Interesting Travel Defense by State

#1 05-02-2004, 07:00 PM

Good to see the defense the State will put on in travel situations.

http://www.michbar.org/opinions/dist...1201/9347.html

#2 05-02-2004, 07:06 PM

here is a brief snippet of the stupidity the government uses in their defense. Whats amazing is they ADMIT they have a interest in towing your vehicle!
As correctly pointed out by Defendants, there is no constitutional requirement that Plaintiff receive notice and a hearing prior to having his vehicle impounded for failure to have it properly
6
registered. See Scofield, 862 F.2d at 763-64; Kutschbach v. Davis, 885 F. Supp. 1079, 1092 (S.D. Ohio 1995) (citing Goichman v. Aspen, 859 F.2d 1466, 1468 (10th Cir. 1988)); Weinrauch v. Park City, 751 F.2d 357 (10th Cir.1984). As aptly pointed out by the Scofield Court:
<DIR>
<DIR>
the government interest in towing unregistered vehicles is analogous to the government interest in towing illegally parked vehicles. By towing unregistered vehicles, the government removes these automobiles from the public streets, encourages owners to maintain automobile registration, and deters owners from violating state registration laws. If notice had to be given before a car with[out] registration could be towed, it is likely that the car would simply be driven away.</DIR></DIR>
Scofield, 862 F.2d at 763-64. Due process in situations involving the towing and impoundment of a vehicle is satisfied when a person whose vehicle is impounded is given a prompt post-tow or post-impoundment hearing. Id. at 762.
In

#3 05-02-2004, 08:12 PM

The following was taken from the Jennings Lien seminar:
&
Title 42 suits were created under § 5 of 14th amendment. Use it against federal and state actors in a judicial court. Tell them that a petition and a motion are not the same. When in federal court, only appear in special visitation, 12H(3).
&
It appears that that guy was in an administrative court, not judicial, nor did he appear by special visitation.

Ice · #4 05-02-2004, 10:33 PM

kgod,

They ADMIT to the fact that they are overstepping the authority that was granted to them by the People... and they admit to abuse and usurpation of power... and... well, read closely:

"... By towing unregistered vehicles, ... , encourages owners to maintain automobile registration, and deters owners from violating state registration laws."

Now, shouldn't granting your property to the state be a voluntary act and not one done out of fear of reprisal??

Ice

#5 05-03-2004, 12:15 AM

Now, shouldn't granting your property to the state be a voluntary act and not one done out of fear of reprisal??

It's not their property, so why voluntarily grant it to them?

&

Jerseee · #6 05-03-2004, 10:00 PM

Can you prove it is not their property?

Can you prove that it is your property? (if need be)

Ice · #7 05-03-2004, 11:30 PM

My point was a simple one:

The towing of unregistered vehicles "encourages" [okay, scares the hell out of people] to maintain auto registration.& The registration of your automobile is the granting of your property to the State.& Therefore, they are using a threat of force to "encourage" folks to "grant" their property to the State.

So, Godd, in light of the threat they have so blatantly stated in the code, how do you think it could be "voluntary"??& Seems to me that the registration of vehicles is done under threat and duress... don't ya think?

And what do we know about actions taken under threat and duress?

&

#8 05-03-2004, 11:49 PM

So, Godd, in light of the threat they have so blatantly stated in the code, how do you think it could be "voluntary"??& Seems to me that the registration of vehicles is done under threat and duress... don't ya think?

As far as I understand,&car registration is not voluntary.

What is your understanding?&

Jerseee · #9 05-04-2004, 04:49 AM

Tora,

Car registration is voluntary.

It is the "consequences" that make it unsavory.

It is sort of like, "I'm going to make you an offer you can't refuse"

#10 05-04-2004, 09:04 AM

this reminds me of a site i visited some time ago in reference to car registration where a long dialog took place between&a "freeman" and the state's attorney over whether "registration" was mandatory.& the correspondance spanned a year i think.&

it was an interesting read as it pointed out many things about the legal system, etc., but the end result was that the state's attorney could not/would not cite any "law" that made car registration, etc., mandatory.& the guy refused.& nor would he provide a copy of the state code.& in fact, his attitude was such that "i'm a lawyer, i know, you aren't and therefore are incompetent to start with."& how atypical.

as far as i can determine, registering your car, getting a driver's license, etc., is not mandatory.& the problem is, though, the 'police' will take action against you because they are not taught to recognize when a car is supposed to be registered, etc., and so on (they are hoodwinked into thinking everything must be plated, etc.).& even the group that todd (cancellatura) is working with works to get plates, etc., that are recognizable by enforcement officers so that one is not harassed (ply the seas showing the colors so that one may pass).

jon