Evidence Repository

[Anthony Joseph]

The Libel of Review has quite an interesting history behind it, and as I have indicated elsewhere in the lesson plan area here, is remedy from the inherent One Form of Action (1938) manifesting itself in a general district admiralty style of process in America. For this segment of the lesson plan I am going to focus on the example Clerk Instruction found within the LoR.



The scenario I like to use is that after properly identifying yourself to a police officer; Officer, I am not showing you this driver license for identification purposes, I am only showing it to you to show you I am competent to operate a motor vehicle and I have a valid insurance policy to cover me. [There is more to learn about this in my thread about identity.] Most of the time, this will stop the officer from even writing the ticket. Especially if you understand to add; I need to get your name so that I can have you recall what I just said about my identity and driver license at trial. I want you to remember that I did not give you this driver license card for identification purposes. Now at the very least the police officer knows that in a few weeks he will be spending half a day in the courthouse hallway killing time waiting to be called in to testify; and if you have not harmed anybody he will likely give you a verbal warning and depart.

That aside though, let's pretend you get a speeding ticket. You should already know better than to write Refusal for Cause across it in great big letters and hand the clipboard back to the officer (an executive officer Goes Postal?). [However, when a suitor did one time the R4C was immediately in force, the officer returned ten minutes later with an identical presentment where he filled in "Refused" on the signature line and walked up to a few feet of the minivan driver window, sprinted forward and stuffed the Defendant's Copy of the Citation in, then ran back to his car.]

So now you have three days to Refuse for Cause the presentment. The procedure is to make it clear by writing Refusal for Cause with a red marker across the presentment and returning it to the officer's principal - the chief of police. In an honest world that's the end of it - no consent - no acquiescence. Check out the Court of Record thread.

It is unsafe to count on the chief of police to be honest. Who instructs clerks? Judges - courts of competent jurisdiction. So instruct the clerk. Instruct the clerk to file a copy of your R4C into your LoR and provide the chief of police with a copy of the Clerk Instruction. Now the chief of police knows all you need to do is run up to Denver (or wherever) and you can prove you exercised your right of refusal in a timely manner. The chief of police will be waiting at least three days to send the cause over to the courthouse, because he has to respect your right to R4C. Even if he sent it already though, if he fails to provide the court with your R4C he is obviously defrauding the court. If you can produce a copy for the chief of police, you can for the judge and court! [Who is keeping the record now? If the chief of police or clerk of court are fudging up the record but you have the US clerk of court keeping yours for you - then who has the authority of a court of record?]


Regards,

David Merrill.

I like the the simplicity of stating that the DL card is for competency purposes only and NOT as or for ID. This implies that it is the STATE that recognizes "competency" in the form of a DL and not you. You are just utilizing a tool of the modern era, out of necessity only, in order to keep the peace and avoid unnecessary roadside conflicts with ignorant and conditioned LEOs who expect to see a DL to stay in their "comfort zone". After all, they are armed with deadly weapons and trained to understand that everyone they encounter on the "roadways" is subject to their claimed jurisdiction. The inherent right and power to R4C any presentment from the LEO is how we exercise our authority, in our own right, to refuse contract novations (ticket, summons).

Another good trick is to get the LEO to write on the presentment itself that the DL was NOT presented as ID in the notes area. My wife actually had an LEO write that on a warning which was written after she told him that the DL card was NOT for ID but for competency purposes only. The claim was that she did not fully stop at a STOP sign. She also refused the request to give a phone number.



There it is right there as testimony from the LEO himself; DL WAS NOT USED FOR ID. If the officer refuses to write it, then you can right it in prior to signing the instrument. Either way, the instrument itself testifies to the truth.