Quote:
|
The judge has no right to put you in jail for not signing a bad agreement. However, you must be the one to decide to defend your "Rights". It seems that David Merrill has suggested a good fall back position.
|
I think you are already in that fall back position. Keep negotiating; negotiating. They cannot accuse you of being obstinant if you just keep negotiating. You are there to contract and they are there to make that process look like law. Like you have no ability to negotiate a reasonable deal. Protect your fiduciary position of responsibility - meaning protect your job. They cannot possibly have the motive to have you fired; then you cannot support your sons at all. Fiduciary responsibility covers all and is a prime leverage position. [In fact they are trying to keep jails operating at above 110% filled for profit. But you should try to get that on the record if you are on the way there. If they are actually threatening to have you fired, that may get you leverage. Consider hiring a transcriber for the hearing - become the court of record.]
Go over your details with them and then they will probably get you to agree to pay about 200% of what you can afford. Then when they present the contract agreement, strike it down to about 50%. Then the whole thing starts over and they draw up a contract for about 150%; strike it down to about 60%...
I would suggest abating the nuisance for misnomer but you need to protect your legal name for commerce. If you abate for lack of subject matter jurisdiction they will likely just move for a "judicial" hearing before an attorney in a black robe. At that time they will present a charge. That charge will not have an enacting clause on its face. Read your local State constitution for the stipulation all laws will have an enacting clause. You will be charged with breaking a non-law. That is want of subject matter jurisdiction.
Find Article V; Section 18;
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elec...2001_const.pdf
Quote:
Section 18. Enacting clause. The style of the laws of this state shall
be: "Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Colorado".
|
[That and $4.50 will get you a Starbuck's unless you secure the oaths of office of any officers coercing you. Then you have their testimony to uphold the stipulation that all laws will have enacting clauses.]
Get Charles Weisman's book
The Authority of Law. It has a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. But here's the catch; the moment you hear any admission there is no SMJ, not another word. You have to get up and leave the room and building. No looking back. Otherwise you abate the matter for no enacting clause; no subject matter jurisdiction. Give them ten days to correct the charges to proper law - then enter default judgment because they cannot and will not. That failure to appear could get nasty but the matter is a nasty one anyway.
I doubt they will consider lack of subject matter jurisdiction for lack of corpus delicti (injured/complaining party). They consider the State (the People) injured by delinquent dads. But like Bobt12, I am just throwing stuff out on the Internet. There are a lot of experienced and wise people here on the forum but you are really just getting what you pay for going on the Internet for legal advice. Only use the advice for leads. You have to back things up; validate and authenticate. Unfortunately you may not have much time for that so I am just telling you - use your senses and keep your head together.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. I apologize for taking your comment literally; that you were just going to lie down and go to jail if that was going to happen. Maybe that is how you felt when writing your first post and my taking it seriously woke you up?