Traffic Ticket Question

[Akira-]

Welcome fellow Mainer

Why look in a book about slave privilege / commerce regulation, for info on sovereign rights?

Title 29-A: MOTOR VEHICLES
Chapter 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS
§101. Definitions

54. Person. "Person" means an individual, corporation, firm, partnership, joint venture, association, fiduciary, trust, estate or any other legal or commercial entity.

Are you a corporate / legal entity?

http://www.suijuris.net/forum/travel...ss-travel.html


For HIS Glory,
Akira

[Friendsplacect]

54. Person. "Person" means an individual, corporation, firm, partnership, joint venture, association, fiduciary, trust, estate or any other legal or commercial entity.

What do you say to people that insist that "individual" means human being? To me individual means one/single.
In CT they use the words other aggregation of individuals.

65) "Person" includes any individual, corporation, limited liability company, association, copartnership, company, firm, business trust or other aggregation of individuals but does not include the state or any political subdivision thereof, unless the context clearly states or requires;

In the Penal Code they use this definition;

(1) "Person" means a human being, and, where appropriate, a public or private corporation, a limited liability company, an unincorporated association, a partnership, a government or a governmental instrumentality;

[Akira-]

You are who you say you are... per best evidence rule

They say you're a person, individual, ect?

The burden of proof is on them

Make them prove their claim... they can't.

and you can't prove a negative... so don't waste your time


For HIS Glory,
Akira

[612Actual]

ss_stealth wrote - Title29-A
Chapter 1, §105. Enforcement

1. Authority to stop motor vehicle. If a law enforcement officer has reasonable and articulable suspicion to believe that a violation of law has taken or is taking place, that officer, if the officer is in uniform, may stop a motor vehicle for the purpose of:

A. Arresting the operator for a criminal violation; [1993, c. 683, Pt. A, §2 (new); Pt. B, §5 (aff).]
----------------

You need to verify whether speeding, without more, is a crime. If not then where has the Legislature AUTHORIZED the cop to make a "warrantless arrest" for NONcriminal conduct?

[612Actual]

Friendsplacect wrote - What do you say to people that insist that "individual" means human being? To me individual means one/single.

----------

People who would argue that "individual" means me or you or anyone else without the noun following it are ignorant and more than likely flunked English Grammar 101.

EJUSDEM GENERIS. Of the same kind.
Bouvier's law Dictionary, 1856

Rule of ejusdem generis, which holds that where general words follow enumeration of particular classes of persons or things, general words will be construed as applicable only to persons or things with same general nature or class as those enumerated, applies whether specific words follow general words in a statute or vise versa; in either event, general term or category is restricted to those things that are similar to those which are enumerated specifically.
People ex Rel. San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Com'n v. Smith, 31 Cal.Rptr.2d. 488 (Cal.App. 1st 1994)

"Ejusdem generis" provides that where general words follow specific words in statutory enumeration, general words are construed to comprise only objects similar in nature to those enumerated by preceding specific words; likewise, where specific words follow general words in statutory enumeration, doctrine is equally applicable, and restricts application of general term to objects similar to specific
words.
Carriere v. Cominco Alaska, Inc., 823 F. Supp. 680. (D. Alaska 1993)

Principle of "ejusdem generis" provides that general statutory term should be understood in light of specific terms that surround it.
U.S. v. Parker, 30 F.3d. 542 (C.A. 5th Va. 1994)

Expressio unius est exclusio alterius.
The expression of one thing is the exclusion of another.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1856

It would appear that we're on the same page re the definition of "individual" meaning SINGLE. "Individual", when governed by the forgoing rules in 99.9% of the cases means a LEGAL ENTITY, a CORPORATE ENTITY, a NONsentient being. "Individual" is an ADJECTIVE not a NOUN.

It seems entirely appropriate when someone says they're or you're an individual to respond with, "Individual what?"

The bottom line is that the term standing alone is vague and ambiguous because it's a QUALIFIER and if there's nothing to qualify then the user is either stupid, ignorant, or running a con. My opinion of course.

[Akira-]

The ONLY thing a sovereign needs to verify for themselves, is that the STATE and it's "legislature", are fraudulent, deceptive, arbitrary and capricious third parties.. who have no authority beyond the barrel of a gun.

Once realized.. all proofs are on them.

If you are commiting mala in se... than any and every man has the authority to confront you.

If it's mala prohibita... tell em to pound sand.


For HIS Glory,
Akira

[Akira-]

What Actual612, offers is correct.

EJUSDEM GENERIS is a Canon of Construction. Canons are usually found at the beginning of you states stautes..

The 3 "biggies" are:

EJUSDEM GENERIS" . All the same kind, class, or nature.

In the construction of laws, wills, and other instruments, the "ejusdem generis rule" is, that where general words follow an enumeration of persons or things, by words of a particular and specific meaning, such general words are not to be construed in their widest extent, are to be held as applying only to persons or things of the same general kind or class as those specifically mentioned. Black, Interp. of Laws, 141; Goldsmith. v. U.S., C.C.A.N.Y.,N.Y., 42 F2nd.133,137

NOSCITUR A SOCIIS. "It is known from its associates.1 Vent.225. The meaning of a word is or may be known from the accompanying words" " the doctrine means that general and specific words are associated with and take color from each other, restricting general words to sense analogous to less general. Dunham v. State,140 Fla. 754, 192 So. 324,325,326.

The canon of construction "expressio unius est exclusio alterius" or "inclusio unius est exclusio alterius" holds that "to express or include one thing implies the exclusion of another, or of the alternative." Black's Law Dictionary 602 (7th ed. 1999).

For HIS Glory,
Akira

[Akira-]

Steve762,

If your motion works as you claim... more power to you!

My concern is, why would anyone subject themselves to the courts jurisdiction and the descretion of the judge, when it's not only unnecessary, but potentially self destructive?


For HIS Glory,
Akira

[612Actual]

Akira wrote - My concern is, why would anyone subject themselves to the courts jurisdiction and the descretion of the judge, when it's not only unnecessary, but potentially self destructive?

-----------------

The Motion to Quash is a frontal attack on jurisdiction. The document is used for that purpose alone. The party submitting that document CAN NOT argue anything else if they do they forfeit their "special appearance" and the court acquires jurisdiction.

If you do an MTQ you MUST NOT argue the merits or kiss the "special appearance" good bye.

They don't like being told they don't have jurisdiction so be prepared to dig your heals in.

Under the circumstances presented in steve762's MTQ the only thing the court can do legally is "dismiss sua sponte", which terms I'd put in the MTQ.

Are you gonna do Points and Authorities?

My caption page info under the box containing the plaintiff and defendant usually looks like this re Motions to Quash:

TO THE COURT, PLAINTIFF, AND THE ATTORNEY OF RECORD, COMES NOW, the Accused, [MY NAME HERE] appearing specially, to advise the court that the instant matter must be quashed for lack of subject matter and in personam jurisdiction, and Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Then the next page has brief a STATEMENT OF FACTS which is followed up with Points and Authorities then the Conclusion, then the Declaration, then the Proof of Service.

If you're in LA then the court's know full well about all these arguments and you better have ALL your i's dotted and t's crossed because they have contingency plans for those of us who know about all this stuff.

You have a substantial crew down there who know and rub the court's nose in the law so your job just got that much harder.

[Akira-]

Court battles are won or lost in paperwork, before you ever get to trial.

I abate for misnomer, challenge jurisdiction, default them, and throw a few writs in for good measure.

Currently, it serves me to go to court, and rattle their cage, so I generally don't start process, until after arraignment.

But, to avoid going to court at all.. file your docs before arraignment, and the PA will likely withdraw the charge(s).


For HIS Glory,
Akira