Proof you can travel without license

folks, im on a roll today; forget the conviction on the taser, they werent cited for not having a license or plates. i would sue now to get them back after they confiscated their private property:

Defendants claim sovereignty
Two men convicted, but they don't recognize state court power.

The Macomb Daily/May 7, 2005
By Chad Halcom
Two members of a political/religious order that doesn't recognize the legal authority of the state court system could face jail or prison time after they were both convicted by a jury.

Jurors took roughly 90 minutes in deliberations this week before convicting Alvester Jones, 62, and Reginald Jones, 40, in a trial before Macomb County Circuit Judge James M. Biernat. But the case against them encountered some obstacles from start to finish, officials said, since both men are part of an organization that believes it is not subject to the local authorities and their laws.

"They didn't recognize the authority of the Macomb Circuit Court, so sometimes we had some communication difficulty with them," said Jeffery Cojocar, a defense attorney for Alvester Jones in the case. "But overall, it didn't come up that much as a factor in the case except in the (jury selection)."

Prosecutors said the Joneses belong to the United Nuwaubian Nation of Moors, a quasi-religious order based near Macon, Ga., but the defense attorneys and a police officer in the case identified them as "Sovereign Moors." In either case, officials said, both of them cite the tenets of their organization and refuse to recognize the legitimacy of courts in any state throughout the country.

"Of course they have every right to their political and religious views, and we don't in any way want to infringe on those. But their legal views -- the fact that they say they are not subject to our laws -- are utterly without merit," said Stephen Steinhardt, the Macomb County assistant prosecutor handling the case. "They live in our country, and they are subject to all the same laws as everyone else is."

Both men were facing a felony charge for illegal possession of a Taser shocking device concealed in a compartment under the passenger seat of a car stopped by St. Clair Shores police last November. They also faced an additional 90-day misdemeanor charge of refusal to submit to fingerprinting after their arrest.

But Judge Biernat granted a defense request during the trial to dismiss the taser charge against Alvester Jones, who was in the passenger seat of the vehicle driven and owned by Reginald Jones. The judge agreed with defense arguments that no evidence in the trial ever indicated that Alvester Jones was aware of the Taser stored in a compartment under the passenger seat.

"If this evidence were sufficient, then any person getting into a vehicle operated by another would have to search that vehicle, for anything illegal," Biernat stated in his ruling from the bench.

The Jones vehicle also had some sort of self-made driver licenses and vehicle plates to emulate diplomatic plates, which were confiscated by Shores police, court officials said. But the Joneses were not cited or ticketed for driving without a valid driver license.

"My understanding is they don't recognize the authority of any state courts, only the federal courts," said Khalid Sheikh, a defense attorney for Reginald Jones. "And some of this they base on court rulings like the Dred Scott (U.S. Supreme Court) case from the 1800s, and the interstate commerce clause and the right to travel between states."

[weishaupt1776]

Wow, pretty intriguing. I need to read this a couple more times

whats interesting about the case is i know these guys are probably moors "black" and you know the cops were tailing them because they are black and had those sovereign tags, so, to NOT cite them for that and not having a license is saying they used the tags as a excuse, found the taser and charged them with what they could.

[Jerseee]

Hhhmmm,

I believe they slipped when they got a lawyer.

[weishaupt1776]

Besides Kgodd's last post; the thing that really got me is that these cats seem to be in the know w/the tags & Moor presentation and all, but hire an attorney.

[KaosTheory]

Originally Posted by Jerseee

Hhhmmm,

I believe they slipped when they got a lawyer.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Interesting article though. The fact that the license thing didn't come up is really strange. I wonder if they have SS#'s.

I also wonder what would have happened if they didn't have the taser. I didn't know a taser was illegal to own.

depends on where their educational level is, thats probably why they hired a attorney, a lot of variables we dont know. at least THEIR ATTORNEY acknowledged their stance. like kaostheory said, why they didnt cite them for the travel violations is the only thing im looking at. One more thing we can learn from this post. if the guys had knowledge of marc steven's material they could have sunk the district attorney who stated " they live in THIS country". well, thats admittance that if they didnt live in "this country", the charges cannot stick. sooo, district attorney, prove i live in this country. if the glove, i mean the jurisdiction doesnt fit, you must acquit.

[Jerseee]

Kgod,

I was getting to that point of the jurisdiction after the lawyer part.

All,

For those that do not know about the Moorish Society--I suggest you read and learn. The proof of their stance is evidenced by their treaty with the original United States hundreds of years ago.

If anything, these cats should have stood on making them prove their jurisdiction that they are subject to the laws of the state.

I agree with Kgod...these guys did not know what they were doing. Challenging SMJ is one of the first things they teach you when realizing your moorish ancestry.

[fulltitle]

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Subject matter jurisdiction can be raised at any time by any party or by the court, and if it appears that subject matter jurisdiction does not exist then the case must be dismissed. First Hawaiian Bank v. Engichy, 10 FSM Intrm. 536, 537 (Chk. S. Ct. Tr. 2002).

"Subject matter jurisdiction is created only by statute or constitutional provision. Steckel v. Blafas, 549 So. 2d 1211,1213 - 11 - (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). It may not be assumed by the court where it has not been authorized by law. Cf. Capricorn Marble Companv v. Georue Hvman Construction, Co., 462 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) ( "[Ilt is a fundamental principle of law that if a court is without jurisdiction, it has no power to adjudicate or determine any issue or cause submitted to it."). [State of Florida vs. Chr|stopher Griffith]

"Subject matter jurisdiction is a power that arises solely by virtue of law, F l o r i d a Export Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Dept. of Revenue, 510 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 519 So. 2d 986, 987 (Fla. 1987). It is conferred upon a
court by a constitution or a statute, State ex re. Caraker v. Amidon, 68 So.2d 403 (Fla. 1953), and can not be created by waiver, acquiescence or agreement of the parties. Amidon; Florida Export. The defense of lack of
s u b j e c t m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n can be raised at any t i m e . Marion Correctional I n s t . v. Kriegel, 522 So.2d 45 (Fla. 5th DCA) rev. denied, 531 S o . 2d 1354 (Fla. 1988)." [State of Florida vs. Chr|stopher Griffith]

Originally Posted by Jerseee

...Challenging SMJ is one of the first things they teach you when realizing your moorish ancestry.

[Jerseee]

Fulltitle,

Now that's an EXCLAMATION POINT!!! Thanks for the support.

Now look up the Treaty of Morrocco.