Printable View
[Attached] The court INTERESTINGLY displays "REFUSAL FOR CAUSE" right on the court minutes! The minutes also reflect the "disposed" status which means that the matter is completed.
The one who communicated the R4C had received a ticket before this one and R4C it. Then they received this ticket and without R4C'ing this one, received this and a notice that no further action is necessary and received the same for the first ticket. It appears that one R4C became the remedy for two tix.
Interesting, thanks for posting this.
I have two tickets I have refused for cause. I later after about 6 months received a notice in the mail to pay the tickets. which I again R4D. After about another month I received yet a another notice under yet a different spelling of my name, suggesting they were going to send the whole thing to collections. Which again I R4C'd. Still waiting for the next responce. fB
That is pretty cool!
Happy! Happy!
EZ;
I got curious and cannot find what that charge was about - 16082(C)?
Congratulations ! It would be very helpful to all if you could provide more details of what lead up to the success, many are probably thinking you just wrote " refused for cause " on a ticket and brought it to the court which i know it could have not been this simple.
An evidence repository is always helpful.
Hey Motla, I am not sure if your question was directed at me. But in my situation, I simple wrote Refused for Cause on the ticket and sent it to the chief of police. I had prior to getting this ticket gotten a new rendition of my competency to drive. On the application for a DL because of loss, I signed first and middle name. I also made sure that along with the copy of the ticket I made it known, that a copy was being sent to my evidence repository. At the time of getting a duplicate dl due to loss, I changed my status in regards to voting. Not a US citizen, to which I received a notice that I was not eligible to vote. Which I promptly also send a copy to my evidence repository. I hope this helps clear up questions you have as the process I went through. Should you have more questions, please ask. fBQuote:
Originally Posted by motla68
Actually it was directed to EZ , but since you posted I am kind of curious what is the end goal of getting a case jacket assigned as I have heard this a few times now ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick Burrell
To comment on what you posted I look at these courts as banks with collections services, just like the microlined signature line on a check says " authorized signature " is just that it would not be my jacket, but a jacket(evidence repository) I would have authorized use of, the same goes with the status of person, not my status. Along with the DL, if it can be revoked without my consent then it must not be mine, just have use of it whether it be for competency or not.
Attachment 743
Non Assumpsit
The repository is a case file opened in district court. Through the saving to suitors clause, this gives us access to common law courts, which, to my knowledge the district court judges cannot preside over. Hence by filing paper work in this case file, it becomes the court of record. From what I have seen the courts and federal employees seem to take paper work submitted to them and to the case file much more seriously, and with less hanky panky, as a record is being established as to the events and what has transpired. Some states allow you to just open a case file for $39 others like Hawaii do not allow miscellaneous filing, hence the LOR for around $350 ddollars. I think the most enjoyable aspect during my case was R4Cing the judges dismissal of the case and then issuing a default judgement for failure to respond within 20 days. Call me weird but there is something really satisfying about telling a judge to stick it where the sun doesn't shine. lol. I know not very peaceful, but what can I say. fB
Albeit being a court of competent jurisdiction is not required (there are a few researchers) this has long been a requisite to being a "suitor". Meaning we would rather a suitor not try to teach us anything until he or she is a court of competent jurisdiction, and can show that to be true with a true judgment. Saving to Suitors Club is an echo chamber of the brain trust.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick Burrell
Your comments about Robb having success for example. While you pique interest with that hearsay, they are basically meaningless as hearsay. If you start a thread with citable examples and links so that we may verify your comments then that is another story. We learn about record-forming (becoming the court of record) and rules of evidence in our daily ingestion of beliefs and belief sets. Almost all suitors have evidence repositories in the federal courthouse.
Very interesting solution naming the courthouse as the house of record. There is talk through the rumor mill that when a certificate of live birth is created in a county that a short form of that is recorded into the county courthouse around the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick Burrell
These days though I come in as my own court of law as in one suveran speaking to a sovereign , I never claim them words in court but just walk the walk and talk the talk since 2004. It would be interesting to see the judges reaction to what I must tell them but they never let me get that far, back in 2004 was taken into a private court room after everyone else left, when all was said and done the judge sort of congratulated me on the way had handled myself, said he had not seen anything like it in quite a while and that produced a good feeling to i guess, since then I cannot even get into a hearing to appear as a witness either, they will not continue if I am there and usually get escorted out. I agree that judge is only in there to protect the interests of his employer, but most of the time it is us that puts our foot in our mouth that gets us put in front of the judge in the first place,
he just a man doing his job he had been trained to do to get a paycheck like any other neighbor, what we do to one man effects all men around us including ourselves so telling a judge to stick it where the sun don't shine is basically flipping your neighbor off just because you can, yes not very peaceful I agree, but that is on your own consciousness I am no judge in your court.
Ok well since you had not issues with Shikamaru bringing in recordings of the Informer to satisfy the brain trust in the same thread here it goes:Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
1. His conference call with Angela Stark:
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-39904/TS-548863.mp3
2. His conference call on James Madison's community call:
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-35567/TS-551786.mp3
Well Motla, I am happy to say my thinking has changed in the last two years. I am slow but I get there. At the time it was a very liberating feeling. Things do change. lol Even your and my interactions since then have evolved. Happy to see you are active in the forum. Thanks for your input. fBQuote:
Originally Posted by motla68
Me too, we are all equal here, teacher and student are constant interchangeable interfaces and we all evolve together. I guess have been sucked into the vortex here some, most places I have posted information at there is not much interaction, nobody to agree or disagree, questions seem to come without evidence of effort that law was studied at all, but here it has been a good variety of responses, anywhere from being raked through the coals to get more information, spit on by big EGOs to being called a conspirator, I expected that since I get a little of that reaction when speaking to certain groups in physical appearance. Also as said before even there was a time speaking locally here to MJ he did not contact me back for 2 months an then all of a sudden he contacts me back with a success he had dealing with some police officers. We been doing things wrong for so long we forgot how to do it right, each generation must come through this process in matters of the heart it is all part of that evolution. Thank you for your input too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick Burrell
Why would he?Quote:
Originally Posted by motla68
The Informer puts his information out there with cites for anyone to research on their own along with howtos sprinkled here and there on how to do your own archival research.
THAT is not hearsay.
You can disagree with the conclusions but the CITES and FACTS are undeniable.
You might want to look up the word hearsay so you can understand and use it correctly.
-->So say you<--
No. So it IS.Quote:
Originally Posted by motla68
You are the lone person I have met across several message boards who has such vehement objections to "the Informer" ... well... other than attorners.....
In addition, you are the only person who hasn't looked at the cites either.
To the attorners' credit, they will review the material at the very least.
David reviewed the material. He stated his objections in a reasoned and rational manner in complete contradistinction to you.
The material has presented in earnest to those interested therein. It does not signify a wholesale endorsement of anything and everything "the Informer" says.
But, I have to tell ya' .... its been very, very, VERY hard to stump him :).
The material is based on ARCHIVAL and HISTORICAL research. So, if you desire creativity, this ain't it !!
After this, I'm dropping it. You'll come back to this material when you are ready and right now ... clearly you ain't ready!
This is my conclusion of "feeding pearls to swine".
---> So, I say!! <---
This is a test message.
I am not questioning his research, I am questioning your inadequacy to perform and present the information yourself directly on this forum, proof that YOU know it rather then say "well the information is on one of those audios". You do not practice what you preach, lead by example, not by a tyrannical hazing of a newbie in the forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by shikamaru