Traffic Court: Judge and cop fail to appear; I wait 45 min. then leave

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by starr747

Ok i will start at beginning for you Bob Myhusband got three tickets no seatbelt no license and improper tag . We went to municipal court(Kangaroo court)

This is a court of NO record.

we had filed a notice of dismissal for lack of jurisdiction . the judge ask mu husband his plea he said innocent ,. the judge said not guilt my husband again said innocent . Well then he said he was gonna recuse. We came back the next court date and the judge said after looking thru the paperwork he seen that my husband wasnt going against him he was putting this in in his defense.

I am not sure, what the judge was putting in your husbands defense? Was it the notice of dismissal?

My husband then said the only reason i am going after you with the courtwatch form .

Is this is some sort of oversight committee?

Oh by the way i am a courtwatcher .

How does this work? Does your state constitution require this?

Is you are practicing law from the bench .

The rules are different for courts of no record, they call them informal rules. You just need to appeal their negative decisions. As I said above, you should check you state's constitution, as well as the court rules.

He then said my husband was in the wrong courtroom he needed to be in a court of record .

This seems about correct.

so now we are in state court . Where you speak with the Da and not the judge .and have no right apparently to do nothing more than make a plea .

Yes, the DA is just trying to make you an offer or plea bargain, you don't have to accept it.

Well we were asking under what jusrisdiction he was being tried under .

You must raise this issue in court, likely at the Motions Hearing, before addressing the merits of the case. The judge should give you a ruling, then you must move to other issues. If you don't think that he was fair or correct, then it may be grounds for a later (after this trial is over) appeal at the appellate level. You should be at the trial level now.

I am sure you have read about that . And as i said we got as far as criminla under common law then he was told he could go handed two peices of paper with the next courtdates on them . One is motions hearing

This should address any open motions, such as a Motion to Dismiss, or I suppose, your husband's dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. If the case is not dismissed, it will go to the next step.

and one is jury trial .

This would be the next step.

and both are signed by the Da . With my husbands name .

Okay.

Remember, this is not legal advice, just a lawful exchange of information.

[starr747]

ok . what about the Da signing my husband name is that legal . The da wasnt wanting to plea bargain nothing people would walk up make there plea walk out with courtdate . that was it.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by starr747

ok . what about the Da signing my husband name is that legal . The da wasnt wanting to plea bargain nothing people would walk up make there plea walk out with courtdate . that was it.

YOU NEED TO CHECK THE COURT RULES. I do not know why the DA would sign something for your husband. However, it is not clear what he is doing, he may just be putting your husband's name (with his handwriting) on the hearing and trial documents, which he may likely have the power to do.

The DA is not required to give pleas, however, it is quite common.

Nevertheless, you have a right to trial, unless the DA wants to drop the charges (which it does not look like the DA is willing to do), and it appears that it is being provided.

Personally, I feel there shouldn't trial or fines where there is no injured party (damage to people or property), or criminal intent (like trying to run someone over). The rest seems to be government harassment and extortion.

If you agree with the injured party theory. you may want to look for support in the case history of your court circuit. If you find such support, you should include it as part of your Motion to Dismiss. If unsuccessful in getting the case dismissed, you may consider raising the issue (again) as part of your defense at trial.

[ezrhythm]

These are notes I have received in which case I didn't save who the sender was but definitely a good lesson anyhow.




I would never ever use the word, "name” to describe how I designate myself. A "name" is that designation assigned to property by the owner thereof. I do not have an owner, I am John Paul, Jones, I own myself; John Paul Jones is not my "name", John Paul, Jones is who I am. Otherwise, in stating it any other way, you have acknowledged that you have an owner who assigned a name to its property, you! You therein acknowledged to your having a birth certificate and that you are a citizen of the United States.

I would say to the Judge. Yes, we have two issues (1) we have an issue here of jurisdiction and ((2), in asking me if I have a problem with the procedure you used the words "our procedure". The word "our" is a plural word, your interaction with the DA and your use of the words "our procedure" clearly indicating that this court and the District Attorney have combined their constitutionally mandated separate procedures into one single Unconstitutional procedure. What I see here is a clear violation of the separation of powers doctrine and you are disqualified for cause, and I presume this matter is dismissed."

If, after I had said as stated herein above, the judge persisted in asking me if I had anything else to say, I would have then reminded him of the jurisdictional issue I had previously mentioned. If he asked me any questions I would have responded, "I beg your pardon, but at this point it is my clear understanding that as this court's jurisdiction in this matter is challenged, this court's jurisdiction is in limbo, and as the executive branch has initiated these proceedings that it is incumbent upon the executive branch to bring forward and present to the court whatever evidence the executive branch may now have to establish jurisdiction, and, moreover, in as much as the judge of this court, in questioning me, has initiated the seeking of evidence to establish the executive branches jurisdiction, which is the responsibility of the executive branch, so it is clear there is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine, so you are disqualified for cause; And, in as much as you asked me questions in a clear effort to develop jurisdiction at this time, it is clear that you do not as of this moment have any proof of jurisdiction and this is especially relevant because if jurisdiction lies, it had to lie back all the way to the date that the officer issued me the citation, not beginning here today.”

And I would get that all out in one breath so I could not be interrupted.

You can't have it both ways. You cannot claim to be outside their jurisdiction and at the same time carry a state ID card. You have either voluntarily submitted yourself to their jurisdiction of you have not. If you are a citizen of the United States then you have an obligation to do whatever they tell you - that is - everything they tell you - no exceptions. If you don't want to be in that condition then all you have to do is say "NO". In my opinion, if I was a citizen of the United States and wanted to get out of that status, I do not need to do anything in so far as filing any rescission documents. All I have to do is put the burden of proof over on whoever is claiming it. I do not have to prove they don't have jurisdiction over me – they have to prove they do.

If you have already screwed up, admitted jurisdiction and you are going to trial, then when I went into court (with a court reporter present and taking everything down), when the case was called I would stand and say, “Before we begin your honor, I am making a statement to the court that I am guilty, that therefore there is no dispute before the court, but that I do not waive any of my rights nor do I give up any of my rights".

I would get that entire statement out in one breath - the precise wording is critical – I would not change, add, or subtract even one word!! And then SHUT UP!!! And wait for the judge to speak. No matter how long it may take (the longer the better) for the judge to respond - I would keep my mouth SHUT!!

The judge might test me by responding by saying something similar to, “When you enter a guilty plea you are automatically waiving your rights".

To which I would respond, again all in one breath, “I am most definitely not entering a guilty plea, I am making a statement to the court that I am guilty, that therefore there is no dispute before the court, but that I do not waive any of my rights nor do I give up any of my rights". And then SHUT UP!!! (I would say the whole thing every time because if I leave anything out it could be construed as a change of my offer).

Note: What no one stops to realize in these situations is that what the courts are operating is a money milking machine. All they really want is money and all I want is for them to interfere with my life as little as possible. In order for them to get all of the money they want (or at least all they can get for the particular violation as set by the legislature), all they actually need is for me to agree to pay them $1.00 or agree to spend one day in jail, whichever is appropriate for the "crime".

What I would have done here constitutes an offer to settle the matter and the judge knows it but is not sure that I do (because nobody knows this), that is why he will move so slowly. If the silence goes on so long that I just can't restrain myself (and, understand, this applies ONLY if there are other "victims" in the court), I might say, “If you would like to continue this matter until the end of your calendar, I have no objection". This takes the pressure off the judge and really lets the judge know that I really do know what I am doing because part of his problem is that he does not want to proceed with others in the courtroom to learn how to beat the system.

Whatever, when the judge finally gets his wits back together he will either tell me the amount of the fine or how many days in jail.

No matter what he says I will respond with one of the following, “I will agree to pay one dollar and not one penny more", or, “I will agree to do one day in jail and not one minute more."

And I will also quickly say, without allowing the judge an opportunity to say anything, “I will say, in addition, I will not accept any probation and the record of this matter will be totally expunged from the court file and the DA's file.”

I would not budge from this.

EVER!!!

[starr747]

In every criminal trial, the prosecution must prove the corpus delecti, or the body of the crime itself-i.e., the fact of injury, loss or harm, and the existence of a criminal agency as its cause." People v. Sapp, 73 P.3d 433, 467 (Cal. 2003) [quoting People v. Alvarez, (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1161, 1168-1169, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 903, 46 P.3d 372.].

[ezrhythm]

From, MYRLANDsMETHODs@yahoogroups.com:

I have successfully argued by challenging subject-matter jurisdiction.
No contract, no agreement, no injured party, no competent fact witness, denial of corporatation, denial of being in commerce, supported by affidavit, but only after getting to the appeals court.

The courts do not give up their game until it gets to a real court of record.

Moisha

[starr747]

well that makes me feel better . now the question is . If they strike all the motions since they dont want to let him talk lol . and goes to jury trial and they find him guilty . does he have to go to jail till appeal is done . that is exactly what we are fighting is jusrisdiction victim everyhting and they arent backing down . I feel if they would listen it may help but you cant make them listen . Did you do jury trial or bench ?

[starr747]

ezrhythm where did you get you motions from i am working on some new ones . but looking for someone that may have some that succeeded ..

[ezrhythm]

I have them from this site and various Yahoo groups.

[starr747]

It wont let me download forms for some reason :(