Alaska Pipeline court date

[scottinalaska]

My friend threw the courtroom for a loop last week.
9 months ago, Wyatt was drinking(stupid) and drove through and broke a couple security gates leading up to the privately owned Oil Pipeline here in Alaska. He even tossed the chains holding the gates in the back of his truck. No contact with the actual pipeline took place. A week later, a passing trooper asked around seeing the chains in the back of his truck and impounded the truck on suspicion and eventually, Wyatt got a number of charges leveled on him from theft, vandalism, and trespassing.
I told him to settle the account in private with the pipeline company and his day in court would go better since no injured party could be produced then.
He ended up paying the insurance company 1200 bucks for damage and got an awesome letter from the pipeline company saying they have NO grief with Wyatt and all is settled between those two parties.
BUT the STATE of ALASKA is still the plaintiff.
When he presented his letter upon his arraignment, the room became flustered, the DA began asking questions about the minor who was with him, and anything else that had NOTHING to do with the charges.
This being Wyatt's first experience in court, he let his Public Defender speak for him and they calendared this crazy thing for May for no real apparent reason.
We need to close this issue shortly so Wyatt can go on with his life.
He is ready to fire the PDefender and go in pro se with the question of "Do you have evidence of an injured party?"
I am thinking for lack of that, we should move to dismiss and just do it via the paperwork route now.
This is a Criminal Action, not Civil. What categories do Criminal actions fall into here? Aren't they either Common Law or Admiralty/Military Tribunal?
Any thoughts on this?
thanks,
scottinalaska

Greetings scottinalaska,

It would be most helpful if you could pick up Marc Stevens' book, "Adventures in Legal Land". This sort of case is right up his alley.

One strategy Marc uses is to put an UNSIGNED guilty plea right on the judge's bench, and then say "Look, I'm willing to plead guilty to this, but I don't understand. So, first I have a couple of questions." But, I would strongly suggest reading the book before attempting this. To begin with, I'm sure Marc would not be using a public defender. I will bypass questions for the judge regarding jurisdiction and go to the heart of the matter. Although, it could be held that jurisdiction IS THE HEART of the matter, I'm assuming your friend does not want to take that route at this stage of the proceedings.

Basic questions for the judge:

Is there evidence of a COMPLAINING party? There must be something to complain about, coming from someone who actually has a right to complain, or they are demonstrating "bad faith".

Is this a contract dispute or a tort? Please provide me with the evidence from the record of this purported contract. If there is no contract, are you suggesting this is a tort, the cause of action being a known breach of a "legal duty"? If so, where is the evidence in the record that this "legal duty" attaches to me?

Is this cause of action factually consistent with Supreme Court opinion?
If so, what are the facts to support the claim, and who has presented them?

As you know, you have a right to know the nature and cause of the action and to have your accuser brought before you. That being said, hammer them with it. That cop is not a competent fact witness. He does not own the property that he saw in the back of your friend's truck. And, he did not see your friend take it. So, turn it around and ask these questions of him on the stand. Do you own the property that you saw in the truck? Did you see that property being taken by anyone? Then, I believe the most important question is, "Have you placed evidence into the record in the form of a formal written complaint signed by the real owner of the property? Who invited you into this matter and for what purpose?

If the judge or a prosecutor interrupt claiming that it invites a "legal conclusion" on the part of the cop, so they want to strike that portion of the testimony, request on the record that they then strike the ENTIRE TESTIMONY, inclusive of the bogus complaint. Just some thoughts!

Sincerely,
truth

[scottinalaska]

Oh Truth!

When I went with him last week to court I had something similar to that written out for Wyatt to read. (Yes, I have read and studied Marc's book, restudying it when the wife isn't looking!)
But he was meeting his Public Defender for the FIRST time 25 minutes before his arraignment! I told him if he had the gonads, FIRE him if he won't at least ask for evidence of a complaining party. The PD was reluctant to even enter into evidence the "letter of gold" stating Wyatt's compensation to the legitimate injured's party(wonder why?) The PD looked at the easy to read one page worth of questions with routes to take depending on yes or no answers and told my friend that it was all BS and never would work. "Trust me. I'll help you here. You want me to speak for you, right?"
Wyatt relates this back to me right before we enter the courtroom and I tell him it's his life. I think we'll kill the felony count and move it right on out to dismissal, but hey, it IS nervewracking, I know!
He IS ready to go sans PD this time. But if something could be filed and avoid the eternal wait, that would be best.
A motion to dismiss I think is best unless another route is advised by someone on the board for me to consider.
Thanks for your time and thoughts, Truth and others.
scottinalaska

We can certainly appreciate your seeking of the truth of a matter in private, even when the other half hasn't reached that level of understanding. YHWH willing, through your diligence, she will begin to see some results, and 5-10-15 years from now, you can both look back and LAUGH!

[quote=scottinalaska]Oh Truth!

When I went with him last week to court I had something similar to that written out for Wyatt to read. (Yes, I have read and studied Marc's book, restudying it when the wife isn't looking!)

On the other hand, concerning your friend, since he has already seen some of the fallacies of the PDefender, the next time you're with him, you can afford to be more forward with your council, of course, allowing him to make the final decision. Republic...free will, and all that sort of thing, you know?

In the mean time, without any disrespect to this forum for moving you away, I would direct your attention to someone closer to your area, Alaska, and that is Ralph Winterrowd of www.jusbelli.com.

With the intensity of a Bulldog, he can point out the Alaskan laws, statutes, codes, rules, and regulations in the blink of an eye, and possibly offer your friend his next course of action!

I'm sure there's many others here on the forum that would be glad to help, as well.

The best to you and your friend.