11-02-2006, 06:32 PM
|
 |
Come and Get Some!
|
|
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Colorado.
Posts: 6,326
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planetmark
What is the meaning of this statement?
Sounds like they want to book you and take photographs or something? Why would you agree to schedule a time to go do that?
|
That is about the misnomer. As I understand it, the hearing was cosmetic. When an out was offered, the player in the black robe grabbed it. |
11-02-2006, 07:03 PM
|
|
Waking Up
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by David Merrill
That is about the misnomer. As I understand it, the hearing was cosmetic. When an out was offered, the player in the black robe grabbed it.
|
The judge asked you to go along and see if the photograph of the person whom they charged is the same as you, I believe it is effectively an identification parade.
When and if you come back to court he is going to ask you if you went (you said you would) and then he is going to ask you if your picture and you look the same etc and he is then going to try and get your consent that you are the same person as the one who was charged. Have a think about it. |
11-02-2006, 10:07 PM
|
 |
Waking Up
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Georgia Republic
Posts: 13
|
|
|
Did you plea in court?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mikah2k
1 Cuffed and canned.
2 Bonded out with FRNs.
3 Sprang the auto with FRNs.
4 Prayed to Almighty God.
5 Read suijuris forums.
6 Went to quasi-court.
Spoke under restricted appearance, declaring misnomer, and that my name is not on the quasi-court's papers.
Showed cert. copy of DBA from SOS to quasi-judge.
Quasi-judge said come back [to quasi-court?] January 2006.
|
Did you plea in court? Is there a complaint? Are there witness's?
__________________
Enter the Vortex and see where you come out.
Last edited by Anubis : 11-02-2006 at 10:11 PM.
|
11-02-2006, 10:49 PM
|
 |
Come and Get Some!
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: kingdom of heaven
Posts: 1,577
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wandaria
The judge asked you to go along and see if the photograph of the person whom they charged is the same as you, I believe it is effectively an identification parade.
When and if you come back to court he is going to ask you if you went (you said you would) and then he is going to ask you if your picture and you look the same etc and he is then going to try and get your consent that you are the same person as the one who was charged. Have a think about it.
|
Without Prejudice.
If someone points at a photo and says "Is that you?" Think about it. Are you a piece of paper with colorful ink on it?
__________________
All rights reserved. No Liability Assumed. No Value Assured. Without Recourse. Private. Not for hire.
|
11-03-2006, 10:20 AM
|
 |
Practice Makes Perfect
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 338
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by planetmark
What is the meaning of this statement?
Sounds like they want to book you and take photographs or something? Why would you agree to schedule a time to go do that?
|
Planetmark,
I believe the question from quasi-judge was so that the other folks in line would not comprehend what was going on. Besides the quasi-judge never stated go to police dept on or before such and such a date. His exact words were confusing.
I agreed to go back on 1-10-2006 anyways. |
11-03-2006, 10:22 AM
|
|
Practice Makes Perfect
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 338
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by wandaria
The judge asked you to go along and see if the photograph of the person whom they charged is the same as you, I believe it is effectively an identification parade.
When and if you come back to court he is going to ask you if you went (you said you would) and then he is going to ask you if your picture and you look the same etc and he is then going to try and get your consent that you are the same person as the one who was charged. Have a think about it.
|
I'll go back on 1-10-2006. |
11-03-2006, 10:24 AM
|
|
Practice Makes Perfect
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 338
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Anubis
Did you plea in court? Is there a complaint? Are there witness's?
|
Read my second post. I did not plead guilty or not guilty. I "plead", under restricted appearance, a misnomer.
I never saw any complaint, but I did not state anything about such to the quasi-judge.
I brought no witnesses, though I have at least one possible friendly witness. The cuff-cann gunman was not in attendance as this quasi-court-date was the arraignment, I believe, so no witnesses whatsoever.
Also no prosecutor in attendance, but I made no mention of "evidence of complaining party" to quasi-judge. (Without evidence of a complaining party there is no case.)
Last edited by mikah2k : 11-03-2006 at 12:19 PM.
|
11-03-2006, 12:02 PM
|
 |
Practice Makes Perfect
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 367
|
|
|
Please elaborate
Mikah can you please explain more in depth the issue of restricted appearence, misnomer.
|
11-03-2006, 12:12 PM
|
|
Practice Makes Perfect
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 338
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by RICKO
Mikah can you please explain more in depth the issue of restricted appearence, misnomer.
|
RICKO, My thoughts are
Restricted appearance (Rule E(8)) is some admiralty code-phrase, not yielding/granting in personam jurisdiction.
Misnomer is legal-jargon code-word, wrong party or defect in the process by defect of name of party.
David Merrill has written more on either of these than I. |
11-03-2006, 12:21 PM
|
|
Practice Makes Perfect
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: PA
Posts: 367
|
|
|
Thanks mikah
 Thanks a million mikah. |
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:47 AM.
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.1 Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
|
|
