Weis Dismissed!

Fantastic! Congratulations, Weis. I'm looking at, www.Ticketslayer.com , now for their docs, and Adventures In Legal Land is already on the way. Anything else you can tell us? What about that insurance/bond thing you have going? Keep up the good work.

reminds me of when i won a civil case and the judge asked me what i wanted to do before he dismissed the case? they do that when the adversary runs from the case. in my case it was the other party's attorney who dismissed herself from my case after i submitted some stuff to her, so, the judge was left standing and didnt have nothing to prosecute with. good job weis, and like jersee, sui juris and the others say, let the critics say something negative about this, you ran them off using the law, common law, freedom, sovereignty or whatever you wanna call it.

[rearguard]

Was the case dismissed simply because the cop failed to show?

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by rearguard

Was the case dismissed simply because the cop failed to show?

Officially, yes. Dismissal for failure to prosecute.

I screwed up on procedure, and the judge was testing me, trying to rope me in to push it for a possible continuance probably. That's why I just kept saying ,"I don't understand, I didn't understand, etc. . ."

What a classic response, because you're telling them that you don't "stand under" (understand) their law or their charges. Since ingnorance of the law is no excuse, saying that you don't understand is an acceptable word or response for them, because of the meaning that it implies. It should be used more often. That was the first thing I learned from Pam Gaston, www.avoiceforchildren.com, in her book, Sui Juris - The Truth In The Record. Congratulations, again, Weis!

[Fed-Up]

Weis,great work! It's unfortunate I hold a CDL. Would like to use these

Common law strategies but the Commerce thing disqualifies me.

Great Win

[weishaupt1776]

Thanks. The Quatloos guys cackled like the hens that they are over this one. They're happy placing expediency above principle, though.
It's like they support people's rigts to life, liberty, and property being violated by armed municipal corporations in situations where there is absolutely no evidence of the alleged "defendant" violating any one elses LLP.

To me it's a win, because I spent alot of time learning my way around a law library, shepardizing, etc . .

I learned alot about perfecting service, too; because in serving the cop, he or the "authorities" didn't want what was in the paperwork to be addressed in court.

Yup, that CDL is a tough one due to Congress being able to regulate interstate commerce and all.

Thing is, it is a defacto CONGRESS, so I would renew the CDL "under duress" "All rights reserved".

Originally Posted by Fed-Up

Weis,great work! It's unfortunate I hold a CDL. Would like to use these

Common law strategies but the Commerce thing disqualifies me.

Great Win

Key Words, and you probably didn't even know it: "I hold"

But is it yours?

Have you filed a DBA? (Doing Business As: STRAWMAN)

Henry Franklin

[weishaupt1776]

The DBA is a great idea !

it would be Fed-Up(first & middle)

DBA as FED-UP MOTHERF!@#R (first-middle last)

[Fed-Up]

I will start with that approach Henry Bowman.

Thanks for the clarification, always figured CDL holders were

screwed when it came to fighting the excessive fines

that are attatched to it.

UH,Weis: Your suggestion to adobt that colorful

dba/ sounds as natural as rain!!!


Back to the books.

Thanks all