Ticket Slayer

[weishaupt1776]

[color=black][b] One law forum's documents for Traffic Default are IDENTICAL to Ticketslayer's docs. Before anyone jumps to conclusions, I emailed Ticket Slayer about this to verify whether or not the Two are affiliated.

O.K. TicketSlayer & the other forum are in a mutual agreement.

[weishaupt1776]

This is based on Clyde Hyde's common law default whiich has been developed by Greg Slaughter @ Ticket Slayer. Here is an explanation by Clyde:

• When the law masterbaitors coined the term infraction, they created a new realm of law which was quasi-judicial only, that is it was really administrative law (like tax court) but given a factious front as judicial for the "court" setting.* Most People don't understand the real trial is on the street and not in the courtroom.
  *
  The reason the default works is because it brings the setting into the judicial realm and takes it out of the administrative realm.* Once it is in the judicial side, the street trial is not relevant and the matter becomes a matter before the court on the judicial side.
  *
  It is to the revenue enhancement, that the law robbers wanted to direct this infraction fiction because that generates vast taxes.* In one day, I did the speeding trial on the street and won, mostly by denial and not admitting to the infraction much to the amazement of my wife who was with me.* Later as my techniques for dealing with this non sense peaked, they wouldn't even stop me, despite driving with my own plates and*with no driver's license.
  *
  We couldn't figure out at first why we always lost no matter what the officer said.* We even documented that he testified on the stand that he was the one speeding and make false contradictory statements and still lost appeals.* Only much later did we discover why we lost, because the cop fictiously tried the case on the street and the ticket was the result of that trial, the rest was administrative enforcement of that hearing.
  *
  You see, the prosecuting attorney doesn't always get involved*unless you go out of*your way to involve him and as long as you don't involve him or join him to the case, you likely will not win.* The default moves the cause to the judicial side and allows you a new trial because you bring up issues not dealt with on the street.* These are issues of law.
  *
  However, you never want to let the court know you know what the scam is, all you really want to say is you have a duty to act on the paper in front of the*judge and that*is all.**Anything else is outside the law expressed on the paper and isn't allowed (facts), so you move from the factual side to*the law (demure) side and keep it there, unless you are stupid and want to argue the facts which will likely let the judge know just how stupid you are and how much you want to lose*your case.* There is only two issues before the court when you step up:
  *
  Rule on the Motions to Dismiss brought by special appearance.
  *
  Rule on the Petition for Writ of Mandamus brought as a matter of prerogative superior right.
  *
  There are no other issues before the court, and you need to bring the judge back to these issues in that order if he wants to discuss other issues.

[weishaupt1776]

If you ask to examine the cop, you start your trial and void the default and special appearance. The only issue is the law of the case, there are no facts in dispute as the prosecutor has not rebutted the affidavit.

If the judge dismisses your motions to dismiss, he leaves himself no way out on the Petition for Writ of Mandamus, that is why they make any excuse they can dump the case without comment. Most of the time, you don't have to say a word, and if you do without knowing what you are doing, you will likely shoot yourself in the foot with your words.

The only reason you would want to put the officer on the stand and examine him would be to establish the lack of probable cause. For instance you can make a motion for probable cause hearing and then disqualify the officer as not a competent witness as he violated the Supreme law, doesn't know the law, violated his oath and abused his office. In Washington this would be easy as you can use the gun issue, they are forbidden by the State Constitution from being armed. So, you ask him the magic questions, do you work for a corporation?; is there a body of men employed in similar circumstances by the municipal or state corporation?; are you supplied a fire arm by the corporation?; are you supplied ammunition for the gun?; you can elaborate on this to keep him off the street for as long as you can dream up questions to ask him; you ask him if he read the Federal and State Constitution; did he raise his right arm to the square and swear to uphold them?; has he ever read Art. 1.24?; does he understand Art. 1.24? Likely he will tell you he doesn't know what you are talking about so you read it to him. Now, you can ask him again if he understands it? You can read it till he does and admits he disobeys it. At that point you have a criminally unfit witness who is not true to his words and affirmations, so how can he be qualified under the law to write a ticket, much less appear as a creditable witnesses. Then you would motion to dismiss the witness from the cause and dismiss the cause for no witness and failure to establish jurisdiction. You could also motion for lack of service as well as he is unfit to serve process as well as he is incompetent and a liar who violates his oath openly and flagrantly.

See, you can have a lot of fun with this in Washington, you can also claim the same applies to your state through the full faith and credit clause and intent of the 2nd Amendment as well as your state 2nd amendment pendent provision. You may also be able to find other reasons for forcing a probable cause hearing but you must be able to substantiate your reason to discredit the witness(as). Believe me, once you do this to an officer, the word will spread quickly and they won't ticket you for anything trivial. I know the People that I worked with on this issue, were never ticketed. As soon as they identified themselves they were told to have a nice day and that was it. One time the cop said, "Oh, I didn't recognize you Mr. Sego, have a nice day" and that was the end of it.

However, you have to be careful that you make it clear the probable cause hearing is only to show dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, service of summons and complaint was defective, and you have not been joined in the cause, it is appropriate and expedient ministerial duty for the court to dismiss. The purpose and cause for special appearance is only to show the court that the court has failed to establish jurisdiction in some way under rule 12 or joinder. If you move into anything else, even a plea, you void your special appearance. Fortunately, the default overcomes any kind of impediment to the case if forced to move ahead dispite a plea by threat, duress and coercion as being a common law fraud. If you follow the paper trail examples and process outlined in the default process, there will only be two issues before the court as previously explained.

This is not an evolving process, it is based on old long established common law, tried and proven to be effective. It is so effective that the "Ticketslayer" offers a money back guarantee if you file on time, follow the process, show up for hearing and the case is not dismissed through no fault of your own.

[weishaupt1776]

As the Federal pattern is that no acts of Congress can apply outside that Art.1.8.17 jurisdiction unless it has a nexus to some legitimate injury to some federal duty (mail, insurance, interstate commerce, crime against employee, etc) it doesn't apply to the People in the states.

By the same token, no state law can apply but what it doesn't injure some state duty which is generally confined to state lands and not private property. Private Property is the domain of the Sovereign of that property and thus under the concepts of the Magna Charta, a man could stand in his doorway and thumb his nose at the King without fear of retribution because of his acts, thus the term, "A Man's home is his castle."

SOF is an artificial entity, it can't be injured. Its law is to limit and define government not the People. In does hold all property in trust for the People who is its Creators. It has no authority to take life, liberty or property without strong justification in law and due process, generally for the good of the People. Its jurisdiction is thus limited to those areas basically "in this state", which literally means state property and not private property.

In Washington there are recreational vehicle codes which define this term "in this state" as being only state property and says in effect that no recreational vehicles have any right upon private property, only those state lands under the state code.

I am sure the same provision is found in your codes as well which makes the express point that the interests of the state and the body of People end at the boundaries to private property. The state as an artificial entity, only existing on paper as corporations do, can not claim any Superiority over the People and their private property either collectively or individually. Such is a myth, like the myth of state ownership as the court said in relation to game animals and fish, they can only maintain any ownership in trust for the People so they act as both trustee and corporation.

The trustees of the public trust are the AG and Sec. of State. You elect them by virtue of your "power of appointment" by exercising your right to vote. Note that "power of appointment" is not expressed much by the leaders, it is kept pretty quiet for reasons of control.

[weishaupt1776]

In almost all cases the judge will find an excuse to dismiss. There
are a few who press the issue, and for those, you need to Petition by
naming the judge to the next higher court, for a writ of mandamus to
mandate the judge to mandate the clerk.
>
> This makes the judge look like a complete idiot. Often if he knows
you know how to Petition for a Writ, he isn't going to take the chance.
>
> If you have no faith in the process, it doesn't make sense to you,
or you don't want to use it, then pay the ticket and be done with it.

So, I like to keep everything on paper and not use oral hearings for "argument".* I go*into court and don't play lawyer, I first ask the judge if he read my paper.* If he says yes, I ask him to rule on the paper.* If he says, NO, I ask him to call a recess and read it, then rule on it.* I don't say anything else but what is absolutely necessary.* This usually frustrates any attempt to address issues outside the paper.
*
You can also take witnesses to make notes of what is said and produce affidavits which is probably the best way to do it.* In any event the official transcript will control unless it can be proven to be fraudulent and done with affidavits.

you know, what's funny is that seems all well and good until you go and try it, as i had done. i got rolled over in the first trial, and now, the appeal pre-trial "judge" rolled over it claiming the actual trial judge "...will have fun with it..."

i basically did the same thing - i am not here to plead, i am here to receive a dismissal, did you read my paper, please do... then the judge sayeth "bulls***" and rolls on...

oi, the courts suck...

but i am working with greg on a solution and look forward to making the court eat crow, lotsa fat greasy crow, by their own hand of course...

jon

[weishaupt1776]

Don't do a declaratory judgment in a traffic case if you want the case dismissed. Do that separately or in a collateral attack if they don't dismiss or even if they do, but after the dismissal, by coming back under rule 60. However, don't be surprized if they don't want to consider it. It is best to do it by initiating your own suit.

On the plea, you can avoid the plea and move the court to dismiss if you can show the court that you haven't join, won't join, and you are there stictly under a special appearance to challenge jurisdiction. For an example of this see the motion to dismiss files in the L series zip files. Under special appearance you are only there to challenge jurisdiction, and before a plea the judge must rule on your motions to dismiss. Motion to quash the information, complaint or dismiss is all you can do without admitting to the jurisdiction of the court.

The way to do this is to challenge the jursidiction of the court but not in an ignorant manner like some advocate. What you must do is study the rules for the court you are in. Then you must know the rules for the cop as well. There are rules for when the complaint must be filed, usually 48 hours (probable cause), for when the first hearing and for trial if you get that far. Then there are certain rules for your so called crime. We have gotten cases promptly dismissed because the cop lost sight of the vehicle in the chase for instance. Suppression of evidence because the cop abused his office and oath, can be at issue as well. There are various other errors which can be grounds for automatic dismissal, like I was in court one day and saw a case called and the attorney said that should be dismissed due to Scribner Error and the judge dismissed it. Scribner was the case, so you have to be aware of the cases which hinge on the weakness of your case.

You need to look at the patent jury instructions for a particular crime which are published. For instance in one case a man was attacked and he decked the attacker. The cops arrested him but we got the case dismissed when we filed the jury instructions for the defense to assault. If you don't know about the jury instructions and defences you could be found guilty of assault and be entirely innocent. Just like my pet, "Reckless Endangerment" which could fit a multiude of acts, but in fact is only drive by shooting in a city. Prostitutors use this to scare People who are ignorant and they fall pray to plea bargain to something they didn't do, which is criminal (prosecutor) in itself.

In my animals at large case TCP 6976 in the Thurston Co. District Court, another classic, they didn't even get to the plea because I had numerious irregularities with the case. I went to the state law library and looked up the quoted code and all the cases tried under that code. There were two and both civil, there was no penalty clause. I had a list of about filed with the court and each one was a dismissal decree. I didn't voluntarily appear, I made them come for me, and they didn't get me into their hands till after the limitations run. For instance:

The incident occured in the Spring and the ticket was written in the Fall, there was no investigation progressing in the meantime.

There was no Plaintiff marked on the summons.

The statute of limitations had run and I hadn't been hiding.

The time for speedy trial was long past (Striker Rule, Washington).

The cattle bore no brand.

I wasn't a corporation as defined by the code being liable.

There was no declaration of closure of open range.

Was a breach of agreement between the myself and the cop.

The complaint was written by the prosecuter who had no first hand information.

The cops report was unsworn.

The warrant was issued without an affidavit.

The first warrant was recalled upon notification that the complaint was deficient.

The second warrant was issued without affidavit.

I was falsely arrested and falsely imprisoned without due process.

The arrest and imprisonment violated the Fourth and Fifth Amendments and pendent state constitution Bill of Rights.

The complaint was criminal and the law was civil (there was no penalty or class clause).

The complaint failed to charge a crime.

It is impossible to plead to a criminal accusation when it doesn't charge a crime.

The judge consulted with the rule 11 intern (sacrificial lamb) and asked if she could come up with any crime to charge me with. Because of the statute of limitations, it had to be a gross misdeamenor or felony which was impossible.
The judge dismissed the case.

I'm up against a tailgating charge accused on video assuming from a patrol car- state police. I'm ready to go ticketslayer for this, never used, but have firends with sucess. What are my options? I understand the ticketslayer method makes it a legal issue instead of a vehicle violation. Any help would be appreciated, my court date is in may.

Josh

according to ticketslayer's website, they have a 95% success rate.

if you do not get your ticket dismissed, they will refund your money.

i was one who's ticket did not get dismissed, and they did refund my "money."

so, i while i can't speak for the success, they were courteous and forthright.

the docs themselves seem to be inline, but that's all i can really say.

see my thread: speeding ticket from scratch. it is in the travel section.

i would highly recommend marc stevens of Adventures In Legal Land fame. his material is fantastic, and, i think, better than ticketslayer. however, it takes guts to implement...

you decide which route you want to take, if you have friends locally who used ticketslayer, get the case numbers, etc., and let ticketslayer know about them - perhaps they can be incorporated into your documents somehow if you go that route.

jon

[weishaupt1776]

Better be offering a proof of default by the prosecutor and a*Petition for Writ of Mandamus to compel the clerk to enter a default.* Folks, if you aren't using this default proc. in traffic courts, you are missing a real treat.* You do this right, timely, like I have shown and it is a 95% winning chance.*
*
It has been so effective that "TicketSlayer" is using my methods with my*agreement and offers his customers a money back guarantee.* I was getting consistent 95% wins with it in courts considered some of the most corrupt in the state.* I was sending people into court that couldn't speak a single word about law, knew absolutely nothing about law, and they didn't have to say a word.* It isn't difficult either and the beauty of it is you never argue anything and the facts don't make any difference.
*
Once you have established the law of your state, searched the code and court rules for the parallel references to those quoted in the paper written with Washington law, you will be able to repeat this with about 2 hours of paperwork and the paperwork can all be done in one sitting because the prosecutor is boxed and can't answer.* In the whole 10 years I have been doing it, only one prosecutor has attempted to rebut it.* This isn't something they can catch onto and then it won't work again, it works almost every time, if you don't open your mouth and say something stupid.
*
It is all available to this group as you should know.
*
If you don't have time to do it, like one of my procrastinating*friends, who would call me the night before his trial, there are a few little tricks which could get you off.**Craig*told*me his story and I told him to*ask the cop if he every lost sight of him in the chase because I knew the area and*knew that it was impossible because of a turn and trees for the cop to*keep him in view.* He reported to me the next day that the cop admitted losing sight and he*instantly motioned to dismiss and the judge dismissed it.* The cop was furious as he said "he would recognize the helmet Craig was wearing anywhere because it was distinctive" and started arguing with the judge.* The judge told the cop to get out of his courtroom.** If the cop loses sight of you in the chase, he can't be sure it was the same vehicle as there could be others just like it.
*
In Washington a cop that wears a gun is automatically a disqualified witness because he swears to obey and support the state Constitution which says he can't do it as a corporate body of men.* All you have to do is ask him magic questions about the corporation he works for, other men in the body or force, and the fact they supply him with a gun and ammo, and then turn to the judge and tell the judge he isn't a creditable witness because he has raised his right arm to the square to support the Constitution and then goes right out and disobeys his oath.* He has therefore abused his office and oath.* Without a creditable witness the state has no case.*
*
There are many other ways to trip the cop up as well by asking a myriad of questions about the traffic stop.* We did this in once case, had a map and had the cop mark the map as to where the two vehicles in question were in relationship to each other and the timing of the sequence of events in the matter.* The situation was the cop was traveling toward the suspect with a front and rear radar fixed gun.* Where he marked the map as instructed, where each vehicle was to begin with and where they passed each other.* The trick was, we jumbled up the questions in random fashion, so he couldn't lie.* The marks on the map after the questions, showed that he traveled over*twice the distance in the same amount of time, meaning that he had to be the one speeding and not the suspect vehicle.* Actually, what really happened was we had him so confused in his lie and having the questions in*a non logical sequence having nothing to do with time relation, his triple lie showed him to be the grand liar.
*
After that, there was not a cop around that would issue a ticket to Russell Sego no matter what.* He never got another ticket in his life that I know of, but he was such a rotten driver that he finally had the ultimate wreck.* That transcript is in the L1.zip file as trans.txt.* It is worth reading to show how you can ruin their day in court.* The default is much easier but at that time, it wasn't conceived.
*
So, with a little knowledge you can win and consistently as well.* There are ways to make sure they never give you a ticket again, you just have to ruin their day in court.* We got so good at it, they wouldn't give any of us tickets and we all drove without licenses and they knew it.