Help -- Fast

[Jerseee]

Originally Posted by artificialsteve

This seems like a good time to ask you a question. I know that without jurisdiction, the court has no case.....At what point in time( in our traffic ticket scenario) would YOU challenge this jurisdiction?
and what jurisdiction are you talking about...In persona, In rem, subject matter??...thanks

Subject matter.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Originally Posted by BenGera

Greetings to all!
YES, I am going to chalange jurisdiction. Previous attempts of mine where shot down, as the courts here totaly ignore there own laws!!

Of course they do. Ooops, you mean they don't agree with you on their own laws.

Originally Posted by BenGera

YES, I did apply, and am using, Ticket Slayer method!

I'm sure you're getting your money's worth.

Originally Posted by BenGera

BUT, I want to have more weapons and attacks/defense!
I want to prevent the officer from showing his face for fear for his job.

To explain, I went to the Post Office and talked to supervisors about my letter, that was marked as invalid address, yet there was a handwritten return address -- written by officer!
The USPS guys were trying to explain how this could happen and then found that they are getting entangled in a physical impossibility for each and every excuse. They put me on hold until they investigate this some more.

Investigate what? The Sheriff's office for sending things to an address they found because they don't have any reason keep it?

You're confusing some things, I think.

Originally Posted by BenGera

Meanwhile, to those of you (unlike JRB) who think there is something in the REFUSAL FOR CAUSE, can you give me an idea as how to proceed with the assumption that it's a valid process. I stipulated to the officer that if he does not respond I see that as admittance on his part that the contract is null and void. Officially, and legally, he did not respond to my claims !!!
My arraignment's on June 26. I can postpone it for an extra month, I think!

I think I have the officer in a situation that he messed up with the mail

What on earth does sending some meaningless correspondence back to its origin have to do with frauds and swindles?

Hi JRB,

I am not confusing anything...
I sent a letter to the officer, at an address he specified as locale where I can reach him (and he was relactant to supply me with an address at the first place..)

I did not place a return address on the envelope.

The officer -- in his efforts to avoid the letter, which he obviously opened and read -- marked the address as vacant and undeliverable. It seems he used a USPS label from somewhere to stick on this letter. He also addedd the return address by his handwriting.

Now, address being the address of City Hall, the USPS local supervisors do see this in bad light, as this puts their service in the incompetent division. Also, undeliverable mail goes in the "DEAD-LETTER" bin, not in the "RETURN-TO-SENDER" bin, especially if no sender is listed...

So the officer oppened the letter, and could have ignored it. But, by using the RETURN-TO-SENDER trick, he swindled the USPS from delivery fee too!

And, obviously, it is not meaningless correspondence!
If it were, the JBT would not try so hard to avoid it, would he???


******************************************

Silence can only be equated with fraud when there is a legal and Moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be Intentionally misleading. U.S. vs. Prudden, 424 F. 2d 1021, U.S. vs. Tweel, 550 F. 2d 297, 299-300

[Judge Roy Bean]

Originally Posted by BenGera

Hi JRB,

I am not confusing anything...
I sent a letter to the officer, at an address he specified as locale where I can reach him (and he was relactant to supply me with an address at the first place..)

I did not place a return address on the envelope.

The officer -- in his efforts to avoid the letter, which he obviously opened and read -- marked the address as vacant and undeliverable. It seems he used a USPS label from somewhere to stick on this letter. He also addedd the return address by his handwriting.

Now, address being the address of City Hall, the USPS local supervisors do see this in bad light, as this puts their service in the incompetent division. Also, undeliverable mail goes in the "DEAD-LETTER" bin, not in the "RETURN-TO-SENDER" bin, especially if no sender is listed...

So the officer oppened the letter, and could have ignored it. But, by using the RETURN-TO-SENDER trick, he swindled the USPS from delivery fee too!

And, obviously, it is not meaningless correspondence!
If it were, the JBT would not try so hard to avoid it, would he???


******************************************

Silence can only be equated with fraud when there is a legal and Moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be Intentionally misleading. U.S. vs. Prudden, 424 F. 2d 1021, U.S. vs. Tweel, 550 F. 2d 297, 299-300

What evidence do you have that the officer allegedly involved is the one who sent the letter back?

A far more likely scenario is the officer gave you an adddress, knowingly or unknowingly invalid, then you sent something to that address and whoever sorts the mail there didn't know where it was supposed to go so they opened it, found your address, wrote it on the envelope, marked it on the outside with a USPS label and put it in the outgoing mail tray.

"City Hall" probably gets as much junk mail as the rest of us, even more if you count the number of these kinds of silly quasi-legal maneuvers. I like to take the pre-paid business reply envelopes and send them each other's promotional garbage.

But in any event, they have no need to avoid it. What you're trying to send them is legally meaningless and they have no reason to avoid it or keep it, let alone take the time and effort to write a letter explaining it to you and sending it all back to you in another envelope.

[Rlynne]

A far more likely scenario is the officer gave you an adddress, knowingly or unknowingly invalid, then you sent something to that address and whoever sorts the mail there didn't know where it was supposed to go so they opened it, found your address, wrote it on the envelope, marked it on the outside with a USPS label and put it in the outgoing mail tray.

Judge you raised a very interesting scenario. However, isn't it illegal to open mail addressed to someone else?

Hi JRB,

Again, I AM SURE the officer wrote the return address himself -- same, very unique letters that are on the "ticket" Absolutely no doubt!!!

JRB, it's very simple logic!
If the letter (with no return address!) was not delivered - it goes to USPS 'dead-letter' bin. USPS supervisor told me they DO NOT open the letter to see who sent it until it sits for a while -- long while -- in storage. ANd then they send it in a special envelope...

This address is City Hall, 'delivry-boy' knows he did not have a 'dead-letter' during those days in question !!!

ALL mail-carriers at USPS, from that section, know the address & the girl who sits in front and signs for certified mail -- when it is certified (this one wasn't).

The USPS manager now told me they sent the case to USPS Inspector !! They are not taking this lightly....

[marksgirl]

Originally Posted by Judge Roy Bean

I like to take the pre-paid business reply envelopes and send them each other's promotional garbage.

I'll have to try this sometime. Thanks for the idea!