See other Dead Constitution Articles
Title: BRAINSTORM: Driving Without A License Defense Help
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Mar 1, 2009
Author: Old Friend
Post Date: 2009-03-01 17:25:19 by Old Friend
Keywords: None
Views: 261
Comments: 30
Ok here is the deal. I got busted back in November I guess for driving without a license. I'm due back in court Tuesday. This is my eleventh time by my count. I want to beat this and I have in the past. In the past I have used driving as a right defense. I may use that defense at a later point but not now. My focus right now is that they violated my right to a speedy trial. You see one of the clerks told me to sign this paper signing away my right to a speedy trial. They also said if I didn't I wouldn't be able to get a public defender. Not that I want a public defender. I have already filed a motion to have the case dismissed on speedy trial grounds. The judge at my pre trial conference last week said that he rejected the motion because of the waiver I signed. Anyway here is my potential strategy. I am thinking about appealing his decision. I also wonder if he was supposed to give me some kind of ruling in writing and if he potentially violated some kind of rule by not doing that. I assume he didn't issue a written ruling as I have not received one. Anyway would I have some kind of case if he didn't issue an official ruling in writing. That is one thing. Anyway I appeal the case to drag it out (cost them more money and time). Then I am thinking of also going to federal court and filing a motion (formus pauper of course). The motion would be that the municipal court violated my right to a speedy trial. I am not sure if I will take this path or if I should. Because if I do I will go to an all out war phase subpoenaing records of everyone for the last month that had signed a similar waiver to get them to back me up that they tell you to sign these waivers. Also isn't the fact that some clerk tells you to sign a waiver some kind of legal advice? They aren't supposed to give legal advice are they? If I go to all out war and I lose the penalty will likely be worse. So I am not sure what to do and just thinking about some stuff. I could also file a motion that I filed before that is a cut and paste that is about 30 pages on driving and that it is a right. I want to use that as a last resort though. So are their any Lawyers out there. Or people who can offer some suggestions. Or even type up some motions that I can cut and paste. Thanks
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Old Friend (#0)
I don't deal with Admiralty Law or it's (all of them) courts. Sorry can't help.
So you just ignore them and don't show up? I've done that before then they come knocking on my door and shit. I once asked a judge acting ignorantly why there was gold fringe on that flag on his court and I thought the American flag was red white and blue. He looked at me and somebody has been telling you something haven't they. That is all he said about it.
You will decide the facts of this case and I will give you the law. The law required this man to file and Income Tax form; you decide whether or not he filed it. What a shock! The jury convicted him. Later some of the members of the jury said, What could we do? The man had admitted that he had not filed the form, so we had to convict him. The same Judge I told you about earlier. We were in a jury trial. I started bringing up the constitution and stuff. The judge called me to a sidebar and told me to quit talking about the constitution. I said to him but John Jay said that the jury was to judge law and facts. I can't remember what he said but he basically said to shut up about it. I went back to the podium. I had a copy of the constitution printed out. I took it and ripped it in half. Then I said I guess the constitution isn't in effect in this court room. So I must rest my case. They found me guilty that time.
I don't deal with the kangaroos.
That is and was correct. You were/are in an excutive tribunal (under the commander-in-chief) which is only competent to hear matters of contract. For general info, look up tribunal in a Black's Law Dict. and read the description of the court setting. Did you have a driver's license? Was it revoked, or, did you lose it or simply not renew it? Do you have state-issued license plates on your car? If so, case is over -- you are going to lose 90% of the time and believe me, the judge knows if you do or not. Do you have a loan on your car? If so, case is over -- you are going to lose 90% of the time and believe me the judge knows if you do or not. Do you have a state issued Certificate of Title for your car? If you do you are going to lose 95% of the time and believe me, the judge knows if you do or not. By the way, a certificate of title is not the title to the car; it is a certificate that stands for the title and entitles you to the beneificial use of the car; nothing more, and only according to the established laws of the state....... such as having a driver's lic. in your possesion when driving the car. Do you have a Social Security number? If so, case is over -- you are going to lose 90% of the time and believe me, if the judge does not know yet, he will before this goes very far. Are you answering his questions in the tribunal? If so, he has jurisdiction, and you have a real problem. Sure you want to pursue this?
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
So your recommendation would be to do nothing?
I'm not recommending anything to you at all whatsoever. As I said, I can't help you.
the thing i see is that just because some clerk tells you to sign something , that does not make it compulsory, and you did not have to, and probably should not, have signed it. i make it a general rule never to sign antyhing. if they said you had to waive your right to a speedy trial in order to get a public defender and you wanted to challenge that claim, you should have simply challenged it (perhaps filed a motion) challenging it, but not waiving your right. Now in CA they do not have to provide a lawyer for infractions, [[although now that i think about it, i am not sure if driving without a license in CA is a misdemeanor, in which case you would have right to public counsel]]. -- as far as his requirement to issue a ruling in writing, once the ruling is filed with the court i assume it's in writing somewhere? here they dont have to 'explain' their rulings, so as long as it's entered i think it stands. but by all means, i'd challenge or appeal his ruling to throw a monkey wrench in it. -- i also like the idea of subpoenaing everything, that is always important in my experience. i lost one traffic case because specifically i failed to do so. (got careless and hadnt bothered demanding the info before trial.) as far as your actual defense against the charge against you, (driving without ''license'') i have no experience in that matter, but i would be interested in a copy of the defense you used to win in the past. if i were you i'd shout it from the rooftops and release it widely to the world. what a victory to be proud of.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. i wanted to add one thing. I know it is tedious and burdensome to fight these bastards and even when you win, it's gratifying but a shallow victory. the only ones that know is you and some mindless group of bureocrats (pigs, court clerks, judges,) who get paid anyway and don't give a sh!t. so the burdon is on you and you alone, and the victory may seem shallow as they will continue oppressing everyone else who is too weak or lazy to bother fighting it. but do not ever stop fighting!! you stood up for liberty and held against their evil tyranical nonsense . you cost them time and money. and for that you should be applauded. such things are a meaningful fight and are well worth it. i often tell people, ha, you claim you will stand against fema camps, gun grabs, cps, vaccines, etc yet you cant fight a damn traffic ticket??? so i always encourage friends to fight and 3 of them that i have told, have fought for the first time and WON. man that makes my day. So, keep up the great work.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. The court's are corporate/commercial courts. If you have a SSN you've opted to use them. The Judge has summary authority regardless of the law. I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket. General Smedley Butler
In the past I didn't sign it. I signed it so I could make a case of it. Because that way I knew they would let the time expire. It was a strategy I thought I would employ.
I am going to have to look for that again. I had a copy on my last computer. I found it on the net. It was a case out of Pennsylvania. I cut and pasted it. Read through it and made some changes to to reflect on the Ohio State Constitution. I was scheduled for a jury trial on that case. I went to trial that day with my notes and some poster boards I made. The court had ruled against my motion. Without reason. Anyway I went to court and got the jury selection papers I was going through. Then they called me up to the bench. The judge told me that I wasn't to use the constitution as a defense that she had already ruled against it. She asked me if I understood what she said. I remember saying "I understand that the constitution is the supreme law of the land. She said something else. Then I also remember saying. "Your honor is the constitution of the United States of America in effect in this court. She then said "I am offended by that question and will not answer that question". To which I replied "Let the record show that the judge has refused to acknowledge that the constitution is in effect in this courtroom". She slammed down her gavel and called recess and told me to go back to the jury selection room. Not five minutes later the prosecutor came in and said we made a mistake the way we filed your papers. So we are going to have to dismiss the charges. He said it wasn't because I was right but because of a paperwork problem. I still had to go to court for wreckless driving though. You see my tire blew out on the highway and my car spun off to the side. The fuel safety shutoff got triggered and I couldn't get the truck started again. Anyway that charge didn't allow a jury trial so the judge just found me guilty of that charge. I was a little disappointed because I wanted the jury to find me not guilty of everything. But I was overall happy with the outcome as I was not going to jail. One other note on that case. When I was before the judge the prosecutor motioned to let the judge and I guess myself know that a "federal observer" was going to sit with the prosecutor and if I objected or the court objected. I didn't object. I always have wondered why the federal observer was there. And thank you for your advice.
I understand that. Part of my strategy is to get them tired of dealing with me to make a deal possibly. Or to use the jury trial to try to win. I plan on using emotions if a jury trial is what it takes.
I have thought about doing something else to put a monkey wrench in their system. I thought about going to court every week or whatever to protest in front of the court building. My plan would be to encourage people not to sign the waiver. If no one signed it we could bury them in cases. Also encouraging them to demand a jury trial would further bury them in paperwork.
I always fight it. On another case the pig didn't show up. Case dismissed.
I was broke back in 98 I guess it was. It was Christmas time and I didn't pay my insurance. I was taking a friend home one night and my back light was burnt out. Actually it was my wifes car. They pulled me over and canceled my license without a trial or anything. That made me angry. That is when I started more about some of these issues we face. I was stubborn and refused to get a license again because driving is a right. I should have drove my truck. And yes I do have insurance now and have ever since.
great job! sorry i couldnt be of more help, and let me know how this one turns out.
Glory to God in the highest, and Peace to His people on Earth. Thanks for the encouragement.
According to a Supreme Court ruling made in 1815, all insurance is of admiralty jurisdiction -- that ruling stands today and can not be changed because of the nature of insurance. So no matter what, the Constitution will not and can not apply in your case. If you find a way to beat this, you will amaze me, I assure you.
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
As I stated above, the Constitution does not apply in that so-called court room (tribunal), BUT, they do not want such info being put before the sheeple. And the judge is well aware of what you were doing before, and will be prepared this time. You go into that court room with the same arguments and start doing things, she will warn you (she is required to), and then she will throw the book at you. Look at your state codes; generally (everywhere I have looked), the Uniform Commercial Code is printed in front of the State Constitution. Why? Because it is based on contract law and overrides any Constitution once a signature has been obtained on a piece of paper. Your state constitution has language in it that confirms the right to contract. I will never understand why people do not understand that everything that they sign is a contract. PERIOD! Now, if your state has a searchable data base on the law and codes, look for a connection between insurance and/or state issued lic. plates and a drivers lic. It exists somewhere in the codes, I assure you. Ifn you gots one of them three, you gots to have all three. Basic contract law everywhere.
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
She isn't a judge anymore. This is a different court.
Does not matter. He/she/it; believe me, they are up to date and well aware of what you were doing before. Count on it.
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
I know about UCC and all that stuff. They aren't going to bother looking up any of that stuff. They just find everyone guilty. Even if I didn't have a SS# or didn't sign this or that. Oh and I will win.
Oh I know they have my record. The judge counted up 9 driving without a license charges. That doesn't include this one or the one in Kentucky. But they don't know the details of the case. They don't have time to look it up for such a petty thing. They already offered me a deal with no jail time. But if I take that deal my license automatically gets suspended for at least a year and another reinstatement fee.
I hope so, but the more you say, the more loaded the deck looks against you, and this time around, it could be quite bothersome. I have seen similiar situations elsewhere, and by the time it gets to this point, someone on the other side gets tired of all of the games and makes a real issue out of what is going on -- last one I watched it meant 2 years in the slammer for a friend of mine. You might keep that thought in mind as you prepare. This is not a game, believe me, and they really do not like people that challenge their jurisdiction. There is a reason, and you are living it, as to why we, as Jehovah's Witnesses, do not enter into their court rooms except as a last resort -- and generally speaking, we never have to. At Romans 13:1 we read: “Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities,” There is an excellent paper on subjection and why; I will post it. But you might keep something in mind and as you think about this. Do you really believe that Jehovah God is interested in a rebellious people for His Name? Ones that can not learn to live in subjection to the superior authorities?
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
There is an excellent paper on subjection and why; I will post it. But you might keep something in mind and as you think about this. Do you really believe that Jehovah God is interested in a rebellious people for His Name? Ones that can not learn to live in subjection to the superior authorities? In Romans talked about civil authority. It laid out some things. Like stealing killing and stuff. The government is right to punish those crimes. There was no authority given to oppress us in our right to travel. To steal our money and redistribute it etc. Then consider when Jesus said Give to Caesar what is Caesars and to God what is Gods. Well i'm not caesars.
What was the "crime"?
Driving without a drivers lic. and the real problem was how he pushed the issue and refused to stop talking about the Constitution after repeated warnings. As I recall, been many years ago now, he had about 6 tickets over the issue. And a loud mouth in the court room.
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
I admit that I used to agree with you -- not any more. You should read the post I put up about subjection. It is pretty good. Explains that the right of the civil authorities is to maintain order. How do you maintain order on the roads if everyone is allowed to drive with no oversite? Does the oversite only start once someone has been killed? Who says that a 12 year old can not drive? Or, that a drunk should not be allowed to drive? How about someone with bad eyesight? Can they drive? And once you start making exceptions, what is the limit? Oh, OK, you got a Constitution in your hand; you can drive. Oops, you don't so you can't without a lic. And pretty soon, everyone has a Constitution in their hand and the problems really start. So where does it end? As I said, after someone is killed? No, I stopped participating is such things long ago; they did not make sense to me then, and after I really started to study the Bible, they made even less. Don't forget, in the days of Rome, riding a horse could hardly be compared to taking a 5,000 pound car down a road at 70 miles an hour. That is a deadly weapon, and someone needs to keep track of who what when and where. And yes, they abuse what they are doing. Such is human nature. We have to learn to live with it.
Daniel 2:44 “And in the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be brought to ruin. And the kingdom itself will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it itself will stand to times indefinite;.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#2. To: Rotara (#1)
#3. To: Old Friend (#2)
I once asked a judge acting ignorantly why there was gold fringe on that flag on his court and I thought the American flag was red white and blue. He looked at me and somebody has been telling you something haven't they. That is all he said about it.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#4. To: Rotara (#3)
From your link
#5. To: Old Friend (#4)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#6. To: Old Friend (#4)
Then I said I guess the constitution isn't in effect in this court room.
#7. To: Rotara (#5)
I don't deal with the kangaroos.
#8. To: Old Friend (#7)
So your recommendation would be to do nothing?
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#9. To: Old Friend (#0)
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#10. To: Old Friend (#0)
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#11. To: Old Friend (#4)
(Edited)
http://www.apfn.org/pdf/ExD401.jpg
#12. To: Artisan (#9)
the thing i see is that just because some clerk tells you to sign something , that does not make it compulsory, and you did not have to, and probably should not, have signed it. i make it a general rule never to sign antyhing.
#13. To: Artisan (#9)
as far as your actual defense against the charge against you, (driving without ''license'') i have no experience in that matter, but i would be interested in a copy of the defense you used to win in the past. if i were you i'd shout it from the rooftops and release it widely to the world. what a victory to be proud of.
#14. To: noone222 (#11)
The court's are corporate/commercial courts. If you have a SSN you've opted to use them. The Judge has summary authority regardless of the law.
#15. To: Artisan (#10)
i wanted to add one thing. I know it is tedious and burdensome to fight these bastards and even when you win, it's gratifying but a shallow victory. the only ones that know is you and some mindless group of bureocrats (pigs, court clerks, judges,) who get paid anyway and don't give a sh!t.
#16. To: Artisan (#10)
so i always encourage friends to fight and 3 of them that i have told, have fought for the first time and WON. man that makes my day. So, keep up the great work.
#17. To: richard9151 (#6)
Did you have a driver's license? Was it revoked, or, did you lose it or simply not renew it?
#18. To: Old Friend (#13)
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#19. To: Artisan (#18)
great job! sorry i couldnt be of more help, and let me know how this one turns out.
#20. To: Old Friend (#17)
And yes I do have insurance now and have ever since.
#21. To: Old Friend (#13)
To which I replied "Let the record show that the judge has refused to acknowledge that the constitution is in effect in this courtroom". She slammed down her gavel and called recess and told me to go back to the jury selection room. Not five minutes later the prosecutor came in and said we made a mistake the way we filed your papers. So we are going to have to dismiss the charges. He said it wasn't because I was right but because of a paperwork problem.
#22. To: richard9151 (#21)
As I stated above, the Constitution does not apply in that so-called court room (tribunal), BUT, they do not want such info being put before the sheeple. And the judge is well aware of what you were doing before, and will be prepared this time. You go into that court room with the same arguments and start doing things, she will warn you (she is required to), and then she will throw the book at you.
#23. To: Old Friend (#22)
She isn't a judge anymore. This is a different court.
#24. To: richard9151 (#21)
#25. To: richard9151 (#23)
Does not matter. He/she/it; believe me, they are up to date and well aware of what you were doing before. Count on it.
#26. To: Old Friend (#24)
Oh and I will win.
#27. To: richard9151 (#26)
At Romans 13:1 we read: “Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities,”
#28. To: richard9151 (#26)
last one I watched it meant 2 years in the slammer
#29. To: Old Friend (#28)
What was the "crime"?
#30. To: Old Friend (#27)
In Romans talked about civil authority. It laid out some things. Like stealing killing and stuff. The government is right to punish those crimes. There was no authority given to oppress us in our right to travel. To steal our money and redistribute it etc.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest