Another ticket slaying started...

[theghost]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

JRB, if you were behind the bench, we'd rip your balls off, feed 'em to the bailiffs, then mop the blood off the courtroom floor w/ your wig

Weis, best qoute I've seen in quite some time! I'm actually writing this one down! Laughed my a$$ off. Keep em coming.

[Maximus]

Well tomorrow is the big day.I wish that I was the one with the ticket instead of my wife.I've been steadily sharpening my teeth but doubt that I get to use them.Can I speak for my wife in court (traffic)?I have a few other friendly questions to ask of the forum.They are a little more general than is appropriate for this thread.I will post on the general thread for a "Forum rebuttle"... ;-)

[rottweiler]

Originally Posted by Maximus

Well tomorrow is the big day.I wish that I was the one with the ticket instead of my wife.I've been steadily sharpening my teeth but doubt that I get to use them.Can I speak for my wife in court (traffic)?I have a few other friendly questions to ask of the forum.They are a little more general than is appropriate for this thread.I will post on the general thread for a "Forum rebuttle"... ;-)

I am in suspense as to what happened. Can you please tell us?

[Maximus]

Everybody breath.Sorry about the tardy follow up.We went to court they called my wifes name she was asked for a plea.She responded "Have you read my papers?"The judge responded yes.Then asked how she pleaded.She replied I don't know.This whole time I'm sitting behind her trying to hear the judge who is using a microphone but is still unaudible.I think that my wifes lack of eagerness made the judge take note of me sitting behind her.He asked if I was with her and if I'd like to step up with her.and of course I did.He then proceeded to explain to us that the TS docs did not apply to his Statutory court.TS docs are law docs they don't apply to statute courts.I just smiled a looked at him.To shorten up the story she has to return in sept for a bench trial.I had asked if I could help her represent her self and the judge and the prosecuter said that was fine with them.I will be allowed to pass notes and whisper direction.I have to say that so far my lawyer friend has been correct with prediction of how the local system would react.I have many comments as to the load of $hit that the judge has told us but I will discuss this as the comments come.I felt like I was playing rock,paper,sissors with me 3 year old.Since when do statutes out weigh law?Rott Thank you for the attention.So times I wonder if any one is out there.Peace.

[Maximus]

Oh yeah! One interesting tid bit I forgot to mention the judge told my wife that the the name on the afidavit was her.I think that the judge and the pros are going to try bluffing by not acknowledging anything but the gov't corp.strawman.I really need some direction as to how to coach my wife.I've been pretty busy work wise (plumbing,hv\ac) as well as a bit overwelmed\ if not just plain lost.My attack plan to guide my wife is NOT coming to me.I've thought about asking where their jurisdiction came from but I have no follow up punch.I've thought about pushing the judges oath to the constitution and the common law rule of thumb,no victim no crime point.I am a problem solver in my mutiple trades and usually have good results applying this knowledge to my life but I am drawing a blank on how to deal (or not) with this court over a little traffic ticket.I want this remedied without conforming to their give us your money or our insurance companies your money.If I don't figure this out it will eat at me till I do.I would feel like I was making a whore of my soul you could say.

[Skeptic]

To shorten up the story she has to return in sept for a bench trial.

Gee, I guess that ticket isn't as "slayed" as you thought it would be.

[rottweiler]

This is what your wife should of said:
Your Honor, you are asking me how I plead when the District Attorney failed to answer my Affidavit of Truth citing for one thing the U.S. Supreme court case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins which firmly states that I am a sovereign not subject to the laws passed by the legislature? The law holds that when the District Attorney failed to answer my claim that I was a sovereign not subject to the law, then he is in legal default and must accept my claim as being true. So, Your Honor, the District Attorney has no legal grounds to prosecute me, since he by legal default has to accept my claim as true. The District Attorney having lost all grounds to prosecute me leaves this court with no legal choice, but to dismiss my case.

(That came from the TS website testimonial of Steve from Atlanta, Ga.)

When you accept the judges offer to plea you contracted back into his jurisdiction and you are nullifying your default. You need to contact the Ticket Slayer because you need to start the process all over again.

Does anyone agree with what I'm saying?

Originally Posted by Maximus

Everybody breath.Sorry about the tardy follow up.We went to court they called my wifes name she was asked for a plea.She responded "Have you read my papers?"The judge responded yes.Then asked how she pleaded.She replied I don't know.This whole time I'm sitting behind her trying to hear the judge who is using a microphone but is still unaudible.I think that my wifes lack of eagerness made the judge take note of me sitting behind her.He asked if I was with her and if I'd like to step up with her.and of course I did.He then proceeded to explain to us that the TS docs did not apply to his Statutory court.TS docs are law docs they don't apply to statute courts.I just smiled a looked at him.To shorten up the story she has to return in sept for a bench trial.I had asked if I could help her represent her self and the judge and the prosecuter said that was fine with them.I will be allowed to pass notes and whisper direction.I have to say that so far my lawyer friend has been correct with prediction of how the local system would react.I have many comments as to the load of $hit that the judge has told us but I will discuss this as the comments come.I felt like I was playing rock,paper,sissors with me 3 year old.Since when do statutes out weigh law?Rott Thank you for the attention.So times I wonder if any one is out there.Peace.

[rottweiler]

I am interested in how this goes for you Maximus because I got a ticket for violating ordinance 9.14 "dog at large". As soon as I get a pre-trial date I will start the process myself. Please keep us posted as to what the TS says.

http://www.puppydogweb.com/gallery/r...t_williams.jpg

[Jerseee]

Maximus,

Do not feel that you are out there alone. Sometimes folks can't read every post. This is my first time reading it. As far as Judge Roy bean, well when he can prove his claim then you should listen to what he says. This also applies to the Judge that told your wife an affirmative thing that that was her name on the affidavit. Make them prove their claim--the burden does not lay with you. Rottweiler is on the right path.

These are the same thought processes that I have given many members that have met success. think sovereign and you'll be fine.

Originally Posted by Maximus

Oh yeah! One interesting tid bit I forgot to mention the judge told my wife that the the name on the afidavit was her.I think that the judge and the pros are going to try bluffing by not acknowledging anything but the gov't corp.strawman.I really need some direction as to how to coach my wife.I've been pretty busy work wise (plumbing,hv\ac) as well as a bit overwelmed\ if not just plain lost.My attack plan to guide my wife is NOT coming to me.I've thought about asking where their jurisdiction came from but I have no follow up punch.I've thought about pushing the judges oath to the constitution and the common law rule of thumb,no victim no crime point.I am a problem solver in my mutiple trades and usually have good results applying this knowledge to my life but I am drawing a blank on how to deal (or not) with this court over a little traffic ticket.I want this remedied without conforming to their give us your money or our insurance companies your money.If I don't figure this out it will eat at me till I do.I would feel like I was making a whore of my soul you could say.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Originally Posted by rottweiler

This is what your wife should of said:
Your Honor, you are asking me how I plead when the District Attorney failed to answer my Affidavit of Truth citing for one thing the U.S. Supreme court case of Yick Wo v. Hopkins which firmly states that I am a sovereign not subject to the laws passed by the legislature? The law holds that when the District Attorney failed to answer my claim that I was a sovereign not subject to the law, then he is in legal default and must accept my claim as being true. So, Your Honor, the District Attorney has no legal grounds to prosecute me, since he by legal default has to accept my claim as true. The District Attorney having lost all grounds to prosecute me leaves this court with no legal choice, but to dismiss my case.

And the judge would ask again, "Are you pleading guilty or not guilty?"

You apparently think the courts have never seen this stuff before.