Questions for the judge.

The court is a sham. We know it and the judges know it. When your case is not going according to “plan” (the judge’s plan that is) the judge has two and only two options:

1. Expose the sham.

2. Resort to violence.

Questions (all prefaced with “For the record…”):



Do you equate justice with violence?



Are your decisions of greater weight than the Supreme Court OR the legislature?



Even though you have supposedly taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the united states and this state, do you gain your right to ignore those constitutions by authority of the emergency war powers act OR because Washington DC has declared war on this state OR because we are under martial law because Washington DC has declared war on this state OR because this state is actually a concurred nation, concurred by Washington DC OR because this state is under martial law because it is actually a concurred nation?



Did you have knowledge of (the above) when you took your oath?

Isn’t that what in law is called “false swearing”?



Judge do you come to this courtroom with clean hands? Same with opposing attorney.



Are you threatening me with violence in the form of contempt of court just for asking questions?



In “the people of the state v. …” Judge, are you a citizen of this state? If “No” then he is not a judge in your state. If “Yes”: OK then you are one of the people of this state aren’t you? “Yes”. Well then judge aren’t you a party to this case? Would you please rescuse yourself. Same goes for the prostituter.



Doesn’t the infraction you accuse me of specifically state that it pertains to a “person”? (Of course you have checked this.) If “Yes.” Well judge, isn’t a person an actor’s mask OR a corporation OR a legally created, ens legas if you will, entity? Do I look like I was created by the legal system OR the bar association? How is it that you think that law applies to me?



Judge are you in your court duties required to obey the law just like me? If “Yes.” It’s field day time. If “No.” Then do the laws not apply to you because in law you are not a “person”?



Isn’t that reversible error?



In this proceeding if you trample on any of my rights or break any law or allow a fraud in your court, doesn’t that remove subject matter jurisdiction and make any judgment or order proceeding from here “void”?



In criminal court: Judge does this court have jurisdiction to try a “person” or a “flesh and blood man”? If he says person: OK, I have no problem with that. Set a picture of yourself on the table and say, “Try away. My business here is finished. Good bye.” If he says both: see above. If he says flesh and blood man: Then why does the law say person instead of flesh and blood man?



No matter what the outcome here today, am I really only allegedly bound to that outcome by contract? If yes: I would like to see that contract and have it explained to me before I enter into it.



Does this court consider me “surety” for the person you are trying? If yes: Well I didn’t create the person you are trying. You and your cohorts did. So, I do not agree to be surety for that person. If no: Well then I certainly have no business here do I? Yes or no he is admitting you and person are different.



Does me answering your questions allegedly enter me into some sort of contract with you? See the contract and have it explained.



Is this a court of equity or law? If equity: let’s see the contract. If law: Let’s see the law. Person? (see above)



Needless to say you will want to have a sizable audience of friends. Hire your own court reporter.



There is another one if the judge will not let you have your own court reporter. Judge are you concerned that your court reporter’s record and my court reporter’s record will not match? (Note I said “will” not “may”) Why are you worried about that judge? What would cause them not to match other than someone altering them?



Needless to say you have laid a little path for these questions by playing a bit dumb. “Well I just don’t quite understand.”



The main point is that they cannot answer any of these questions either way. If they do they expose the sham. If you only ask questions it cannot be contempt. Note that the judge’s big, dumb, robotic bailiff will be slobbering on his tie waiting for the word to take you away. They may haul you off on contempt then let you out that afternoon, just to get you out of the public eye.



Ok ladies and gents, this is only a start. Put your minds to the grindstone and let’s see some more.

Jim

Jim, Don't give me out. Sunday is a little slower than other days, but don't think I missed this.



From the bottom of my heart, Thanks, and to quote Ahnold, "I'll be back."



HB

[weishaupt1776]

<font color=purple>[b] Jim, truly an honor for you to spend some time with the young guns. Thank You.



Here's a go:

"Your Honor, For the Record . . .



In this proceeding, is the court presuming that the name on the docket list is the same as the name of myself, the flesh & blood man standing before you in this proceeding?



Does the name of the "person" on the docket list for this proceeding at hand have the same sound as the name of myself who is the flesh & blood man standing before you in this court for this proceeding?



Is absolute accuracy in spelling the name on the docket list required for it to be associated with the name of myself who is the flesh & blood man in this proceeding before the court?



(Note: I was thinking we should enter our real upper case-lower case name as evidence in the record for this next question)



Although the name on the docket list is of a different spelling than mine as evidenced in "Exhibit___" in the record; does it convey to the ear the same sound which is practically identical with how the correct spelling of my uppercase/lower case name in "Exhibit__" would be pronounced?



If I , the flesh & blood man, were to respond when the incorrectly spelled name on the docket list was called, would the court consider that name to be sufficient identification of myself , the flesh & blood man in this proceeding?

Note: I am not a genius-John Jennings & his partner Marlon showed me the word "idem sonans" in Black's 4th. I just reproduced the definition in the form of multiple questions. However, I am an artist & good artists only copy while the GREATEST artists steal.

With humility I would think that your questions come as a result of the questions I earlier mentioned. For one thing your name is only one of your many possessions. As you saw in the jurisdiction thread I answer to Jim but that name does not appear on my birth certificate. I also answer to Brakeman, Conductor and Woof. The first two are often used on the train. The last one is one of the names my dog calls me and I do respond. I have been known to respond to “baby” as in “do me baby.” But I won’t go into it any deeper than that on this forum. There have been a few other names to which I have responded. Some of those also would not be fit for mixed company.

Try this: Do my questions deal with the court and it’s authority? Do your questions deal with a possession of yours? You want “heads I win tails you loose” questions to the court and about the court. The object is to put the court between a rock and a hard place IN PUBLIC! There have been many times when things like this happened and the next gent up and said, “What he just said.” I have heard of one time when the judge told all the people their cases are dismissed and go home.

So what if you get in trouble. Will your friends go right to the local newspaper and submit a story about the judge throwing you in jail for asking questions? Or even better publish an affidavit of what they saw and heard in the legal section.

Jim

[weishaupt1776]

<font color = purple>[b] So would tailoring questions within the four legs of jurisdiction be a place to start?

Am I getting warm?

Jim,



1. What is the clean hands questions referring to?



2. First time I have heard "reversible error," but I can imagine it means reversible on appeal?



3. Is contempt in any way able to be recompensed by the judge? What I am trying to understand is if a penalty for wrongful imprisonment would or could apply for contempt jailings.



Ok, Now on to your Questions:





All are good, but the ones that made me feel the thump of the sub woofer were:



Judge, are you a citizen of this state?





and



Does me answering your questions allegedly enter me into some sort of contract with you?



*********************





I have read many times that if one appears, they should do it pro per, and not pro se. I am starting to believe that one should not appear in either fashion because pro per means" in one's own proper person." Hmmm. Not me. I am a Man.



Pro Se: "in person"



But now this here's a good 'un: Sui Juris: "Of his own right; possessing full social and civil rights; not under any legal disability, or the power of another, or guardianship.

Having capacity to manage one's own affairs; not under legal disability to act for one's self." Black's Sixth.



I'll never appear in court again unless it's only sui juris, and the court recognizes such. Then, it's only involuntarily.

[Ice]

By jove, Henry ! I think you got it !



If you appear Sui Juris do you think they will up and tell you that you ARE NOT Sui Juris and COULD NOT be Sui Juris?



If you ARE Sui Juris... are you not Sovereign?



It seems to me that by appearing "Sui Juris" you stake a claim to your Sovereignty. And if they don't rebut ... it stands as truth... and it's on the record !



Ya think?

[weishaupt1776]

<font color=purple>[b]Come on guys, Prof. Jim's got another Hot Test going. Read the first thread. This is an education you can't get in school.Show some respect to the man for taking his time out to help us

Weishaupt,

Gearing the questions to the four legs of the table is partly correct and certainly never hurts. The bigger picture is to expose the sham with heads I win tails you loose questions that attack the underlying presumptions. For example 1. is the state the land within certain borders or 2. a collection of people or 3. a corporation or an office or what?

Now put yourself on the stand as a cop that wrote me a ticket and I ask you, “What is the state?” if you say 1. I will ask where are the borders by surveyor’s definition. Just in case you give them to me (not likely) I will ask what all these surveyor’s terms mean, are you a licensed surveyor, did you have your transit out to confirm I was within the borders, what did you use for a base point to start your measurements? Getting a little nervous are you?

If you say 2. Who is in this collection of people? List them all. Are you saying that I injured all the people in this collection you call the state? Let’s put them on the stand so we can all see their injuries.

If you say 3. How can I be IN a corporation? Yah, go ahead and answer that one. Just in case you come up with a line like only by contract (this from a cop with an IQ of 5) “Let me see the contract with my original signature.

Thanks Weishaupt!



HB,

Clean hands is the doctrine that anyone coming to court must not be a crook to start with. Like an attorney. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA If one’s hands are dirty he has no standing in the court.

Yes, reversible error is to be appealed. Judges don’t like to hear that because appellate judges are just as lazy as the rest and don’t want to screw with stupid errors that stupid, underling judges make and tend to rag on the stupid judges that make said errors.

Hell yes! Any jailing is arrest. Look up “arrest”. Now if the Society Of Birdwatchers do it without jurisdiction they are no different than an armed mugger on the street. Let’s see…armed assault, kidnapping, likely robbery, usurpation, false swearing, violation of oath, treason, and conspiracy. Etc.

Jim

[Ice]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

<font color=purple>[b]Come on guys, Prof. Jim's got another Hot Test going. Read the first thread. This is an education you can't get in school.Show some respect to the man for taking his time out to help us

Weishaupt,



I'm sure my buddy Jim does not take offense as none is intended. I will reply to posts as I choose. That is what this forum is for.



By the way, you can find this education in some reasonably priced books... some of which are available online. Here is one.



Also, I may be stepping on his toes a little bit but...

I think Jim may have some success to share with us in the not too distant future. Have patience... (something Jim seems to have lots of!).



Ice