I was detained for claming i was one of the people and claiming common law...

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

If the matter does go forward you will want to know the exact definition of the charge.

(look it up here on the 'net, see www.findlaw.com )

Then you need to check the actual claim made by "El Jerko Bigotito" and see if it really matches up with every element of the statutory definition.

Many times, for example, they will charge "PI" without even bothering to say that you were helplessly drunk in the street, or blocking a public way, which is often the definition. This creates a "failure to state an offense"- the claims made just don't equal the offense charged.

If this is the case then you ask for dismissal: "lack of subject-matter jurisdiction".

Corporate, sovereign or otherwise, the fact is there are laws and if these are the source of the jurisdiction then the process is limited by the same. "PI" isn't whatever someone wants to feel it is; this is a specific, legal, established item in the codes with a strict definition.

People confuse the democratic process with the absolute sovereignty of applicable law.

Law is not a series of random speculative opinions.

[TXcarlosTX]

ok thanks. im getting all my stuff ready to send a R4C. If that doesnt work, ill look into this for sure. i was checking out a movie yesterday talking about how "subject matter" is one of the legs of four needed to claim proper jursdiction . or something like that. im new to this. i already looked up PI in texas penal code, and it doesnt describe me at that time. ill keep everyone updated. im going to put up a copy of everything i do today online, so i can get some help. thanks

carlos out

[Akira-]

TXcarlosTX,

Welcome !


I don't have a miscellaneous file, but if you can afford it, I don't discourage it.

I usually attach an affidavit outlining all the presumptuous defects of the presentment, so they can correct the defects and try again ! Which they never do...

Then I default them on the affiavit... register the default (now a judgement) and I'm done.

I've also done this with a few judges (in unique circumstances)... and they get very PO'ed.. I don't recommend going that far unless you have considerable experience, or a mentor.

[David Merrill]

Before you go Carlos;


Disqualify that IF!

It will work. If you R4C in a timely fashion, it has worked and you can forget about it.

If however they pull you in on a bench warrant have your proof of a R4C, however you managed that and require they address why they think you have no right to R4C in open court.

Then there are many ways to address the violation of your rights - mostly through oath of office where you remove govermental immunity prior to lien or criminal prosecution.

This will be interesting. Suitors using R4C on such a municipal matter is one thing because they have the cognizance of the US. However, somebody learning to write Refusal for Cause over the Internet and doing it on the good faith and intuition he has that right - that will be interesting and I hope you mark this thread in your Favorites, and report back in a few weeks.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[farmer_giles_of_ham]

Originally Posted by TXcarlosTX

i already looked up PI in texas penal code, and it doesnt describe me at that time.

Good- but be careful! The question is not "were you described" in reality, but does the 1st hand witness claim you were so described. It's not your judgment (stop judging yourself), nor the accusers, but the actual judge who decides BETWEEN claims. So first, claim "no jurisdiction"- for "failure to state an offense"!

(actually first pay attention to the other posters and defeat this for no personal jurisdiction, misnomer and no oath. My bit here is secondary, but should be well understood anyway, imho)

The adversary needs to establish that there is a case, and then prove it. It only takes one (!) witness, but someone somewhere somehow needs to represent this "cause of action"- if they can't even be bothered to do this then there is no case to begin with, nothing to settle or judge, just grounds to dismiss the complaint.

The whole point of a legal process is to establish a controversy and settle the argument. So someone has to first ARGUE- that you were indeed, "PI", based on what that person knows 1st hand. Not what they think, or feel or conclude, or would like to believe, but what they claim to have witnessed.

The argument is never, "was I", it's:

1. "is it properly claimed" (acts which properly describe the statutory definition)

2. "is that true" (but thats the basis for an actual trial, the merits of the case.

The common mistake we make sometimes is imagining a "GREAT EYE IN THE SKY", that knows all, sees all, and determines all. Nothing could be further from the truth- its your word against theirs, and theirs has to state legal claim first, to even CREATE a controversy, in the first place. The judge just has whatever pleading are made, information duly presented (but they will go haywire and assume anything if you let them!)

[International American]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Before you go Carlos;


Disqualify that IF!

It will work. If you R4C in a timely fashion, it has worked and you can forget about it.

If however they pull you in on a bench warrant have your proof of a R4C, however you managed that and require they address why they think you have no right to R4C in open court.

Then there are many ways to address the violation of your rights - mostly through oath of office where you remove govermental immunity prior to lien or criminal prosecution.

This will be interesting. Suitors using R4C on such a municipal matter is one thing because they have the cognizance of the US. However, somebody learning to write Refusal for Cause over the Internet and doing it on the good faith and intuition he has that right - that will be interesting and I hope you mark this thread in your Favorites, and report back in a few weeks.


Regards,

David Merrill.

David, I did a search on the forum on R4C and have read some of ur great posts but can u please explain in a nutshell, what is "Refusal For Cause"? What does it mean and what does it do? What exactly are u refusing and for what cause? Does R4C work in every case, from debts to taxes etc.? And why 72 hours? Thanks...

[TXcarlosTX]

this is what i sent - registered mail, signature conformation, express mail. i got copy of everything. i have receipts of number, from post office, ect ect. i couldn't get the post guy to stamp my original refusal or letter. anyway, so i did the best i could. any feed back. below is what the letter says in case you cant read the pic.




City of San Antonio Registered Mail US #
Municipal Court Magistrate Section


401 S. Frio
San Antonio, Texas 78207



To Whom It May Concern:


I am returning your Presentment marked Refusal for Cause in a timely manner in Accordance with U.C.C. § 3-501. PRESENTMENT. Please cease and desist all further communications with in regards to this matter. Thank you.



Sincerely,
TXCarlosTX



Registered Mail US #




ACKNOWLEDGMENT

STATE OF TEXAS
COUNTY OF BEXAR
This instrument was acknowledged before me on the 19th day of February, 2008, by TXCarlosTX


--------------------------------
SEAL
Notary Public, State of Texas
-------
Notary's name

________________________________


Notary's commission expires: ___________

__________________________________________________ __________



below is what they gave me when i was asked to sign out. but it was me agreeing to come to court a month later. but i was never told i was talking to judge. in back of green paper it says "PI"

[David Merrill]

quote duplicate

[David Merrill]

I think that citation of the UCC might have opened the door for trouble. But maybe not. It sounds like you are requesting the magistrate to consider jurisdiction in light of the UCC instead of you adjudicating it and notifying the magistrate.

Your intent to avoid the jurisdiction is on the record. Good.

Dear International American:

there is a citation about presentments right there.



http://michie.lexisnexis.com/colorad...-frame.htm&2.0

http://michie.lexisnexis.com/colorad...2.0#JD_4-3-501

I recall first reading that years ago at or around there; and it mentioned the 72-hour rule. So get a look around there.

As I have said though, you are wiring yourself incorrectly to rely on the UCC for anything. Three days is a reasonable amount of time considering weekends, to consult with your spouse, family and counsel about a high-pressure sale like this one here.



I read that as three days should that be Thursday after 2 pm... You would have all of Monday to do your R4C.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[TXcarlosTX]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

I think that citation of the UCC might have opened the door for trouble. But maybe not. It sounds like you are requesting the magistrate to consider jurisdiction in light of the UCC instead of you adjudicating it and notifying the magistrate.

Your intent to avoid the jurisdiction is on the record. Good.

Dear International American:

there is a citation about presentments right there.



http://michie.lexisnexis.com/colorad...-frame.htm&2.0

http://michie.lexisnexis.com/colorad...2.0#JD_4-3-501

I recall first reading that years ago at or around there; and it mentioned the 72-hour rule. So get a look around there.

As I have said though, you are wiring yourself incorrectly to rely on the UCC for anything. Three days is a reasonable amount of time considering weekends, to consult with your spouse, family and counsel about a high-pressure sale like this one here.



I read that as three days should that be Thursday after 2 pm... You would have all of Monday to do your R4C.


Regards,

David Merrill.

well im in now!!
like clay davis from the wire says "its all in da game"