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

[TXcarlosTX]

the cop prob wont show up and get dismissed. he doesnt want to get his ass torn up by me. he knows i was right.

[David Merrill]

Funny thought Carlos;


If it gets dismissed like you hope, remember to ask the black-robed actor what you should do about all the inconvenience this cop put you through. That would be funny if he gives you legal advice from the bench!



Regards,

David Merrill.

[moishanb]

Originally Posted by TXcarlosTX

the cop prob wont show up and get dismissed. he doesnt want to get his ass torn up by me. he knows i was right.

You should recognize that there doesn't need to be a competent fact witness, nor an actual charge, nor an actual party in the courtroom. IF you contract or make an agreement, then you will be held liable for that contract or agreement.

I say this because courts today are nothing more than contract insurers. The black robed guy insures that you consent, and you make an agreement or contract by your actions so as to 'legally' extract money or blood from you. There does not need to be a 'cop' there for contracting. In fact, there doesn't need to be anyone in the courtroom except a witness to your agreement.

Do not consent, do not understand, do not contract in the private courtroom.

[ezrhythm]

Originally Posted by TXcarlosTX

when i went to get dismissed. they said only a trial can dismiss. so they asked me if i want one. i said yes cause i know that the texas penal code states that i wasnt PI. and i have a witness. i said yes. then they asked with a jury or only judge. i said jury only cause you never know if judge is on cop side.

i will enter there system cause i know i can win in it.

You were tricked. A case can be dismissed at any time.
Accepting anything from them voids your Refusal For Cause efforts.

It is wise to understand that you never KNOW you can win in their system, especially if they are able to deceive you. They will also go against their own rules and see how far you are willing/able to take the case.

[quasimodo]

Sometimes I feel like a broken record.

LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION!!!

NO DAMAGE> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION
NO LOSS> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION
NO COMPLAINING PARTY> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION
NO WITNESS> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by quasimodo

Sometimes I feel like a broken record.

LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION!!!

NO DAMAGE> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION
NO LOSS> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION
NO COMPLAINING PARTY> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION
NO WITNESS> NO CRIME> NO JURISDICTION

Moishanb brought up a good point. The black-robed actor is an attorney fully capable of simply representing the state or city for the prosecuting witness.

Quasimodo;

Your post reminds me of one fellow who filed Charles Weisman's brief from The Authority of Law. The judge came back from recess and said, "This court has no subject matter jurisdiction."

Jim, who was approaching 90, stood at the podium processing this as quickly as he could at that age. The "judge" asked, "Did you understand what I just said?"

Jim started into Plan B which was a constitutional argument and therefore appeared and was shot down, convicted. Later I told him that was his queue to leave the courthouse. He tried to get the transcript and the tape recording was damaged at that place in the transcript where the judge admitted no subject matter jurisdiction.

Carlos;

If you have R4C'd the cause, forget about it. If you appear, forget about the R4C. If you appear because you are sure you can win; get back to us on that please.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[quasimodo]

Originally Posted by David Merrill

Quasimodo;

Your post reminds me of one fellow who filed Charles Weisman's brief from The Authority of Law. The judge came back from recess and said, "This court has no subject matter jurisdiction."

That would be Me sir.
Good book by the way.

Marc Stevens' Adventures In Legal Land is another good SMJ read.
As where Mr. Weisman approaches essential elements of "Law" Mr. Stevens approaches the essential elements of a "crime".

Both well worth reading (IMO)
Q

[TXcarlosTX]

well i know all this stuff from what ive read from bill from his 1215.org site. i ordered the dvd package thing. but basically i should file a counterclaim challenging jurisdiction and ask for a court of record as to keep the magistrate separate from the tribunal. then as the sovereign i will be the tribunal and rule on my case ..... but it really depends on how far i want to take this. i do business with the city so i dont want to jack that up. even tho its the state of texas against me. if i knew going the distance is ok i might be up for it.

oh yeah another thing - should i then go back and ask for it not to be a jury but only vs judge and cop?