right to counsel

#1 05-27-2004, 03:46 PM

My Daughter was ticketed for driving while suspended awhile back even though she was driving a young lady who was in labor to the hospital. Even the state statutes provide a defense of justification which should be an open and shut defense in court if properly presented. We have gone to the county prosecutor and suggested that he drop the charges based on this, but he refused to do so and wanted her to plea bargin to a lesser charge. We are taking the case to trial by jury which I'm doubting will even come about.& I think they surely must realize that they would have a hard time winning and are merely hoping we will cave before&trial time.& My concern is in the chance that they do go ahead with the trial, that my daughter might say the wrong thing.& The judge claims that I can not speak for my daughter in court that I can only be there as her supporter. She (the judge) claims that I can discuss matters with my daughter but not speak for her, address the jury or question witnesses on her behalf. This somehow feels wrong to me but I have been unable to find anything in my research to uphold that feeling. Is there anyone who might be able to help in this matter?

&

Jerseee · #2 05-27-2004, 03:59 PM

CRH,

Sorry to hear about this but welcome to the forum.

This case sounds very easy to shut down.& I'll make this brief so you can soak it in.

1. Remember the prosecution cannot testify.& If they want to testify, have them swear in.& You can tell when they are testifying when they start talking like they know the situation.& Was the prosecutor there when the situation happened?& If not, he/she cannot give testimony.

2. Your daughter has a right to counsel!& Who in the world says it should be a lawyer?& You have been counseling her all your life.& I'll let you think on that one.

3. Bring a notary.& A notary is a public official.& If the prosecution wants to swear in--let the notary do it, not the baliff. The baliff is not a public official (at least not that I know of)

4. Make sure it is a court of record.& You want to get this on the record.

5. there is a difference between driving and traveling.& I'm not sure of your knowledge level when it comes to redemption but, this information alone should put you on the right path.& One is&a&commerial activity&(driving)&and one is your god given right (right to travel).

Hope that helps.

Ice · #3 05-27-2004, 04:06 PM

Why not ask the judge if she is making a legal determination or decision?... how about objecting?... will she "certify the question" as to whether or not you can assist your daughter?

See the Downloads section for Objections to Evidence and Testimony for more assistance.& It may come in handy.

Also, if the "license" to practice law comes up in any fashion -- ask to see ANY LICENSE acquired from any governmental office that gives anyone the privilege to practice law... and plainly state that you know of no such agency that issues such licenses.& If the "BAR" is brought up -- that is a PRIVATE association and NOT a government agency.

&

#4 05-27-2004, 04:51 PM

Another thought:

If you are going to serve as some type of "counsel", "adviser" or whatever label you may desire, create a private contract between yourselves (creating the authority and legal standing for you to be there).& Do a little research on 3rd parties (be it the judge or anyone else) who try to interfere with the obligations of private contracts.& You&may be able to&box the judge in by using this method when questioned about this, in&conjunction with&all the other info here.

-squirrels

#5 05-27-2004, 05:26 PM

Jersee and Ice,

Thanks for the speedy replies. Even though this is the first time I have gotten on the forum,&I have been reading and considering many things on this site as well as others for quite some time now.& I have have actually been kidnapped by well meaning blue suited agents of BB on a couple of occassions.& I am familiar with Right to Travel, Redemption, and similar issues. The state and I have a wife and 7 children that I love deeply, but all of whom are not (yet) of the same mindset that I am on these issues.& Regardless of the rightness of things, I find it difficult at best to provide for them from a jail cell, and admittedly if I had handled one situation differently that could have been avoided.

Nonetheless, for the present I feel that the wisest course of action is to get better educated about these matters and pick my battles carefully.(Be wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove.) I am not sure that I am ready to do battle with them on most of the issues that you mention, but was hoping to wrap this up using their own statutes. I do think there is a lot of merit to asking the judge some of those questions ,but&wonder how to proceed if she refuses to answer them&properly. As several have pointed out on these forums,&they have the power whether right or not. I couldn't agree more that my daughter has a right to counsel and that it doen't have to be a lawyer, but where can I show them irrefutably by the law that this is so. What will stop them from holding me in contempt if I raise these issues?& What if they refuse to provide a court of record?& What if they refuse to allow a notary to swear in?& In any case I will check out the downloads section you mentioned and I really appreciate all the great information you are posting on this site and will continue to try to learn as much as time allows.

CRH

#6 05-27-2004, 05:55 PM

Hey, CRH....

So take the judge up on her notice that you can "assist," but not "speak for."

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/c...nt06/10.html#1

Self-Representation

The Court has held that the Sixth Amendment, in addition to guaranteeing the right to retained or appointed counsel, also guarantees a defendant the right to represent himself.&It is a right the defendant must adopt knowingly and intelligently; under some circumstances the trial judge may deny the authority to exercise it, as when the defendant simply lacks the competence to make a knowing or intelligent waiver of counsel or when his self-representation is so disruptive of orderly procedures that the judge may curtail it.

The essential elements of self-representation were spelled out in McKaskle v. Wiggins,&a case involving the self-represented defendant's rights vis-a-vis ''standby counsel'' appointed by the trial court. The ''core of the Faretta right'' is that the defendant ''is entitled to preserve actual control over the case he chooses to present to the jury,'' and consequently, standby counsel's participation ''should not be allowed to destroy the jury's perception that the defendant is representing himself.'' 250 But participation of standby counsel even in the jury's presence and over the defendant's objection does not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights when serving the basic purpose of aiding the defendant in complying with routine courtroom procedures and protocols and thereby relieving the trial judge of these tasks. 251

Me, again: The last sentence says it all about the "real" reason "they" keep telling us we "need" "lawyers."& It's not about "defending" us. It's what all here know: "Lawyers" are "officers of the court" and their primary function is to make sure the judge stays happy and doesn't have to do anything, that everything runs nice and smooth and no one gets upset, blah blah...

So brush up on court procedure and go kick ass!

Randy

Ice · #7 05-27-2004, 06:47 PM

First of all, don't worry about going to jail for boxing the judge in on this issue.& The Judge is bound to adhere to what the Higher courts have decided.& So, if you ask the judge to "certify the question" they will have to come up with actual cases that demonstrate they are right.& You can use the objection process to settle the matter in your favor if you would spend just a little time researching it.

Anyway it goes, the Judge is bound by the Supreme Court&Decisions that can be found cited in this forum.& Use that to your advantage.

&

#8 05-27-2004, 10:46 PM

Sir:

You and/or your Daughter do not have to speak. File an "Appearance Brief" with an "Affidavit of Specific Negative Averment" attached.

This will solve matters in an instant!

Jerseee · #9 05-28-2004, 12:57 AM

CRH,

never argue.

The questions you posed in your last post are questions arising from a dispute.

The first thing you must do is change your mindset and believe in what you are doing.

Enslegis appears to have offered a good method so you may want to PM them on the particulars of that.

But you can file an affidavit or a power of attorney signed by your daughter appointing you her counsel. You will have to bone up on courtroom procedure if you go this route.

You can make it a court of record by bringing in your own recorder. If they do not want to make an official record--then you make one. If this is a trial I am sure there will be a court recorder.

The notary is not there to swear in, the notary is there to do the swearing in. Don't worry about that too much because the prosecutor will not swear in. because they know they are perjuring themselves.

You may ask who is the damaged party? You have the right to face your accusor. You may ask does the prosecutor have an affidavit on file to appear and represent the accused? You will have one why don't they? You may object everytime the prosecutor begins to speak about the "alleged" facts of the case. Check out the downloads section. Ice has posted some very good info there on objecting and where it can lead.

There are lots of avenues to take but, whichever road you take to victory--you must know and believe that that is the right road. Doubt will only make you turn around and start from where you began everytime you try a new road.

I know you have said that you have been keeping in touch with this site and understand what we are about. But this should be listened to by your whole family so they understand:

http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuth...k/Badnarik.htm

This is great for beginners to understand what you are doing.
good luck

Akira · #10 05-28-2004, 12:17 PM

Hi CRH & All...

I would like to concur with all opinions above... excellent advise !

I am intriqued by Enlegis' idea, but I lack the particulars.. at the very least, it appears to be a labor efficient approach as opposed to other techniques offered here....

My long winded 2 cents...

First, Anyone can practice law.... just quote the Supreme Court of the United States ( their decisions should be trump cards in court )

http://www.suijuris.net/main/suijuri...&query=License

So, politely ask to see their license to practice ! Per their OWN arguement, priviledges require licenses, whether on the highways or in court, you need a license to participate, therefore, they should be prepared to show their license to practice law, or be subject to sanction... (notice I said "should be")

In my home state of Maine, neither the Sectratary of State nor the state Supreme court issue licenses to practice law, and as I recall, the ABA's own constitution says they don't issue licenses, although I can't find the specific reference atm... (possibly their web site?) it's worth a check...

Second, find out who the Judge will be and get an appropriately dated copy of their Oath of Office from the SOS to verify his/her legitimacy.

Third, Your daughter didn't "break the law", she alledgedly violated provisions of her corporate "driving" contract, which is an equity issue ! not an issue for a court of criminal law...

http://www.suijuris.net/main/suijuri...showtopic=2480

Fourth, your daughter wasn't driving, she was TRAVELING, in her CAR, with GUESTS....

Driver is a regulated occupation for hire, whether moving goods or passengers, you must be getting compensated to be "driving"

The state may only regulate commercial activity... Driving, motorvehicle and passengers are all commercial terms and are POISON !! don't use them EVER ! by doing so, you automaticly give them jurisdiction.

And, according to the Supreme Court of the United States, the states don't have authority to issue "traveling" licenses

Shapiro v. Thompson : 394 US 618 (1969):
"The constitutional right to travel . . . has been firmly established and repeatedly recognized." United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 757. "The right to travel freely from State to State finds constitutional protection that is quite independent of the Fourteenth Amendment." United States v. Guest, supra, at 760, n. 17. As we made clear in Guest, it is a right broadly assertable against private interference as well as governmental action. Like the right of association, NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U.S. 449, it is a virtually unconditional personal right, guaranteed by the Constitution to us all. "

Mudook v. Penn. : 319 US 105 (1943):
“A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution ...... No state may convert any secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it.”

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Al.: 373 US 262 (1962):
"If the state does convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it, you can ignore the license and a fee and engage the right with impunity.”

Get the full scoop at http://www.suijuris.net/main/suijuri...ile.php?lid=77

Fifth, now include the state statute you refered to for emergency cases.. that arguement worked for me when my 2nd son was being born and my registered auto would not start, I drove my unregistered truck to the hospital...

Sixth, When the Judge tries to throw out the Constitution, the Supreme Court Law decisions and quoted case law, which they no doubt will... Challenge their jurisdiction (which can be done at ANY time) by saying WHO THE HELL ARE YOU??? I DON"T RECOGNISE YOU... and tell them why... state FACTS !!! since they don't recognise the Constitution, the Supreme Court, equity arguement in a criminal law jurisdiction, unlawfully accept FRN's as payment of debt and any other fraud you have studied and are comfortable in quoting as FACTS. (don't argue) Just the forced issuance of drivers licenses to private citizens is an ongoing 70 year fraud.

Personally, I would wait till just a few hours before court and file all this in a demure, so the judge and prosecuter won't have it yet (catch them off guard) and simply introduce it in court, and READ IT into the RECORD !

See Lawyerdudes demure page at http://www.lawyerdude.8k.com/5736.html

If the Judge attempts to throw everything out (remember, you are entitled to a reason why)... which they are certainly capable of doing... I would default to the presentation made in "Atlas Shrugged" by Ay Rand

read an excerpt here.... http://www.angelfire.com/oh4/befree/AtlasShrugged2.html

"I will not help you to pretend that I have a chance. I will not help you to preserve the appearance of righteousness where rights are not recognized. I will not help you to preserve an appearance of rationality by entering a debate in which a gun is the final argument. I will not help you to pretend that you are administering justice."

I love that book !

For your consideration....

Akira

P.S. gals/guys...since an unrebutted affidavit stands as truth, is it worthwhile to put the provable ongoing frauds into an affidavit and go through the notice - default - recording procedure? Has anyone tried this? My synical side says it's a waste of time/money... any thoughts?