Two traffic stops snubbed.

[Michael Joseph]

Zec 5:1 Then I turned, and lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a flying roll.

Zec 5:2 And he said unto me, What seest thou? And I answered, I see a flying roll; the length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits.

Zec 5:3 Then said he unto me, This is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the whole earth: for every one that stealeth shall be cut off as on this side according to it; and every one that sweareth shall be cut off as on that side according to it.


In my opinion: verse 3 describes to a tee the State as Trust. On one side we have those who take from the Trust without standing or possibly by endorsement of another Trust - Federal Reserve System - and on the other side we have the Trustee who is also unable to reach the trust corpus by Oath of office.

[David Merrill]

Zec 5:1 Then I turned, and lifted up mine eyes, and looked, and behold a flying roll.

Zec 5:2 And he said unto me, What seest thou? And I answered, I see a flying roll; the length thereof is twenty cubits, and the breadth thereof ten cubits.

Zec 5:3 Then said he unto me, This is the curse that goeth forth over the face of the whole earth: for every one that stealeth shall be cut off as on this side according to it; and every one that sweareth shall be cut off as on that side according to it.


In my opinion: verse 3 describes to a tee the State as Trust. One one side we have those who take from the Trust without standing or possibly by endorsement of another Trust - Federal Reserve System - and on the other side we have the Trustee who is also unable to reach the trust corpus by Oath of office.

Thank you! That is some amazing insight.

[Binbokusai Yagyuu]

Hey Colonel;

We talked on the phone several weeks ago. I am the guy in Mississippi who beat the ticket.

The recording of it became corrupted on the computer. I've been having a guy try to recover it. Might work later. If yes, I'll let you know.

BUT, I wrote the transcript the next day. Here it is, exactly as it went down.

Prelim remarks. I believe the reason it worked is simply because I did not plead along the way. In other words, I talked with the clerk on at least 2 occasions before the date to move the date, etc., and on each occasion, she tried to get me to state how I pled or would plea.

Having gone to court and won on a wildlife charge and come to understand that "pleadings perfects jurisdiction," I had figured out the game. So, I fastidiously did NOT plead, and I made it abundantly clear to the clerk that although she is Christian and good person, she was, after all, an officer of the court and as such, she should, in no way, say or intimate to the 'judge' that I pled anything, and if she did, I was going to be very upset and sue her.

So, in court, here's the transcript:

judge: "So, Mr. File, are you here today to plead not guilty."

Me: "Your Honor, I have not pled anything." (my way of saying have not, will not be doing it now because I know you do not have jurisdiction now unless I screw up and give it to you.)

I waited 2 Mississippi:

Me: "Your Honor, may I ask the Court a question?"

judge: "Yes, you may."

Me: "Do pleadings perfect jurisdiction?"

Here, it was as though I farted in church on a wooden bench on the front row. Pussel-gutted prosecutor almost had a heart attack and started blurting out 'jurisdiction' stuff cause he had some more money to collect and they didn't see this coming.

Judge was taken aback and blurted,...

judge: "Yes."

I waited 2 Mississippi:

Me: "Therefore, your Honor, may I MOVE the court to dismiss the charges, immediately?"

judge had his head down writing. He needed a story like the prosecutor did. He said,

judge: "Yes, you may. The officer is not present anyway."

Officer WAS present in street clothes. judge needed a story for the other people cause they were domestic charges and didn't have an officer. Reason I know that is because I listened to all the attorneys talking with them before. I just sat there with my head down like I was napping and listened so hard I could hear the mice in the damn wall. I had everybody pegged. Lambs to the damn slaughter for Fed Res Notes.

10 seconds went by, maybe.

judge said: "You are free to go, Mr. File. Have a nice day."

I walked out through 5 attorneys and 2 police officers sporting 9 MM's and Tasers like I was Barac, 'Insane,' Obama.

Whole thing took less than 30 words from me. Saved me $168 Federal Res Notes.

You and I already talked about the procedure problems I set up on them using these words and getting the question before the court, first.

He had to address the question. If he didn't, I'd get it on the record and beat, and embarass him on appeal as the record is all that matters on appeal unless, of course, well, no matter right now.

The thing that made me figure it this way is I heard an attorney on the radio the day after my Fed Court Wildlife thing talking about pleadings. He was showing out and didn't even know what he said. He go broke lawyering if he practiced what he preached because no court, save a victim case of murder or rape, could get one of his clients into jurisdiction.

Hence, the Bar would sanction me if I were


judge: "So, Mr. File, are you here today to plead not guilty."

Me: "Your Honor, I have not pled anything." (my way of saying have not, will not be doing it now because I know you do not have jurisdiction now unless I screw up and give it to you.)





If that " person " "APPEARED" before the Court, they now had PERSONAM JURISDICTION

look it up

why do you think they call them " APPEARANCE TICKETS "

BETTER CALLED " self arrest warrants "

I am soooo tired of reading this crap

[David Merrill]

No arraignment. I like that!


But there is something fascinating in your style. Instead of saying that, No, I am not here to plead. What you did is point out that you had not plead.

You actually threatened to sue the clerk of court if she plead for you? I think you are a genius. - Or maybe dyslexic...

[Binbokusai Yagyuu]

[QUOTE=David Merrill;6212

You actually threatened to sue the clerk of court if she plead for you? ..[/QUOTE]




actually, it calls for a Criminal Complaint, for Tampering with the Record

nonetheless, by "appearing", our supposed friend has started the Machine... next will be the Judge entering a guilty plea, and an FTA

learn how the System works ...

[Binbokusai Yagyuu]

directing a designated person to appear in a designated
local criminal court at a designated future time in connection with his
alleged commission of a designated offense. A notice conforming to such
definition constitutes an appearance ticket a misdemeanor complaint upon
which the defendant, by a waiver executed pursuant to subdivision three
of section 170.65, has consented to be prosecuted.3. A defendant who has been arraigned upon a misdemeanor complaint
may waive prosecution by information and consent to be prosecuted upon
the misdemeanor complaint. In such case, the defendant must be
required, either upon the date of the waiver or subsequent thereto, to
enter a plea to the misdemeanor complaint.

[Shuftin]

This is what you are referring to concerning giving the Court jurisdiction. This is from the great State of Georgia but it spells it out nicely.

Recordation and effect of plea of "not guilty" or of standing mute


If the person accused of committing a crime, upon being arraigned, pleads "not guilty" or stands mute, the clerk shall immediately record upon the minutes of the court the plea of "not guilty," together with the arraignment; and the arraignment and plea shall constitute the issue between the accused and the state

The arraignment and plea [together] shall constitute the issue between the accused and the state.

Appearance perfects the process i.e paperwork. Any errors in the process are made perfect by ones appearance. What is needed is an abatement. An abatement is not a challenge to the Court, it is a notice to the Court that there are errors in the process.

Long story short. An abatement informs the Court "Fix the errors in the process [paperwork] and I will show."

[David Merrill]

Good Church as one suitor coins, that disqualifies the entire exception. Look at .

BY simply pointed out that he had not yet plead. Genius!

[Binbokusai Yagyuu]

This is what you are referring to concerning giving the Court jurisdiction. .

Appearance perfects the process i.e paperwork. Any errors in the process are made perfect by ones appearance.

Thank You, brother Steve, for helping to make my point ...

[Anthony Joseph]

Is there a meaningful and/or consequential difference between:

"I have not plead anything"

and

"I am not here to plead"


Also, wouldn't, "I have not yet plead" be contrued as having an intent to plead in the future?

[Binbokusai Yagyuu]

there is a contumacious difference between the two

You are still missing the point

[Anthony Joseph]

there is a contumacious difference between the two

You are still missing the point

Well, don't hold out B' Yag; let me in on it.

[Binbokusai Yagyuu]

Shuftin
Shuftin is offline
Junior Member
This user has no status.

I am:
----

Shuftin's Avatar

Join Date
Jun 2011
Posts
22
Post Thanks / Like

This is what you are referring to concerning giving the Court jurisdiction. Appearance perfects the process i.e paperwork. Any errors in the process are made perfect by ones appearance. What is needed is an abatement. An abatement is not a challenge to the Court, it is a notice to the Court that there are errors in the process.

Long story short. An abatement informs the Court "Fix the errors in the process [paperwork] and I will show."

[Anthony Joseph]

So, "I have not plead anything" does not perfect jurisdiction and does not constitute appearance

but

"I am not here to plead" does?

[Binbokusai Yagyuu]

Any Appearance ..... perfects Jurisdiction

that means...

physical appearance

a mail in Plea

filing a Motion, other than a Motion to Dismiss for Want of Jurisdiction

hiring an Attorney