I got my "careless op" charge dismissed today

[Logan]

Hello all,

I just wanted to inform everyone that I got my "careless operation" charge dismissed today for failure to submit a sworn affidavit of claim or a verified complaint.

The only catch, according to the Judge is, the prosecution can notarize this claim and 'rebill' it. My motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted was denied and my motion to dismiss with prejudice was denied.

I stated my christian name and rebutted their assumption that I was a corporation according to R.S. 15:429, to which the Judge accepted. I was told this was a judicial hearing and a criminal court. I submitted a notarized and sealed affidavit from the Secretary of States office declaring that they had no signed oath of office for Officer Robert Downs. I then demanded a verified claim and a list of competent fact witnesses in order to verify subject matter sufficient to invoke juridiction. I demanded a dismissal and a reimbursement of over $2500 in damages to which the Judge denied and told me all I could do to was sue the officer in civil court.

I got a little smart aleck then, stating sarcastically "so anyone could submit any claim for anything for any reason and the burden of proof for defense rests on the defendant with no hope of remedy and it is all based on a threat of violence"? The courtroom laughed.

The judge verified that a claim must be sworn to and that I could have him dismiss the charges then and there with no guarantee of a resubmittal or I could waive that and continue with the trial.

I could not understand what I could further gain from waiving the dismissal, so I stated that I just wanted all of them to leave me alone and that I wanted all further acts of aggression towards me be ceased and that I just wanted to go because I was hungry and wanted something to eat. The courtroom laughed.

The Judge dismissed the charge and remitted my originally held bond money of $230, which I submitted under duress during my brief stay in county lockup over the original FTA charge concerning this matter.

Over all, I think I did well. I kept a level head. I asked questions about the foundation of the claim. I acted courteously and in good conscience. I tried to see this forum for what is really was. These people were not malevolent in nature, just misguided and I was there only to answer the threat of violence I was placed under. But absolutely above all else: I did not argue.

The claim was based upon hearsay with no competent fact witness, no verified claim, no subject matter invoking jurisdiction. They had no power outside violence and I made that abundantly clear. I even referred to my treatment at one point as "tortureous".

I waited afterwards to ask the prosecutor if he intended on rebilling the claim and serving me again and he replied that he did not know yet and that the matter pended
review.

Any advise on what to do at this point? If they rebill it, I still have all the evidence of the claim based upon hearsay and the SOS statement of a failure to locate the Officer Oath. So it would seem that it is in their best interest to let this one go.

I am still interested in filing a lein on the Officers bond, but I have yet to locate the office of risk management applicable.

So time will tell if this matter is resolved. I regret that I did not understand the procedure of the Proposed Order well enough and that I could not submit a statutorily sufficient protocol to receive a reimbursment for my expenses and fees, but overall, I feel this was not a bad conclusion to the first auto accident I have ever been involved in. And perhaps, someone in the courtroom learned something.


Logan


P.S. The trooper would not talk to me afterwords, but the other person involved in the accident spoke to me in length afterwords. My judgment: Cops unfriendly-fellow sovereigns friendly.

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

GREAT JOB!

Every victory is good fruit. Keep the faith.

I dont know how it is where you are but in PA there is something called "municipal police jurisdiction", referenced in the 'judicial code'. It involves some kind of official training and test certification. Maybe you could research that as well to see if 'ocifer bacon' is qualified on these grounds.

There was (and I hope, continues to be) a personality out here in internet-land called "frog farmer", in california, who was real big on noting the absence of proper oaths qualifications etc. He came to the conclusion that there was mostly chaos rather than ANY kind of legal authority. Just "business as usual" and employees receiving paychecks etc. He apparently had a lot of sucess with this approach.

[Notorial dissent]

Originally Posted by Logan

Hello all,
I just wanted to inform everyone that I got my "careless operation" charge dismissed today for failure to submit a sworn affidavit of claim or a verified complaint.

Logan, the only thing you got was extremely lucky. They screwed up on the paperwork, and they let you off. You got denied on everything else, and if the paperwork had been right you would have been in a whole lot of trouble.

Originally Posted by Logan

The only catch, according to the Judge is, the prosecution can notarize this claim and 'rebill' it.

This is the critical part, that you seem to want to ignore. They can refile, any time, and then you will be back where you were, except this time you will get to go to trial. You may get lucky and they may decide it is more trouble than it is worth to refile, but if you ticked someone off, they may just do it for the fun of it. No victory, just plain dumb luck.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by Logan

Hello all,

I just wanted to inform everyone that I got my "careless operation" charge dismissed today for failure to submit a sworn affidavit of claim or a verified complaint.

Congratulations!

The judge verified that a claim must be sworn to and that I could have him dismiss the charges then and there with no guarantee of a resubmittal or I could waive that and continue with the trial.

I could not understand what I could further gain from waiving the dismissal, so I stated that I just wanted all of them to leave me alone and that I wanted all further acts of aggression towards me be ceased and that I just wanted to go because I was hungry and wanted something to eat. The courtroom laughed.

Good idea.

The Judge dismissed the charge and remitted my originally held bond money of $230, which I submitted under duress during my brief stay in county lockup over the original FTA charge concerning this matter.

Over all, I think I did well. I kept a level head. I asked questions about the foundation of the claim. I acted courteously and in good conscience. I tried to see this forum for what is really was. These people were not malevolent in nature, just misguided and I was there only to answer the threat of violence I was placed under.

I like.

The claim was based upon hearsay with no competent fact witness, no verified claim, no subject matter invoking jurisdiction. They had no power outside violence and I made that abundantly clear. I even referred to my treatment at one point as "tortureous".

I waited afterwards to ask the prosecutor if he intended on rebilling the claim and serving me again and he replied that he did not know yet and that the matter pended
review.

Any advise on what to do at this point? If they rebill it, I still have all the evidence of the claim based upon hearsay and the SOS statement of a failure to locate the Officer Oath. So it would seem that it is in their best interest to let this one go.

Hopefully.

P.S. The trooper would not talk to me afterwords, but the other person involved in the accident spoke to me in length afterwords. My judgment: Cops unfriendly-fellow sovereigns friendly.

This is often the case.

[Akira-]

Nice job ! ;)

[I am Siren]

Originally Posted by Logan

Hello all,

I just wanted to inform everyone that I got my "careless operation" charge dismissed today for failure to submit a sworn affidavit of claim or a verified complaint.

The only catch, according to the Judge is, the prosecution can notarize this claim and 'rebill' it. My motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted was denied and my motion to dismiss with prejudice was denied.

I stated my christian name and rebutted their assumption that I was a corporation according to R.S. 15:429, to which the Judge accepted. I was told this was a judicial hearing and a criminal court. I submitted a notarized and sealed affidavit from the Secretary of States office declaring that they had no signed oath of office for Officer Robert Downs. I then demanded a verified claim and a list of competent fact witnesses in order to verify subject matter sufficient to invoke juridiction. I demanded a dismissal and a reimbursement of over $2500 in damages to which the Judge denied and told me all I could do to was sue the officer in civil court.

I got a little smart aleck then, stating sarcastically "so anyone could submit any claim for anything for any reason and the burden of proof for defense rests on the defendant with no hope of remedy and it is all based on a threat of violence"? The courtroom laughed.

The judge verified that a claim must be sworn to and that I could have him dismiss the charges then and there with no guarantee of a resubmittal or I could waive that and continue with the trial.

I could not understand what I could further gain from waiving the dismissal, so I stated that I just wanted all of them to leave me alone and that I wanted all further acts of aggression towards me be ceased and that I just wanted to go because I was hungry and wanted something to eat. The courtroom laughed.

The Judge dismissed the charge and remitted my originally held bond money of $230, which I submitted under duress during my brief stay in county lockup over the original FTA charge concerning this matter.

Over all, I think I did well. I kept a level head. I asked questions about the foundation of the claim. I acted courteously and in good conscience. I tried to see this forum for what is really was. These people were not malevolent in nature, just misguided and I was there only to answer the threat of violence I was placed under. But absolutely above all else: I did not argue.

The claim was based upon hearsay with no competent fact witness, no verified claim, no subject matter invoking jurisdiction. They had no power outside violence and I made that abundantly clear. I even referred to my treatment at one point as "tortureous".

I waited afterwards to ask the prosecutor if he intended on rebilling the claim and serving me again and he replied that he did not know yet and that the matter pended
review.

Any advise on what to do at this point? If they rebill it, I still have all the evidence of the claim based upon hearsay and the SOS statement of a failure to locate the Officer Oath. So it would seem that it is in their best interest to let this one go.

I am still interested in filing a lein on the Officers bond, but I have yet to locate the office of risk management applicable.

So time will tell if this matter is resolved. I regret that I did not understand the procedure of the Proposed Order well enough and that I could not submit a statutorily sufficient protocol to receive a reimbursment for my expenses and fees, but overall, I feel this was not a bad conclusion to the first auto accident I have ever been involved in. And perhaps, someone in the courtroom learned something.


Logan


P.S. The trooper would not talk to me afterwords, but the other person involved in the accident spoke to me in length afterwords. My judgment: Cops unfriendly-fellow sovereigns friendly.

WAY TO GO, Logan!!!!

That is a terrific story! Congrats!

-- Siren

[I am Siren]

Originally Posted by Notorial dissent

Logan, the only thing you got was extremely lucky. They screwed up on the paperwork, and they let you off. You got denied on everything else, and if the paperwork had been right you would have been in a whole lot of trouble.


This is the critical part, that you seem to want to ignore. They can refile, any time, and then you will be back where you were, except this time you will get to go to trial. You may get lucky and they may decide it is more trouble than it is worth to refile, but if you ticked someone off, they may just do it for the fun of it. No victory, just plain dumb luck.

Notorial dissent, why are you always such a downer?

P.S. Did you ever get your debits and your credits figured out?

-- Siren

[masterduke]

Good Job Logan! Regardless of anything N.D. posted. And to think you didn't even have to bribe, er make a campaign con-tribution to the judges re-election fund lol.

[Logan]

I certainly appreciate all the support. I will take ND's negativity as school of hard knocks pessimism and file it where appropriate.

I gained all the insight to the revenue extortion racket perpetuated by the State from study and review of this forum. If nothing else, I am grateful that I am no longer intimidated by them. I see them for what they really are. Children with power. I addressed every angle I could with assertiveness and let them know that I will not be an easy target.

However, based upon ND's comment, why was I given the choice to dismiss based upon their error in paperwork or waive that error and continue with the trial? It would seem a no-brainer to be done with it no matter the circumstance. I am curious however, that my 'motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted' was denied. Afterall, the Judge stated this claim had no remedy.

Logically, if the officer was operating in a vacant capacity and the court had no subject matter to dispute and no competent fact witness or unbiased testimony, then how come I was only able to get their attention due to an error in paperwork?

BTW, I could not have gotten into any real trouble as ND warned. This is a misdemeanor with a small fine. I have nothing to lose and everything to gain by fighting their open fraud of extortion by force.

I focused my attention on the details surrounding the foundation of the claim and addressed the judge specifically on points I am sure he does not hear often.

Ultimately, I wanted the judge working for me and against the prosecution. He did not heed my affidavit of corporate denial however and was initially the person who plead for me at arraignment, so I do not know why he openly violated his Oath of Office, and I do not know at this point on how to procedurally prohibit him from doing that, so I was alittle surprised when he began asking the prosecution for a notarized complaint and I knew that it was over when the prosecutor answered "no".

Most of the rest of the time, I stay out of court. I usually submit paperwork that causes the DA to drop the case before trial, so I am a little inexperienced with the open disregard for the rule of law while in the courtroom, but I think I have gained valuable experience and I will be ready if they refile this claim. Who cares if I lose, it is only Federal Reserve Notes which are worth less every day and the reactions by the courtroom full of peasant slaves in response to my challenges are priceless!

Logan

[charlesa6]

Good job! Congratulations!