
      No Recording Devices Allowed!  No Video, No Recorders of Any Type!
      Cell Phones must be left in your car. (Yes it actually said to leave the phones in the car.)

      I pulled out my cell phone, set it on "Record", dropped it into my front shirt pocket, pulled the door open and sauntered  in. Sitting around "behind the bar" (that little fence thingy that separates the hoi palloi from the magisterials) were four distinct people each carrying a folder of some sort and reviewing materials therein.  One guy was sitting with his lawyer.

      A few minutes before showtime the Clerk comes into the room, pulls the judge over, looks directly at me, then to a couple of the studiers, talks and walks out.  Then the policemen (City, County and State) start filtering in.  They ran through the docket and got to a younger guy, one with a folder.
      "Dismissed."  Lack of prosecution.  Then the next folder. Same.  Another. Then me.
      I walked up, opened my folder and laid my 5 by 8 on the lectern next to my hat.
      "Dismissed."  Lack of prosecution.
      There were a lot of dismissals that afternoon and they all tied to two separate policemen.   I wondered if we the resistors were piled into one hearing to improve the efficiency of the machine.

      So that was it.  Dismissed.  No cop, no prosecutor, no prosecutor-cop.
      What I was prepared to ask were three questions:
      1) Can I have anyone represent me in this court?  Say a good friend that's really knowledgeable about the law?
      2) What is the requirement for someone to represent someone else in this court?
      3) Could you have the prosecutor-policman show his current NM BAR card and tell the court which Law School he graduated from, and what year?

      But, alas, I didn't get to.

      Thanks all.
    • Baruch HaShem
      I showed the Clerk the paper that was the Continuance and pointed out the fact that no prosecutor was listed, but the Judge was and so was the State
      Message 2 of 3 , Jun 6, 2013
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I showed the Clerk the paper that was the Continuance and pointed out the fact that no prosecutor was listed, but the Judge was and so was the State Policeman.� I also pointed out that I would need the exact title of the presiding judge.� And I would need the Clerk's name� as well.
        The Clerk kindly told me that, "The policeman is the prosecutor."

        Several years ago, I was faced with charges in New Mexico of no driver's license, no insurance and no seatbelts.

        In preparing for the case I discovered that the police are authorized by state statute to prosecute all cases in the magistrates court, but if appealed, then the local prosecutor takes the case.

        BTW, New Mexico statutes requiring a driver's license specifically mention only residents of New Mexico. I accused the state police officer of violating his oath of office by charging me under the state statue when there was ample evidence that I was not a New Mexico resident. He showed up to court with his immediate supervisor. Pre-trial with both the officer and his supervisor was very interesting.

        Shalom,
        BH
      • originalfrogfrmr
        ... In California, a continuance grants jurisdiction. They spent a lot of effort trying to get me to ask for one. For this reason, I try to be ready for a
        Message 3 of 3 , Jun 7, 2013
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          > I showed the Clerk the paper that was the Continuance and pointed out the
          > fact that no prosecutor was listed, but the Judge was and so was the State
          > Policeman. 

          In California, a continuance grants jurisdiction. They spent a lot of
          effort trying to get me to ask for one. For this reason, I try to be
          ready for a case all the time. I'm like a beartrap set to spring! They
          knew this a long time ago so I think it has something to do with me being
          left alone for a long time now.

          > In preparing for the case I discovered that the police are authorized by
          > state statute to prosecute all cases in the magistrates court, but if
          > appealed, then the local prosecutor takes the case.

          It is good not to waste time if you know you're going to demand all rights
          at all times never waiving any one for any cause or reason and just tell
          them up front you demand a real court of record and a real judge and jury,
          and that you will derive great entertainment from watching and waiting to
          see which of the minions are merely going through the motions to receive a
          paycheck of irredeemable created credit and which if any are capable of
          articulating facts and law.

          > BTW, New Mexico statutes requiring a driver's license specifically mention
          > only residents of New Mexico. I accused the state police officer of
          > violating his oath of office by charging me under the state statue when
          > there was ample evidence that I was not a New Mexico resident. He showed
          > up to court with his immediate supervisor. Pre-trial with both the officer
          > and his supervisor was very interesting.

          Hey, group encounters are almost always fun! I make it a point of every
          confrontation to involve superiors, giving myself silent FrogPoints for
          every level I can involve. Three is an easy minimum. Heck, today three
          might be there right from the beginning. So, I try to identify them for
          proper scoring.

          It is my conclusion after reading California's Constitution(s) and codes
          that there are so many contradictions and inconsistencies that anyone who
          gets convicted and punished here in California does so with their own
          cooperation after numerous waivers of rights. Some claim to awaken in the
          nightmare and fail to realize the repercussions of their previously made
          waivers. This is why I appear at the Initial Moment Of Confrontation
          (IMOC)as the belligerent claimant in person where my rights are involved,
          and obstinately refuse to waive them as long as I am aware of them. The
          longer one studies the more aware one becomes. A tragedy is that few
          people fined and incarcerated took the time to read the few pages of law
          that explained what was necessary to get them into that condition.

          Their homework assignment: Take the penal code, and a pen and paper, and
          list requirements that must be fulfilled in a legitimate CASE to convict
          someone. Try for 100 steps. See how many you can identify. Think of
          ways to make fulfilling them difficult. It really isn't that hard.

          Regards,

          FF

          P.S. One problem people have is giving authority figures too much
          credibility.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.