Cody's Right To Travel

[powder]

How does their case law apply to you?

What does interpretation mean?

Is the implementation of interpretation consistent?

Check Marc Steven's plight. He started down his path 'to understanding' for this EXACT reason. He had case law that supported his position. Robe told him "that is your opinion" and ruled against him.

[Codee]

I don't interpret. I cited every definition from inside the code that it was applicable to. I did not use one court case! Did anyone catch that?!?!? NO INTERPRETATION. THE EXACT OPPOSITE. If there is no definition in the code then I go to a dictionary and then apply to the legislative intent.

I see a forum going mad with non-applicable court cases and so I intoduce the "legislative intent." This intent PROVES they are not targeting me. Someone "interpreting" the law is my God Blessed DOOM!!!

I see no need for interpretation and if it is going to happen on deffintions I get the one that favours me. I already won with that argument and I ain't afraid to use it again.

[Big Al]

Originally Posted by powder

How does their case law apply to you?

What does interpretation mean?

Is the implementation of interpretation consistent?

Check Marc Steven's plight. He started down his path 'to understanding' for this EXACT reason. He had case law that supported his position. Robe told him "that is your opinion" and ruled against him.

If your using SMJ, case law has no bearing, With SMJ it is up to the court and the prosicution to prove they have jurisdiction.

What Codee has shown you is, they don't. Now maybe there is a great legal mind out there that can prove a negative. You will be hailed throughout the land because you will be the first.

[Codee]

Again Big Al preceeds me. Why is this no big suprise? I mean I studied law all by self and a homeless man and I seem to be right in rythm with a guy from Alaska!

SMJ is is by far WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT. This has been a re-occurring theme of my posts for... well since before my posts here. SMJ SMJ SMJ. Do a search just to see how many times I post SMJ concecutively three times in row.

This is all about SMJ and I will not let evidence completely contrary to my best intrests on shady definition permeate my case.

I am entitled to, at leaste in my state, to the most benificial definition where there can be two possible. I am not letting that go.

You all can think that there is nothing but the black robes decisions but when they don't want to decide you get a dismissal. It is never waived and it has nothing to do with personam jurisdiction Id Est...

1) NAME Vs. Name
2) Zip Code
3) "NOT" being a person "AT ALL"
4) CHRISTIANITY
5) Citizen Vs. National
6) Driving Vs. Travelling.
7) Default
8) Refusal
9) Acceptance
10) Appearing Specially
11) Reserving your Rights
12) Being a defendant.
13) Being a state citizen
14) Being an american or 14th citizen
15... Just start filling them in!!!!!

Do you realy want t learn all that crap first!?!?!?!?

[Codee]

Originally Posted by Big Al

If your using SMJ, case law has no bearing, With SMJ it is up to the court and the prosicution to prove they have jurisdiction.

What Codee has shown you is, they don't. Now maybe there is a great legal mind out there that can prove a negative. You will be hailed throughout the land because you will be the first.

Mabey there is a great legal mind out there that can prove that there is no negative?

Maybe....

[Codee]

Originally Posted by powder

How does their case law apply to you?

What does interpretation mean?

Is the implementation of interpretation consistent?

Check Marc Steven's plight. He started down his path 'to understanding' for this EXACT reason. He had case law that supported his position. Robe told him "that is your opinion" and ruled against him.

Originally Posted by Codee, first paragraph of this thread

I will not have all those supreme court cases concerning right to travel. I do not think they are important YET!!! I want to make this a new argument from a new angle that I do not feel has been explored but is the way I have felt.

Agreed!.....good debate Powder. We prommised one at the begining!

[RICKO]

Laaaaaaaadies And Gentlemen, Presenting Are New Heavy Weight Champion, Cooooooooooddddeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by Codee

And you proved your superior knowledge over Beeboah? Wnat to settle it? Go start up a post in the correct forrum like "You got a problem buddy." I'll be there quicker then then I can "appear" in court.

Yeah no kidding. I "appear" specially. Often as a defendant. Call my self a person, a citizen, and use a NAME and still win all the time. You go all wierd, lose, and then parade around like your S don't stink.

What have you ever done for yourself that is "remarkable?" I have only read lame theories and not much else. Any wins on record with DOCUMENTS in a file to support that you are anything more then sheep?

I have free long distance so I would love to call up your county court house and ask for these GROUND BREAKING arguments you use.

The number of my local superior court house is 1-530-265-1311. call them up. refer to me by first name only! Don't even spell it. Just say, "I know a guy named Cody, who the judges and clerks are supposed to know." then request all my filings. You will want to talk probably with Terri. She is nice and will speak so that even you can understand her.

You can talk to Robert L. Tammietti who has dissmissed case after case of mine.

Or former John Darrlington who now retired but still "enjoys remembering my cases" as he told my mother in a supermarket.

Or you can talk to "Kathlene Buttz" who presided over a three day trial for a $45 loitering ticket, who now sits on the state circut of appeals. Maybe she can tell you how proud she is of me and that she is "horored" to have known me. Oh I'm sorry Hennry, Judges don't call you "honerable." You probably call them that. Have you ever been to court? Probably just pay your fines...

Or you can talk to Police Chief John Foster and he can relate to you "I always wanted to be Cody's friend" after I kicked his A$$ in court over and over. His number is 1-530-477-4600.

Or Judge "Mc Mannus" at nevada county.

Or judge Dowling, who ruled that I proved all Grass valley perking tickets invalid infront of.

Or former mayor Linda Stevens who gave me a job recomendation after proving the police of G.V had no authority to arrest on Municiple Code violations and the city had to re-write its city charter.

Or you can contact Barbra Coffman who sits now as City Council woman in the sister town Nevada City. She will tell you how I forced Grass Valley city attorney into vountary retirement.

OR Any youth under the age of 30 on how I have stopped searches of dozens in local parks.

Or you can talk to ANY sergent or captin (Dave Remelard, Mike Heart and Jarod Johnson are the names.) in grass valley who can tell you there is a free dinner on my head for the first succesfull prosecution of me,,,, and then will also tell you that they will not arrest me on less then a felony.

Or maybe Judge Earsle Edwards.

Or judge Carl Briant.

Or the head building department clerk, Her name is Beth. She watches all of my filings and admitted that for a while G.V. was having special "Cody" meetings to discuss how to get their laws in line with my writings to them.

Or Ron White, who I proved was the enforcing authority and he left to after I pointed out he failed to do his job some 5,000 times each a technicall misdemeanor.

How about Oliver Pong the Da that has lost EVERY motion and case against me.

Or... crap you get it. I do not look for verification from you! I have all I need.

You're arguments of "never having appeared as a defendant..." who cares. I appearewd a hundred times by the age of twent one. I have abated more than your arrogance can dream little Nor Cor. man. Debate for any type of remedy? You want to venture into Cal law and post dumb links to washington state websites? I can work a mop!

Frankly Scarlett, you are correct. Who cares?


I sure don't give a @#$%

Originally Posted by HenryBowman

First, all the driving laws are written in future tense. "Shall" is future tense.

Second, I challenge ANYONE to find me a state law that says something to the effect of: "to drive, a person must have a driver license issued by the state."

There is no such law in the statutes of North Carolina.

[I am not talking about the "statute" that says anyone driving without a license." I mean a statute that requires you to have one before getting caught in the first place.

Dear Heavyweight Champion Codee:

I went back, to see if I could figure out what caused your disturbance, and the above is my first post.

I fail to see where I initiated ad hominem attacks against you or the thread.

The thread is titled Cody's Right to Travel, and, as I would ask if my post above is not travel related, as it presents an alternative thought pattern to most defenses?

I am going to dissect this thread. Either you have an issue with me legitimately, or you do not.

[weishaupt1776]

The core of an SMJ challenge is the fact that there is no express delegation from the people to form the DMV in the first place.

If no such delegation exists, then the agency doesn't really exist pursuant to the constitution (of any state)