Jurisdiction - Page 10

AndyJackson · #91 10-14-2003, 09:14 PM

One thing to consider too is that I was not in a constitutionally defined judicial power court.& Traffic court or municipal court was not setup by "we the people" but by the legislature, therefore, its is a legislative court, not& a judicial court thus no judicial process can be observed there.

#92 10-16-2003, 08:11 AM

A few questions:
Let’s just say that SuiJuris is a big, strapping, young lad and decides to play football for a living. The Colts might be a good choice. So you invite the Packers to come and play against you. A thought comes up; there might be some infractions of the rules and perhaps some disputes over those infractions during the game.
Q1. What do you do to solve that problem?
Q2. How is your proposed solution different from the courts?
&<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o

></o

>
AJ:
Let’s just say that your traffic case was for “speeding”.
Q3. What is written on the sign that you supposedly disobeyed?
Hint: There are some posts in here about juries.
Q4. Assuming your infraction was “disobeying said sign”, how does the court THINK it gains or ASSUMES jurisdiction?
Q5. What always trumps evidence?
Hint 2: Use logical thinking for all the questions and how the questions play together.
&<o

></o

>
Ice, I know you know the answers to Q3, Q4 and Q5. Be nice and let the wise people scratch a bit.

suijuris · #93 10-16-2003, 10:55 AM

Q1: I brought in a 3rd party to mediate.

Q2: The 3rd party in my scenario was INVITED by both sides to settle disputes. However, the court INVITED itself to settle a 'dispute' that it was also the creator of.

Q3 & Q4: AJ, you can have these!

Q5: Admission always trumps evidence. (see Ice, I have been listening...)

Sui Juris

#94 10-18-2003, 04:29 AM

Court's get their authority from ONE SOURCE, pleadings sufficient to empower the court to act meaning one of the parties must give the court its power to act by way of written and oral argument.

#95 10-18-2003, 08:34 AM

Yes SuiJuris,
Q1. The third party is called the referee. If you don’t agree to the referee’s decisions, you don’t play. 
Q2. Really not much different, both referees and courts are hired and paid. (court costs) Both sides agree to abide by the referee’s or court’s decision.
Q3. Absolutely nothing! Although I won’t look it up there is a post in here someplace about the jury being in a box and advisory only. We saw this big time a few years back with the English nanny case on the East coast. The jury found her guilty and the judge turned her loose. The law of boxing says, “Whatever is in a box or brackets is removed from the paper”. So, tell me, is there a box around that speed limit babble on the sign? “Pursuit of happiness”. Does that mean you have the right to drive 100 MPH? Of course it does! Mind you, if you hurt someone you will pay dearly but you certainly have the right to drive that fast. So, would it be lawful for the powers to erect a speed limit sign WITHOUT a box around it? NOPE!
Q4. The court then gains jurisdiction by CONTRACT. You enter the contract by admission. Part of the process of entering that contract is performance. Performance is one of the ways of SIGNING a contract. That is by acting such as speeding or not acting such as not warring a seatbelt.
&<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o

></o

>
Ponder this: Is a STOP sign or YIELD sing boxed? Because they are much more protecting lives than the speed limit sign, maybe not. I don’t know.
&<o

></o

>
So here is another question: If the court considers the above contract by performance valid, why would it not also consider the NbWC/SA consummated by performance such as “stop using my copyrighted name” or “send all papers containing my mane to me”?
I can think of only one reason: We are not members of the Society Of Birdwatchers.
&<o

></o

>
ledelfurran,<o

></o

>
What if there is no other party present? No law broken?<o

></o

>
&<o

></o

>
Jim

Ice · #96 07-24-2004, 03:22 PM

hehehe... I'm bringing this one back to the front...

Re: the above...

What if there is NO CONTROVERSY?

Ice

#97 08-05-2004, 01:09 PM

Man, I have been a member here for a while, and I just got ahold of the best thread on the site.

My brain is CHARGED!

Thanks, Jim, and everyone else for this thread.

Question: What ls the law of boxing? I need to know more about this. I know it has nothing to do with Tyson vs. Holyfield.

HB

Ice · #98 08-05-2004, 01:41 PM

If it is "boxed" then it really isn't there.

Simple, ain't it? Look at a speed limit sign and remember that what ever is in the box isn't really there.

TheBlackTruth · #99 08-05-2004, 01:59 PM

Makes you wonder if the Jury (in a box) has any real power in the court room.. . .

this IS a great thread!

The question asked: What activates the court?

I woud say it would be a pleading sufficient to envoke the jurisdiction of the court.

-BlackTruth

Akira · #**100** 08-05-2004, 04:15 PM

Hi all,

WOW.. great thread... not sure how I missed it...

I'm glad somebody is paying attention.. lol

Jim,

I / we could use your kick-starts more often around here..

thanks for the heads up !

For HIS Glory,

Akira