Dismissed! 2 Counts of NO Lic, Reg, Tags, Insp. Sticker

[ezrhythm]

I concur!

Although I have heard of testimony where one was told he was being taken to jail for contempt and then he was let out the back door.

[Lawdog]

Translation:

You heard a rumor that this happened to someone, somewhere, sometime. It was your best friend's sister's hairdresser's cousin.

"Testimony" is given under oath subject to the laws relating to perjury.

What we have here is a typical claim of success. Maybe the judge let this guy off the hook. Maybe he didn't. But some of his arguments were typical wingnut crap that don't work, as I have proved.

For example: his argument that because the State of North Carolina was a party to the case, original jurisdiction was in the U.S. Supreme Court. Yeah, the Supremes exist to try traffic cases. <eyes rolling>

More likely: the cop didn't bother to show up, so he got the ticket dismissed for that reason. I got a red light ticket dismissed once because the cop didn't show.

And once again: trial level rulings/verdicts don't create precedent. I still want to see some APPELLATE COURT RULINGS that uphold wingnut arguments.

[dorkenbutt]

Lawpuppy, why does there need to be some kind of appellate decision for it to be a real win to you? What difference does that make? Maybe the lower courts don't want these to get to the appellate level? Best to let this be dismissed than to get too high to set a precedent? A win is a win and it just irritates you when "wing nuts" win, doesn't it? LOL!!!! ROFLMAO!!!

[FreeFromContract]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

More likely: the cop didn't bother to show up, so he got the ticket dismissed for that reason.

More unsubstantiated fascist opinion from the lapdog. Since you seem to have plenty of free time on your hands lately, go fetch:

April 17, 2008...case #08CR700204-200 in the Fifth District Court of North Carolina, Judge John C. Carroll presiding.

Oh that's right, even if it is true, and there is a complete record of the proceedings, it's not an appellate court ruling, so it doesn't count. Why don't you ask this guy if it counted to him?

I applaud this man's effort and decision to stand up for his freedom and right to be left alone in his personal affairs when he wasn't endangering anyone.

Would I be correct in guessing that you are greatly disappointed that "justice" wasn't served due to him not serving any jail time?

[Tigron-X]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

Translation:

You heard a rumor that this happened to someone, somewhere, sometime. It was your best friend's sister's hairdresser's cousin.

"Testimony" is given under oath subject to the laws relating to perjury.

What we have here is a typical claim of success. Maybe the judge let this guy off the hook. Maybe he didn't. But some of his arguments were typical wingnut crap that don't work, as I have proved.

For example: his argument that because the State of North Carolina was a party to the case, original jurisdiction was in the U.S. Supreme Court. Yeah, the Supremes exist to try traffic cases. <eyes rolling>

More likely: the cop didn't bother to show up, so he got the ticket dismissed for that reason. I got a red light ticket dismissed once because the cop didn't show.

And once again: trial level rulings/verdicts don't create precedent. I still want to see some APPELLATE COURT RULINGS that uphold wingnut arguments.

Psst... the rules you play by aren't the only rules in the game.

And you're speculating.

More likely: the cop didn't bother to show up, so he got the ticket dismissed for that reason. I got a red light ticket dismissed once because the cop didn't show.

Based on what was said, the defendent in this case was aware that one of the cops was not present, so that would dismiss some of the charges, not all of them as you imply. And secondly, the writer of this testimony never states that he argued this fact.

So, are you going to pull a rabbit out of your hat next?

[mrg]

Originally Posted by Tigron-X

So, are you going to pull a rabbit out of your hat next?

No.

He seems to be quite accomplished at this though:

[ezrhythm]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

But some of his arguments were typical wingnut crap that don't work, as I have proved.
[Folks, as you have read the testimony, he never argued and the anti sui juris have proved nothing!]

...I still want to see some APPELLATE COURT RULINGS that uphold wingnut arguments.

WE DON'T! We want to continue to see cases dismissed for what they are, DECEPTION!

[indio007]

Maybe someone can explain to Lawdog why some appellate cases are stamped "DO NOT CITE".......

Even though they are valid legal decisions they go against the interests of the admiralty legal system you do not wish to have proof of it's flaws disseminated. The BAR owns the legal system and the have a right to publish what they want. That's why we must litigate in a Court of Record aka Common Law and publish ourselves.

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by indio007

Maybe someone can explain to Lawdog why some appellate cases are stamped "DO NOT CITE".......

Even though they are valid legal decisions they go against the interests of the admiralty legal system you do not wish to have proof of it's flaws disseminated. The BAR owns the legal system and the have a right to publish what they want. That's why we must litigate in a Court of Record aka Common Law and publish ourselves.

99% of the time when I see a case marked "do not cite," it's because someone is raising one of these typical wingnut arguments. He loses, they dispose of the case summarily, and it's not important enough to merit inclusion in the case reporters. But the wingnut STILL lost, unreported case or not.

Again...if this particular wingnut won a case in North Carolina, let's see a cite that someone can check in the public records. Case number, county, court, etc. For example, something analogous to "Fulton County (Georgia) Superior Court, Criminal Case No. XX-XXXX."

Public record. Let's see it. DiM never provides public proof of any wins. Let's see someone be better than DiM.

P.S. It's not an "admiralty legal system." Unless the case involves ships or property on the high seas, it's not admiralty at all. Let go of the mythology. That's step one on the road to recovery.

[moishanb]

Originally Posted by Lawdog

99% of the time when I see a case marked "do not cite," it's because someone is raising one of these typical wingnut arguments. He loses, they dispose of the case summarily, and it's not important enough to merit inclusion in the case reporters. But the wingnut STILL lost, unreported case or not.

Again...if this particular wingnut won a case in North Carolina, let's see a cite that someone can check in the public records. Case number, county, court, etc. For example, something analogous to "Fulton County (Georgia) Superior Court, Criminal Case No. XX-XXXX."

Public record. Let's see it. DiM never provides public proof of any wins. Let's see someone be better than DiM.

P.S. It's not an "admiralty legal system." Unless the case involves ships or property on the high seas, it's not admiralty at all. Let go of the mythology. That's step one on the road to recovery.

LAWDOG,

Humor us for a moment. I am still conscious of the fact that you stated over a month ago that "it doesn't matter what I think, because the only thing that matters is what the Judicial Council and the Bar Association thinks".

WHAT TYPE OF LEGAL SYSTEM IS 'IT' THEN, IF NOT AN ADMIRALTY LEGAL SYSTEM?

WHAT IS THE IMPORTANCE OF THE PURPORTED JUDGE ALWAYS REQUIRING AN AGREEMENT during litigation by defendant(accused) to understand the charges?

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT BEING CREATED?

WHAT IS A SYSTEM OF PRIVATE CORPORATE LAWS THAT ONLY APPLY TO FICTIONAL 'PERSONS' CALLED?