1. Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
    Dismiss Notice
  2. There are no markets
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Week of 6/24/2017 Closing prices & Chg Over Last Wk---- Gold $1256.40 Silver $16.64 Oil $43.01 USD $96.94
  4. "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"
    Dismiss Notice

Driving while license suspended charge

Discussion in 'U.S. Constitution & Law' started by Goldhedge, Dec 31, 2017.



  1. Goldhedge

    Goldhedge Moderator Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    29,149
    Likes Received:
    33,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    I got this from a TaoOfLaw facebook page. Good info to comprehend. I suggest checking out their website.

    TaoOfLaw doesn't ascribe to any 'Patrinut' theories...

    Just a little bit of info to get you thinking and to give you all an idea of how the law works and using it against those who are using it against you! The 'law' they're using is Texas law, but all the states use pretty much the same law. You need to study your state laws to glean how it's done.




    Driving while license suspended charge
    Venson Cursey So I've been studying for a few years now on my own. 2017 was the first year I tried in force Law in the court. I won 4 out of 5 case til this one. (still going to court hearing) this judge bulldoze me in court when I speak or making a point so that I can't finish my statement then says I'm rude for cutting him off when speaking.

    Basic ignore my filings , county attorney does nothing but sit there well judge speaks for them.
    Any help would be great.

    John Handshy File a complaint against the judge for official oppression, malfeasance in office, obstruction of justice and bar grieve the judge against his/her surety bond. That should wake him/her up. Also demand that the judge recuse himself/herself and be removed from the bench.
    Venson Cursey Thank you so I filed one complaint on the judge after the first court date. I'm willing to do it again. Thank you for the complaint additions.
    I need some info on going after judges bond!
    I need some info on going after judges bond!
    Logan Bartley Denying you the right to present a defense
    Venson Cursey Damn it that's a good and was right in my face
    Tyler Hargrove easily how you can win also..​

    Bill Edward Y'know, from what you said, it sounds like the judge(?) was giving testimony from the bench or leading the witness, thus rendering the bench vacant at such moments. Get the audio from the courtroom if you're not allowed to do your own recording. It's better to use that one anyhow. Distressing the bond must be done right. Get help from a Notary.
    Venson Cursey I don't know anything about filing on judges bond.
    Anything I can read about this?
    Bill Edward - Venson Cursey I've never done it either. You need to do some serious Texas research.
    Venson Cursey I will continue to study and research law.
    Venson Cursey Looking for a group in Austin that want to meet and study and teach each other.
    Bill Edward Venson Cursey Wonderful idea. I'm working with that in northern Arizona. Damned small group in a damned small town, but we don't have much problem with anyone but our know it all JP and some ignorant cops. I'm on first name basis with our sheriff and local Chief of Police, and our county attorney is a face book friend that I've gone riding with. I still would expect them to do what they do, go after the revenue and control, so I go for the preparation. Defense attorneys and persecuters may be drinking buddies that try to kill each other in court. At least I don't have to put up with the crappola of the state capitol and I've heard that Austin is a real bummer in that respect. If I were to move to Texas, I'd go to Vega, a little hick town 30 west of Amarrilo. Good luck with your case.
    Tao of LawGroup Admin This is why I am in the process of getting my legal due process class into an online class.

    Bill Edward - You have an incorrect understanding of what the judge was actually doing. The judge was neither testifying nor leading the witness, as I see nothing in the comments that suggests a witness, which would be the cop or the defendant in this case, was on the stand and providing testimony from what I read.

    What the judge WAS doing was failing to be fair and impartial, acting on behalf of the prosecuting from the bench, being discourteous and abusive, and refusing to allow the Accused to speak on their own behalf in their defense. Not only do these things violate the Code of Judicial Conduct, the first and last ones ALSO violate the Texas Bill of Rights under Art. 1, Sec. 10, and Art. 1.05 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

    Combined, these acts become violations of Penal Code Secs. Sec. 39.02. ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY and Sec. 39.03. OFFICIAL OPPRESSION.

    John Handshy - The "straw man," "all caps name," and "birth certificate" bullshit is all Patrinut myth, which I have refuted numerous times because there is no substantiating evidence that shows them to be true. This has nothing to do with straw, how you name is spelled, or how it was written on a piece of paper, and everything to do with the individual/object being ASSUMED as voluntarily acting/being in the LEGAL CAPACITY of a legal person/object rather then PROVEN to be such, i.e. as a "driver," "operator," "person," "commercial/ motor/ vehicle." This is NOT a "straw man," it is an act of unlawfully and unconstitutionally substituting facts and evidence with mere unsubstantiated legal presumptions.

    These unsubstantiated PRESUMPTIONS of CAPACITY (UNPROVEN because there is no actual EVIDENCE), is what they are using to box people into their allegations. While some want to argue that "straw man" is simply another way to say "capacity" or "legal person," I disagree, because the arguments are usually such that they are insisting there has been a substitution/replacement for the 'real/natural' man, which is NOT the case. They are ASSUMING that the natural man has AGREED/CONSENTED to personally participate in the regulatory scheme in one or more of these legal capacities and then they act upon that consent.

    This is proven by the knowledge that a "license" of ANY KIND is a nothing more than "PERMISSION to do what would otherwise be illegal without the license." If you want a license, you MUST first VOLUNTARILY APPLY (i.e. CONSENT) to be subject to the rules and regulations that come with the exercise of the privilege associated with the permission that IS the license, which is what PERMITS you to step into or to place your property within the role of one or more of these legal capacities.

    The same bullshit goes for the "all caps name" and "birth certificate"arguments. Don't be spreading the disinformation that is any of those Patrinut myths in this group. We are here to teach or learn LAW, not be misinformed and mislead with incorrect understandings of both how things actually work and the law itself. Don't be one of those that has had to learn this the hard way. If no other admin has done so, then consider this your first warning and strike within the group. If you cannot provide verifiable and correct information in reference to something you are stating as a FACT, or even a theoretical fact, then DON'T be posting it in this group at all.
    Bill Edward - You have an incorrect understanding of what the judge was actually doing. The judge was neither testifying nor leading the witness, as I see nothing in the comments that suggests a witness, which would be the cop or the defendant in this case, was on the stand and providing testimony from what I read.

    What the judge WAS doing was failing to be fair and impartial, acting on behalf of the prosecuting from the bench, being discourteous and abusive, and refusing to allow the Accused to speak on their own behalf in their defense. Not only do these things violate the Code of Judicial Conduct, the first and last ones ALSO violate the Texas Bill of Rights under Art. 1, Sec. 10, and Art. 1.05 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

    Combined, these acts become violations of Penal Code Secs. Sec. 39.02. ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY and Sec. 39.03. OFFICIAL OPPRESSION.

    John Handshy - The "straw man," "all caps name," and "birth certificate" bullshit is all Patrinut myth, which I have refuted numerous times because there is no substantiating evidence that shows them to be true. This has nothing to do with straw, how you name is spelled, or how it was written on a piece of paper, and everything to do with the individual/object being ASSUMED as voluntarily acting/being in the LEGAL CAPACITY of a legal person/object rather then PROVEN to be such, i.e. as a "driver," "operator," "person," "commercial/ motor/ vehicle." This is NOT a "straw man," it is an act of unlawfully and unconstitutionally substituting facts and evidence with mere unsubstantiated legal presumptions.

    These unsubstantiated PRESUMPTIONS of CAPACITY (UNPROVEN because there is no actual EVIDENCE), is what they are using to box people into their allegations. While some want to argue that "straw man" is simply another way to say "capacity" or "legal person," I disagree, because the arguments are usually such that they are insisting there has been a substitution/replacement for the 'real/natural' man, which is NOT the case. They are ASSUMING that the natural man has AGREED/CONSENTED to personally participate in the regulatory scheme in one or more of these legal capacities and then they act upon that consent.

    This is proven by the knowledge that a "license" of ANY KIND is a nothing more than "PERMISSION to do what would otherwise be illegal without the license." If you want a license, you MUST first VOLUNTARILY APPLY (i.e. CONSENT) to be subject to the rules and regulations that come with the exercise of the privilege associated with the permission that IS the license, which is what PERMITS you to step into or to place your property within the role of one or more of these legal capacities.

    The same bullshit goes for the "all caps name" and "birth certificate"arguments. Don't be spreading the disinformation that is any of those Patrinut myths in this group. We are here to teach or learn LAW, not be misinformed and mislead with incorrect understandings of both how things actually work and the law itself. Don't be one of those that has had to learn this the hard way. If no other admin has done so, then consider this your first warning and strike within the group. If you cannot provide verifiable and correct information in reference to something you are stating as a FACT, or even a theoretical fact, then DON'T be posting it in this group at all.
    What the judge WAS doing was failing to be fair and impartial, acting on behalf of the prosecuting from the bench, being discourteous and abusive, and refusing to allow the Accused to speak on their own behalf in their defense. Not only do these things violate the Code of Judicial Conduct, the first and last ones ALSO violate the Texas Bill of Rights under Art. 1, Sec. 10, and Art. 1.05 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
    Combined, these acts become violations of Penal Code Secs. Sec. 39.02. ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY and Sec. 39.03. OFFICIAL OPPRESSION.
    John Handshy - The "straw man," "all caps name," and "birth certificate" bullshit is all Patrinut myth, which I have refuted numerous times because there is no substantiating evidence that shows them to be true. This has nothing to do with straw, how you name is spelled, or how it was written on a piece of paper, and everything to do with the individual/object being ASSUMED as voluntarily acting/being in the LEGAL CAPACITY of a legal person/object rather then PROVEN to be such, i.e. as a "driver," "operator," "person," "commercial/ motor/ vehicle." This is NOT a "straw man," it is an act of unlawfully and unconstitutionally substituting facts and evidence with mere unsubstantiated legal presumptions.
    These unsubstantiated PRESUMPTIONS of CAPACITY (UNPROVEN because there is no actual EVIDENCE), is what they are using to box people into their allegations. While some want to argue that "straw man" is simply another way to say "capacity" or "legal person," I disagree, because the arguments are usually such that they are insisting there has been a substitution/replacement for the 'real/natural' man, which is NOT the case. They are ASSUMING that the natural man has AGREED/CONSENTED to personally participate in the regulatory scheme in one or more of these legal capacities and then they act upon that consent.
    This is proven by the knowledge that a "license" of ANY KIND is a nothing more than "PERMISSION to do what would otherwise be illegal without the license." If you want a license, you MUST first VOLUNTARILY APPLY (i.e. CONSENT) to be subject to the rules and regulations that come with the exercise of the privilege associated with the permission that IS the license, which is what PERMITS you to step into or to place your property within the role of one or more of these legal capacities.
    The same bullshit goes for the "all caps name" and "birth certificate"arguments. Don't be spreading the disinformation that is any of those Patrinut myths in this group. We are here to teach or learn LAW, not be misinformed and mislead with incorrect understandings of both how things actually work and the law itself. Don't be one of those that has had to learn this the hard way. If no other admin has done so, then consider this your first warning and strike within the group. If you cannot provide verifiable and correct information in reference to something you are stating as a FACT, or even a theoretical fact, then DON'T be posting it in this group at all.
    Bill Edward - Tao of Law Thank you very much. I stand gratefully corrected. Yeah, I want to see your course v2.0 ASAP. I continue to study and dispel all the crap I picked up before I ran into you, eg. All caps name, use of zip codes, etc, ad infinitum, ad nauseum and I still take a good dope slap quite often. Notice of a couple of "likes" just popped up. Thanks for that as well. (Can't lose them all [​IMG]:-) )​

    John Handshy Also don’t forget that you never had a ‘drivers license’ as your STRAWMAN had it all along. That is your name in all caps. All you did is sign your birth name as ‘agent’ for the STRAWMAN. No State can make a right to travel into a privilege. See the 10th Amendment US. This is why they created the STRAWMAN in order to deceive you. Also to make you surety for the national debt.

    Bill Edward That doesn't matter. DON'T GO THERE Fer Gawd's sake! That's a patrinut argument if ever there was one. Sort of like the gold fringed flag argument.
    Logan Bartley Yes, STEER CLEAR of the "strawman" and "ALL CAPS" patrinut mythology stuff. Your remedy IS in the law, and especially the rules of procedure. Use THEIR OWN RULES against them.
    Bill Edward I also suggest you go to "Rule of Law Radio" and check the archives blog, especially Eddie's Night. That's where the meat of knowledge is. It's ok to be on milk for awhile, but don't stay there. You may lose a few times, but after awhile you'll get the hang of it. Don't be discouraged when it get s rough.
    Venson Cursey I have been working with Randy from r.o.l. radio on my filings. Paperwork in order I believe that's why I've had three resets. I have not asked for any resets.
    John Handshy - Logan Bartley I would suggest that you study the LAW on the STRAWMAN issue as it is a valid issue because it is found in the LAW not in my opinion. Please explain to me why the department of transportation issues all licenses in all caps and you sign for the contract as agent?
    Logan Bartley - John Handshy BULLSHIT
    Logan Bartley I went down that road and chased that rabbit YEARS ago, and it is all baloney. It is not a valid issue, it is not found in the law and it IS your opinion based upon wildly spread internet myths, many of which are probably BAIT set out by prosecutors to get fools to chase and waste their time and make for an easy slam against when such fools show up in court trying to use it.
    Venson Cursey I have researched both lines of defense. I haven't found any wins with the all caps agruement . John I'm not knocking the method just can't find meat on this bone. I have at least been keeping them on their toes. I need to find a clear path to a nerve ending to stop this judge.
    Bill Edward - John Handshy I'm just going to quote Eddie Craig on this. "I've said it a thousand times, it doesn't matter! There are many reasons for it, all are legitimate." (My guess is readability is near the top) Putting your name in all caps on their documents doesn't matter and if it did, they don't care. It's a moot issue. Stay with the relevant.
    Venson Cursey Not knocking you
    John Handshy I just need more facts I know this has more to do you your UcC filing.
    but I can't find any case law to back it up
    Roger Joiner - John Handshy... it is not a contract ....it does NOT meet ANY requirements of a contract....
    John Handshy - Roger Joiner actually whenever you sign your name on a document it is a contract and is generally used in commerce.
    John Handshy - Venson Cursey check out the documents on familyguardian.Net for legal understanding of STRAWMAN.
    Bill Edward - John Handshy May be contractual in nature, as in contract, covenant, compact, or agreement. Each has a unique meaning. (Business law 101 in community or junior college)
    Roger Joiner https://taooflaw.wordpress.com/2016...ving-corrupt-government-and-apathetic-people/
    [​IMG]
    Patrinuts – A short course on expediting your federal conviction…
    TAOOFLAW.WORDPRESS.COM
    Roger Joiner https://taooflaw.wordpress.com/2016...ving-corrupt-government-and-apathetic-people/
    [​IMG]
    Do You Suffer From PatriNUT Allergies?
    I keep encountering the same demonstrably…
    TAOOFLAW.WORDPRESS.COM
    John Handshy - Bill Edward that’s true
    Bill Edward - John Handshy thank you for agreeing with a college text book and a professor that was also a practicing lawyer. He would probably have said that he didn't need his students to agree, the judge in a court would take care of that for him.
    Jeff Savage Special appearance first off.
    Venson Cursey Check done
    Jeff Savage File a discovery motion ASAP. Looking for the complaint, most of the time it's missing. Btw the ticket cannot be both as per rules of civil procedure.
    Logan Bartley If this is in Texas, then it would be rules of criminal procedure, not civil procedure.
    Venson Cursey It is Texas and all the motions you mentioned have been filled and filed.
    Jeff Savage Motion for defective process.
    Venson Cursey Do you have a template ?
    Venson Cursey As for the complaint the officer filed a additional paper as the description of what happened didn't not provide a articulable probable cause or a good reason for the stop
    Jeff Savage - Tao Lauw might have one.
    D. Wesley Leek Texas Penal Code 48.01B, and also Texas Administrative Code Title 37 Ch. 4.13. These you can also use to sue in Federal Court if you get that far.
    Rick Martin Great points
    Roger Joiner I take the ticket is from a Texas officer.....so the question is what do you know about Texas transportation code and the criminal rules of procedure????......and wheres the video???

    Bill Edward Roger, you often make assumptions that may/may not be true. Where has he stated or hinted where he is? I, for example, have no need for the Texas transportation code, but might be interested in my state's. You do that often sir. Do not assume.
    Roger Joiner I don't make assumptions....facebook account says he lives in Austin... I only go off of what is presented....since he has made really no effort in giving out very much information im just trying to figger out the rest of the facts in which to better be able to help....does no good to give help if the person doesnt understand or knows whats going on without having done ANY study ....besides there is a search bar for this group....did you think the questions havent already been asked with no help offered before....not my job to do all the work...its just to fill in the areas in which he doesnt has thought of yet....we are NOT here to argue his case for him we are here to help fill in the blank spots.....its all him/her to decide what is best for them...it takes time to understand law if not willing to take the time then they are wasting our time...just pay the ticket and learn from the expericence so they are better prepared for the next time .....cause there will be a next time.....
    Bill Edward - Roger Joiner I missed the facebook account angle. You try too hard to sound like Eddie but fall short. Damn, your windy.
    Venson Cursey I'm at work now, that why I'm not replying quick. Yes I'm in Texas yes I'm reading criminal code of procedures. Like I said earlier a lot of things y'all bringing up i have said.
    Venson Cursey I haven't been on this group long so I don't know about the search bar ( i will take advantage of it) . Randy suggest I get on here to converse with liked minded human. Since I work two jobs it can be hard to study or catch rule of law radio. But I'm make effort to study every day.
    Like chess we must prepare for the unknown.
    Like chess we must prepare for the unknown.
    Claud S McKelroy Get the TuneIn app pro version. It costs less than $5 if I remember correctly. You can set it to record rule of law radio, which is what I do. Then you can listen at your leasure. It will only allow you schedule one program, but you can set.it to record on different days. I have mine set to record 4 hours starting at 8pm on Mon, Thurs, and Fri.
    Bill Edward - Claud S McKelroy That's what I need. Does it work on all or multiple platforms or just android or ????
    Claud S McKelroy
    [​IMG]
    Bill Edward Thank you. I googled it and got something on the Windows store that's free, but I don't think it's the right one. Well.....maybe.
    Claud S McKelroy TuneIn is free but you can't record. The pro version is what you need to record.​

    Darren DeLeon Recuse him. If a judge proceeds without jurisdiction, he willfully waives any immunity from civil liability. see: Stump v. Sparkman, 2 prong test...

    Venson Cursey Judge said surpme court doesn't matter that only Texas appellate court was the highest ruling I can use
    Darren DeLeon He is full of crap
    Venson Cursey Hahahhahaa, I know he is. But how do I bust him on record
    Darren DeLeon All goes to jurisdiction. Read that case...should give you some ideas.
    Venson Cursey My homework tonight
    Tyler Hargrove Supreme Court is original jurisdiction in almost all cases
    Venson Cursey I know. Image my surprise when he said something so outlandish
    Tyler Hargrove you just need his dumbass on the record. it should be treason to lie to the public. that is, in my opinion, the one rule that would fix everything.​

    Venson Cursey Off work in a bit will answer more question. Just wanted to see what y'all would say

    Jeff Savage You can't make an informed plea. Everything is not there. That's where ya hit them.

    Venson Cursey They can't find the tape of the stop
    Bill Edward Oh my! (That and bull shit.) They don't WANT to find the video. Oh, how I wish I were there as a fly on the wall.​

    Roger Joiner where is your video of the stop???...you did video the stop right???

    Roger Joiner you did ask if the officer had a bodycam or a dashcam....right??....and if they were turned on...right??...and that they were in working condition....right???...should have been some of the first questions YOU ask the officer...and it was all on video...right???

    Roger Joiner otherwise what facts and evidence do you have???

    Venson Cursey Thank you everyone for the input. I knew going into this it wasn't going to be easy. I'm not looking for quick fix I want to learn this and apply it to my core. Any information given to me will be research before I apply it unless it's something I've forgotten. In three different motion hearings went for 3 hours of basically the judge and I going back and forward. County attorney only speaking when the judge ask her to speak. They keep asking for a continuous and seem they don't read any of my motion til the day of court.
    Jeff Savage You could use an old tactic I've heard is very successful, go after the DA for not doing his job. Sounds like the judge is legislating from the bench.​

    Logan Bartley If they keep asking for a continuance, you can object, stating you have all your stuff together and were ready to go, and if the prosecution wasn't ready, especially if they've already had one or two previous continuances, then motion for dismissal for lack of prosecution.
    Bill Edward Timely prosecution. Did you waive time on speedy trial? That can be done by responding or appearing after time has run out. Still might be recoverable by refusing to do it again. ???
    Venson Cursey Explain?
    Logan Bartley You have a "right to speedy trial"... the definition of "speedy" isn't exactly spelled out, so there's some wiggle room, but if they are obviously delaying the proceeding by multiple requests for continuance, AND if you did not accidentally waive your right to speedy trial by failing to object to their motions for continuance (and maybe some other sneaky tricks they might have done), then you might can motion for dismissal for lack of timely prosecution. Even if they deny your motion, at least you get it on record and could help later if you need to appeal.
    Venson Cursey Looks like I may have to appeal. But I'm going swing every bit I know.
    Bill Edward - Logan Bartley In California it's 45 days. I think Arizona is the same, but I need to confirm. I've thrown a few cases out because the att'y for the plaintiff failed to prosecute timely. What a fiasco that can be. Persecutor and judge tried to override the dismissal for cause, made by motion in open court. I just stood up and walked out. Not the right way to do it, but I got the letter of dismissal from the clerk in a few days.​

    Roger Joiner another question for you...what type of license is supposedly suspended??
    Roger Joiner you do know what the only types of license there are for Texas.....right???
    Venson Cursey Commercial license
    Roger Joiner thats only one type.....what are the others??
    Venson Cursey Guess the different class A and endorsements
    Roger Joiner nope....learner's permit...temporary permit....and commercial......that's it ....which one is for people not in commerce???....none of them......so did you apply for a commercial license???...no....then what license is suspended???....make the state prove you had any of three 3 types of license???..........
    Roger Joiner TRANSPORTATION CODE

    TITLE 7. VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC
    SUBTITLE B. DRIVER'S LICENSES AND PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION CARDS
    CHAPTER 521. DRIVER'S LICENSES AND CERTIFICATES
    SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Sec. 521.001. DEFINITIONS. (a) In this chapter:

    (1) "Correctional facility" means:
    (A) a place described by Section 1.07(a)(14), Penal Code; or
    (B) a secure correctional facility or secure detention facility, as defined by Section 51.02, Family Code.
    (1-a) "Department" means the Department of Public Safety.
    (2) "Director" means the public safety director.
    (3) "Driver's license" means an authorization issued by the department for the operation of a motor vehicle. The term includes:

    (A) a temporary license or learner license; and
    (B) an occupational license.​
    Venson Cursey I didn't think of the other two as a licence since the term permit was used.​
    Venson Cursey When I challenged subject matter jurisdiction the four time the Judge said the laws in question are filed here in the affidavit present by C. A.
    And that gives me jurisdiction. If you don't like it then take it up with the people making laws nor here in my court.
    Roger Joiner not here to challenge subject matter but to challenge in personam jurisdiction
    Venson Cursey OK , got to which gears a little. I have been challenging subject matter
    Roger Joiner subject matter is about is there a law....and yes there is one otherwise you butt wouldn't be court ....but the question as to whether or not that law applies to you is in personam....thats what you challenge
    Joe Nie I try to always object to any of the Prosecutor's remarks.
    I object to him speaking!

    When asked why I object I simply state that he has no standing here for I have received nor seen any statement, nor even heard any evidence that he is the complainant or even that he has any representative rights endowed to him by the complainant.

    However, I will give him this opportunity and I will end this case by pleading no lo contendre if he:
    Gives a written statement that I was driving and that he swears under Penalty of Perjury and Forfeiture of Bond (both of his bond and the Prosecutors' office bond) that he knows that I was legally driving and is holding no exculpatory evidence from this good court.
    I object to him speaking!
    When asked why I object I simply state that he has no standing here for I have received nor seen any statement, nor even heard any evidence that he is the complainant or even that he has any representative rights endowed to him by the complainant.

    However, I will give him this opportunity and I will end this case by pleading no lo contendre if he:
    Gives a written statement that I was driving and that he swears under Penalty of Perjury and Forfeiture of Bond (both of his bond and the Prosecutors' office bond) that he knows that I was legally driving and is holding no exculpatory evidence from this good court.
    However, I will give him this opportunity and I will end this case by pleading no lo contendre if he:
    Gives a written statement that I was driving and that he swears under Penalty of Perjury and Forfeiture of Bond (both of his bond and the Prosecutors' office bond) that he knows that I was legally driving and is holding no exculpatory evidence from this good court.
    Tao of LawGroup Admin You have to challenge BOTH subject matter AND personal jurisdiction.

    Subject matter jurisdiction necessarily REQUIRES the existence of not only personal jurisdiction, but ALSO that the subject matter be applicable to that 'person,' which "transportation" is NOT when that individual is acting in their private non-commercial capacity.

    Be aware Venson Cursey that Randall Kelton is my co-host on "Rule of Law Radio" and the information that he is providing to you is coming from everything he and I have put together on this subject and process over the years. He is even using my seminar material to build his online legal pleading generator.

    One thing I have not seen so far, or may have just missed, is what KIND of court are we dealing with here, municipal or justice of the peace? I can only assume the latter since you mentioned the county attorney, but I would like to be certain.
    Subject matter jurisdiction necessarily REQUIRES the existence of not only personal jurisdiction, but ALSO that the subject matter be applicable to that 'person,' which "transportation" is NOT when that individual is acting in their private non-commercial capacity.

    Be aware Venson Cursey that Randall Kelton is my co-host on "Rule of Law Radio" and the information that he is providing to you is coming from everything he and I have put together on this subject and process over the years. He is even using my seminar material to build his online legal pleading generator.

    One thing I have not seen so far, or may have just missed, is what KIND of court are we dealing with here, municipal or justice of the peace? I can only assume the latter since you mentioned the county attorney, but I would like to be certain.
    Be aware Venson Cursey that Randall Kelton is my co-host on "Rule of Law Radio" and the information that he is providing to you is coming from everything he and I have put together on this subject and process over the years. He is even using my seminar material to build his online legal pleading generator.
    One thing I have not seen so far, or may have just missed, is what KIND of court are we dealing with here, municipal or justice of the peace? I can only assume the latter since you mentioned the county attorney, but I would like to be certain.
    Venson Cursey TRAVIS County Court 3​

    Venson Cursey Judges favorite statement driving is a privilege. You can travel all you want to but not in a car on Texas roads
    Tyler Hargrove where is case law going either way? Driving is a privilege, travel is a right.
    Tyler Hargrove Texas doesnt own the roads, they are common highways.
    Roger Joiner not being charged with traveling......
    Venson Cursey This judge stated that Texas owns the road.
    I objected. Judge yells you can object all you want to but there is nothing more to hear. Your motion to dismiss is deny
    I objected. Judge yells you can object all you want to but there is nothing more to hear. Your motion to dismiss is deny
    Bill Edward - Venson Cursey The roads are ultimately owned by the people and that's a quote from a high court. Been trying to find that one again. Meanwhile, the question I have for the corrupt revenue officer (judge) is whether the state has a claim against the people or the people against the state. There was some limited success in Komiefornia by a Mr.John Russel asking, "Is that a judicial determination?" when the judge would make such rediculous statements that were so patently false or misleading. It's getting late and I need my beauty rest (?????) but I want to wish you well. Hope you've been helped or at least poked in the right direction. Just remember that a JP is not a judicial officer, at least not here in arizona. His jurisdiction is very limited.
    Venson Cursey Thank you Bill. All is helpful. Had it find some people that understand what I'm saying evening we don't always agree it still helps.
    Jeff Savage Driving is for profit. Make them prove you was getting paid to drive.....
    Tao of LawGroup Admin “The judge’s favorite statement during my court appearance was that “Driving is a privilege. You can travel all you want to, but not in a car on Texas roads.”

    You have to realize that what the judge is doing right there is what is called MAKING A CONCLUSION OF LAW, which you have EVERY right to demand that s/he does IN WRITING so as to preserve the record for appeal. We do this by raising an objection to the act, "Objection! Judge, you are making an unsubstantiated conclusion of law based solely upon your opinion, which I have a right to object to and challenge both now and on appeal as being an incorrect interpretation and conclusion of the actual law relevant to this matter. Therefore, I move that you state said conclusion IN WRITING with a signed order so as to properly preserve the record for the appellate court and my right of appeal, which you are duty-bound to do."

    Now, WHEN the judge refuses to do this, and they WILL, you have extremely strong substantial grounds to seek their immediate disqualification from the case AND dismissal from their judicial position for obstruction of justice, denying you in your right to access the courts, including the appellate courts, tampering with and falsifying a government record (the case file and the appellate record), tampering with evidence/testimony AND a fact witness, practicing law from the bench, prejudice and bias, judicial incompetence, and general stupidity while cross-dressing and impersonating a competent judicial officer. All of which are "high crimes and misdemeanors" under Penal Code Secs. 39.02 and 39.02.
    You have to realize that what the judge is doing right there is what is called MAKING A CONCLUSION OF LAW, which you have EVERY right to demand that s/he does IN WRITING so as to preserve the record for appeal. We do this by raising an objection to the act, "Objection! Judge, you are making an unsubstantiated conclusion of law based solely upon your opinion, which I have a right to object to and challenge both now and on appeal as being an incorrect interpretation and conclusion of the actual law relevant to this matter. Therefore, I move that you state said conclusion IN WRITING with a signed order so as to properly preserve the record for the appellate court and my right of appeal, which you are duty-bound to do."

    Now, WHEN the judge refuses to do this, and they WILL, you have extremely strong substantial grounds to seek their immediate disqualification from the case AND dismissal from their judicial position for obstruction of justice, denying you in your right to access the courts, including the appellate courts, tampering with and falsifying a government record (the case file and the appellate record), tampering with evidence/testimony AND a fact witness, practicing law from the bench, prejudice and bias, judicial incompetence, and general stupidity while cross-dressing and impersonating a competent judicial officer. All of which are "high crimes and misdemeanors" under Penal Code Secs. 39.02 and 39.02.
    Now, WHEN the judge refuses to do this, and they WILL, you have extremely strong substantial grounds to seek their immediate disqualification from the case AND dismissal from their judicial position for obstruction of justice, denying you in your right to access the courts, including the appellate courts, tampering with and falsifying a government record (the case file and the appellate record), tampering with evidence/testimony AND a fact witness, practicing law from the bench, prejudice and bias, judicial incompetence, and general stupidity while cross-dressing and impersonating a competent judicial officer. All of which are "high crimes and misdemeanors" under Penal Code Secs. 39.02 and 39.02.
    Roger Joiner - Tao of Law ...there's a law against stupidity??....lmao
    Tao of LawGroup Admin - Roger Joiner - There is when it's being perpetrated by a public servant from within their official capacity.
    Venson Cursey Thank you for this information. As I said before this is my 5th court battle and the first time the Judge has given me this much trouble.
    Venson Cursey - Tao Lauw I wanted to ask can you point me in the direction of the codes that give a municipality to enforce transportation code? missed your show about this topic and I'd like to add this to my defense
    Tao of LawGroup Admin - Venson Cursey - The ONLY places that speak directly to a municipalities ability to have municipal police officers certified to enforce the Texas "Transportation" Code are found in the Texas Administrative Code, NOT the "Transportation" Code.

    Start here, especially within §1.2 as to what the "Mission" is, and then look at §§1.3-1.5 to see what programs are specific to that "mission":

    http://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=37&pt=1&ch=1&sch=A&rl=Y

    Then here, especially §4.13:

    http://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=37&pt=1&ch=4&sch=B&rl=Y

    Then you can go here and read up in Chapters 15, 16, 17, 21, 23, and 25 for more details about each of the programs specifically, if you are so inclined.

    http://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=3&ti=37&pt=1

    [​IMG]
    Texas Administrative Code
    TEXREG.SOS.STATE.TX.US
    Casey Schulze - Venson Cursey texas owns the roads? ok well who owns texas? we do!!... besides texas does not own the roads, they are simply appointed by us as its caretaker, nothing more.
    Venson Cursey I know Casey Schulze. Just stating how the judge is trying to spin me. We word battled for more tan two hours til the judge said he need a reset to research something.​

    Roger Joiner he was right ....driving is a privilege....it can also be regulated....and yes you can travel anywhere.....and the last part is where he is wrong....laws says otherwise
    Venson Cursey Agreed Roger. He only would cut me off from speaking when I said anything other than what he wanted to hear.
    Roger Joiner why didnt you direct your questions to the DA
    Roger Joiner excuse me your honor, but isn't that what the prosecutor is supposed to be proving???....then why isn't he proving anything???
    Venson Cursey All questions were towards
    C. A. (she sent there with her head in her hands saying nothing) Judge would reply or cut me off from speaking
    C. A. (she sent there with her head in her hands saying nothing) Judge would reply or cut me off from speaking
    Roger Joiner objection i would like a answer from the DA
    Roger Joiner and Bill Edward is correct then ....Bill Edward Y'know, from what you said, it sounds like the judge(?) was giving testimony from the bench or leading the witness, thus rendering the bench vacant at such moments
    Bill Edward Roger Joiner I knew we'd find common ground. We just have different styles of trying to "help" without doing their homework for them. I tossed this stuff around a lot while in california, starting in the '80's. A lot of patrinut water went under my bridge. Just wish we'd had an Eddie back then and there. Traffic cases worked out not so well, but other civil matters generally went well for me, especially those brought against me by code enforcement beaurocrats. I love those people, they're very entertaining. [​IMG]:-)
    Bill Edward Venson Cursey Judge, are you denying me my right to free speech and/or my right to be heard? That was a late afterthought. Just don't get into contempt territory.
    Jeff Savage Leading the witness, I object. Make sure it's notes in the record for when and if you have to appeal.
    Casey Schulze where is he wrong? in the fact that he is presuming that traveling in a car is "driving"... by his own required code, that is not true at all.
    Jeff Savage Assumptions that's where.
    Roger Joiner you have read this ....right????....
    [​IMG]
    Texas – How to Disqualify a Bad Judge
    How do you go about getting rid of a bad or corrupt municipal or justice court judge? It’s not really as…
    TAOOFLAW.WORDPRESS.COM
    Venson Cursey No, I haven't . It will be my next read after this case I'm in now
    Bill Edward Venson Cursey Don't wait unless you have to.​

    Joe Nie Sue him and the prosecutor and the cop for testifying in court that you were driving?
    They gave false testimony which means that they can be convicted of perjury and barratry and possibly treason.

    Rick Martin This is a good program to build from..
    https://www.howtowinincourt.com/FrameSet.cfm?mTitle=QStartHere

    How to Win in Court
    Every case, civil or criminal, is won or lost by proving or disproving what we lawyers call "essential fact…
    HOWTOWININCOURT.COM

    Tao of LawGroup Admin This is why I am in the process of getting my legal due process class into an online class.
    Bill Edward - You have an incorrect understanding of what the judge was actually doing. The judge was neither testifying nor leading the witness, as I see nothing in the comments that suggests a witness, which would be the cop or the defendant in this case, was on the stand and providing testimony from what I read.

    What the judge WAS doing was failing to be fair and impartial, acting on behalf of the prosecuting from the bench, being discourteous and abusive, and refusing to allow the Accused to speak on their own behalf in their defense. Not only do these things violate the Code of Judicial Conduct, the first and last ones ALSO violate the Texas Bill of Rights under Art. 1, Sec. 10, and Art. 1.05 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

    Combined, these acts become violations of Penal Code Secs. Sec. 39.02. ABUSE OF OFFICIAL CAPACITY and Sec. 39.03. OFFICIAL OPPRESSION.

    John Handshy - The "straw man," "all caps name," and "birth certificate" bullshit is all Patrinut myth, which I have refuted numerous times because there is no substantiating evidence that shows them to be true, unless you plan to be the one to finally produce that evidence and it is irrefutable correct, which I doubt. This has nothing to do with straw, how your name is spelled (unless it is just plainly the wrong name altogether), or in what letter-case it was written on a piece of paper, and everything to do with the individual/object being ASSUMED as voluntarily acting/being in the LEGAL CAPACITY of a legal person/object rather then PROVEN to be such, i.e. as a "driver," "operator," "person," "commercial/ motor/ vehicle." This is NOT a "straw man," it is simply a dishonest act of unlawfully and unconstitutionally substituting facts and evidence with mere unsubstantiated legal presumptions and conclusions.

    These unsubstantiated PRESUMPTIONS of CAPACITY (UNPROVEN because there is no actual EVIDENCE), is what they are using to box people into their allegations. While some want to argue that "straw man" is simply another way to say "capacity" or "legal person," I disagree, because the arguments are usually such that they are insisting there has been a substitution/replacement for the 'real/natural' man, which is NOT the case. They are ASSUMING that the natural man has AGREED/CONSENTED to personally participate in the regulatory scheme by KNOWINGLY AND WILLFULLY ACTING in one or more of these legal capacities by means of that consent.

    This is proven by the knowledge that a "license" of ANY KIND is nothing more than "PERMISSION to do that which would otherwise be illegal without the license." If you want a license, you MUST first VOLUNTARILY APPLY (i.e. CONSENT) to be subject to the rules and regulations that come with the exercise of the privilege associated with the permission that IS the license, which is what PERMITS you to step into or to place your property within the role of one or more of these legal capacities.

    The same bullshit goes for the "all caps name" and "birth certificate"arguments. Don't be spreading the disinformation that is any of those Patrinut myths in this group. We are here to teach or learn LAW, not be misinformed and mislead with incorrect understandings of both how things actually work and the law itself. Don't be one of those that has had to learn this the hard way. If no other admin has done so, then consider this your first warning and strike within the group. If you cannot provide verifiable and correct information in reference to something you are stating as a FACT, or even a theoretical fact, then DON'T be posting it in this group at all.​

    Casey Schulze you should be objecting to his statements and the grounds of (legal presumption) :based on no facts or evidence presented by the prosecution: then when he stops you, you simply file for "disqualificication of the bench"

    Casey Schulze Also take notice of Eddie's comment. Notice when he said "Objection Judge"... anyone notice something there?.... he did not say "you're honor"... in my opinion this serves a very important purpose.. because the so called Judge has no honor and deserves none, if they are even really a "judge" at all. Therefore, never address them as You're honor because they are not entitled to it.

    Venson Cursey Just another man to me. They don't scare me and going to jail doesn't scare me. I never call them judge or your honor. Sir and ma'am because that's what we do in the south no other reason. But we are getting off topic. I want to learn the law so well it comes to mind like waking up.
     
  2. GOLDBRIX

    GOLDBRIX God,Donald Trump,most in GIM2 I Trust. OTHERS-meh Site Supporter Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2010
    Messages:
    5,879
    Likes Received:
    5,758
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A late lawyer and golfing buddy of mine once told me "One of the first things a defense lawyer learns is - You are obligated to advocate for your defendant as vigorously as you are able. Do Not Break the Law, but you can push the line just do not break it".
    He also would say " Law is Like golf the Line moves".

    Of course he also said " Defendants are like golfers, Always improving their lie". ;-)
    You duffers know what I mean.

    Reads like this judge is a "pusher of the line".

    RIP Jim, "Tee it High and Let it Fly". I miss ya buddy.
     
  3. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    Holie cow pies that was redundantly blasted into my brain. Is this how or is that how faceplant posts peoples messages or is it just a conversion glitch?
     
  4. Goldhedge

    Goldhedge Moderator Site Mgr Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2010
    Messages:
    29,149
    Likes Received:
    33,760
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    Sometimes yes, the posts get convoluted a bit. Best to go to the taooflaw website and listen in.
     
    michael59 likes this.
  5. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    I did. You know I just might call them guys up and bend everyone's ears, just kidding about the ears.....but I just might listen in a time or two. I am not really keen on the this will work stuff; oh and pay me money thing. BUT I did run into a bunch of maxims which was refreshing. liked his/their script for a stop on speeding though....twas thought provoking but it don't ever go that way.....
     
  6. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,942
    Likes Received:
    4,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right
    Why do I get the impression that this is written by lawyers???

    Anytime you are using THEIR LAW or arguing in THEIR COURTS...you will lose...period

    You have VOLUNTARILY CONSENTED to their JURISDICTION just by showing up in their courts

    The only thing you argue is JURISDICTION....and that MUST be done by affidavit



    TRCP----Rule 52.

    Alleging a Corporation: An allegation that a corporation is incorporated shall be taken as true, unless denied by the affidavit of the adverse party, his agent or attorney, whether such corporation is a public or private corporation and however created.



    (Texas Rules of Civil Procedure § 257 and 259), back into the venue of the People, to wit:
    A change of venue may be granted in civil cases upon a motion by either party supported by his own affidavit and the affidavit of three credible persons, residents of the county in which the suit is pending. (NOTE: The granting of a petition to move the case is usually automatic, unless some agent from the government corporation objects under penalty of perjury that a fair trial by a jury by due course of the law of the land can indeed be found in a court of equity-not likely, since your affidavit becomes the judgment unless rebutted point-for-point. If rebutted, the affidavit must be tried under the rules of common law, which must be heard by a jury in the county court for the People. This is because a remedy for a common law controversy cannot be heard in an equity court.)
    For an example of removal of a case to common law court, see: Lone Star Steel Company vs. Scott.


    PETETION REMOVAL

    "I am not that fiction on the warrant or information that was served upon me. I am one the People and a living soul. I am not a corporation. I demand my remedy in the court of the People in the county court of record. I petition the court to remove Case No. 121212 from admiralty court under contract law into the county court for the People under common law."
     
    arminius and michael59 like this.
  7. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    Interesting, very interesting. Here inside the bound of Oregon one can move the court but I was looking at it as a move from private municipal fictitious plaintiff court to state/county court where there must be a plaintiff that granted their power to the state, meaning a harm and injury court. It never occurred to me that there could be a move to common law.....And, this takes me to a Oregon state supreme court decision on 'contempt' which in it is stipulated that the judge can throw someone in jail for contempt 'because' it is a common law right inherent in the court. Now I am not implying that the judge is common law nor the other actors inside the court are common law because that in itself would be ludicrous, what I am saying is it is the processes of the 'court' and the titles of the actors and the process(what it accomplishes)that is common law. Humm, I shall do some more thinking on this, but what I was really after is the misinformation found here in this quote:
    This is a solid misconstrued representation of what is actually in that decision that is caused by cherry picking. Sure, sure I remember reading those words but the decision was and is forever decided by the sitting crows of the time that due to the State(and sorry I forgot which state this originated in)Laws the a judges duties did inherently make him immune from prosecution which just flies in the face of that quote and its misleading intent.

    Summary of Stump vs Sparkman:
    There was a child who was a bit of a retard, this child got older and started hanging out with the older boys at school. After a night of passionate bliss the girl came home. Her mom realized she must do something so the mom hired a lawyer to write a writ petitioning the court to allow the mom to sterilize the girl. Yes this did happen and later the girl now married and known as "Stump" went to a doctor to find out why she could not bear a child. So at first try the girl and her husband went after all involved but the court/hearing decided that "ONLY" the judge could be acted upon, this judge's name was Sparkman. It is here where the above quote bears weight and meaning.

    What the sitting crows found facts that swayed the decision was in effect that the current state law did in effect allow the mom to sterilize the child and she did not ever need to get permission, then there is the fact that at the time a "Judges" regular course of business did in fact deal with sterilization when mental institutions had to petition the court to sterilize their charges/wards. It is this last sentence that swayed the decision due to the fact that as a judge actually did such things then it was in his normal jurisdiction to appease the mom and grant her plea.

    There ya go, that's it in a nut shell now there is something very important to know about this case. In this case it can seem that by using the words "immunity" towards the judge as having immunity solely because he is a judge is completely wrong. "This" judge was held non actionable because of "State" law and practice already in existence and not because he was a judge. So you might be wondering why I should know about the case?

    I know because this case is the most analogical court case I could find that mirrors mine but it is substantially different in several points, this is out of hundreds I have read.

    So as I know this I view this "Tao of law" as having good information BUT it is only information and is no silver bullet at all. Not saying there is intentional misleading for profit going on it is just that people often miss quote/cherry pick and as I for one have followed those 'Opinions' and wound up getting butt hurt and losing the case of the day. What I find about this Tao-of-law that is beneficial to any one who reads it or listens to the talk show is that they seem to be steering people to a later event by using your/my words to act on later. What was it my late Uncle told me? oh yeah: "You never win the day you set it all up to win on appeal."
     
  8. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,942
    Likes Received:
    4,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right
    I am sure you have heard ELECTED and APPOINTED officials say, they have immunity from prosecution for any thing they have done wrong. Prosecutors and police officers are notorious for that statement. There is a U.S. Supreme Court case that says they are liable. George D Owen V. City of Independence, Missouri. Decided April 16, 1980. When you look this up scroll down to 25 See, e.g., Globe 365 (remarks of Rep. Arthur) (For Owen v Independence Click (HERE)

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/casesearch.pl?court=US&CiBookMark=S-2e
    5e420-25379-b&CiBookmarkSkipCount=-10&CiRestriction=Immunity


    George M. WALLACE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

    v.

    David HAYSE, in his Official Capacity as Judge in Fayette


    District Court, Defendant-Appellee.

    No. 93-5382.

    United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

    Aug. 6, 1993.

    E.D.Ky., No. 92-00510; Forester, J.

    E.D.Ky.

    VACATED AND REMANDED.

    Before: GUY and NELSON, Circuit Judges, and WELLFORD, Senior Circuit Judge.

    ORDER

    George M. Wallace, a pro se Kentucky prisoner, appeals from a judgment of the district court dismissing as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(d), his civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

    Wallace's suit was filed against Fayette County District Court Judge David Hayse. Judge Hayse was sued in his official capacity, and Wallace sought injunctive and declaratory relief. The magistrate judge's report determined that Judge Hayse was absolutely immune from suit because the allegations of Wallace's complaint indicated that Judge Hayse was acting in his judicial capacity. Over Wallace's objections, the district judge determined that when a judge is performing an adjudicative function, he is absolutely immune from all suits brought pursuant to Sec. 1983. On appeal, Wallace argues that judicial immunity does not extend to Sec. 1983 suits which request injunctive and declaratory relief.

    In Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522, 541-42 (1984), the court concluded "that judicial immunity is not a bar to prospective injunctive relief against a judicial officer acting in her judicial capacity." See also Berger v. Cuyahoga County Bar Ass'n, 983 F.2d 718, 721 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 2416 (1993); Sevier v. Turner, 742 F.2d 262, 269 (6th Cir.1984). Therefore, we conclude that the district court committed error when it dismissed Wallace's suit based upon the determination that Judge Hayse enjoyed absolute immunity against Sec. 1983 suits which request injunctive and declaratory relief.

    Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration. Rule 9(b)(3), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.

    1 F.3d 1243, Wallace v. Hayse, (C.A.6 (Ky.) 1993
     
  9. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    What I was r-searching was these key words "false arrest, false imprisonment" and, yes most/all cases as the 'officials' were acting in their official capacity they were held blameless, even if they were fudging things up. BUT I changed words/search added immunity of the judge and it was more of the same. In my case it is the judges ineptness/incompetence I was after, so I headed for state statutes and found zip, nada, the dolt completely screwed up.

    In a traffic court it is a normal business to fleece the inept of their value, impair contract on them, hold them under contempt power and generally make them grovel under the heel, which we all know is what happens.

    What I liked in the OP is when one of the conserve's(?) asked what court the other was in.....I was waiting for the words "Peace and Dignity" to come out but the conversation went elsewhere. But upon finding the miss quote I felt compelled to point it out for any poor soul who would read these/those words later.

    We all know the fictitious plaintiff is a fraud and essentially that is what a Peace and Dignity court is all about so deflecting jurisdiction of said private municipal court is of paramount importance which I think is what the OP is all about.
     
  10. Krag

    Krag Planet earth Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    4,108
    Likes Received:
    2,891
    Trophy Points:
    113
  11. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    I think you are not understanding my point Krag. My point is: My freedom to be acted on by a fictious plaintiff court shall be deflected at all costs. In the example you provide the court would be one of harm and injury in which laws would apply as the injured carries the common law right of assertion of injury which he/she can hand off to the fiction or state.

    This peace and dignity I speak about is the old "Peace and Dignity of the Crown." And, consequently way back in 1740 it was found that IF it is not in the charter then then there can be no law manufactured that will allow it. Corporate yes-common no, which is what all these sites hover around yet do not strike at. I mean it really does come down to words and their usage.....so who/what practices 'Peace and Dignity?"

    Municipal courts
    IRS
    Congress in their impairment public law
    Your church......in fact all corporations public and private use this peace and dignity stuff in one way or another. Oh and I forgot federal courts ie. Bundy's and Hammond's those were peace and dignity trials.

    When I read the thing know as the constitution I read that Treason is making war against the state. How is my not having a drivers license an act of making war against the state? The state cannot be harmed because it is a fiction so I have done nothing. And, rule of law is a bogus meme because unless there is harm and injury there is no rule of law because the law is not needed. Therefore I have to "consent" through contracts which makes me corporate material to be ruled over which is what I think Tao-of-law and all patriots sites are going for like a bunch of monkeys f'n a football are trying to point out.

    edited for punctuation.
     
  12. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    As far as patriot sites and well all of them this is what we face everyday in these peace and dignity courts:

    Jurisdiction can be proved by allegations of complaint, allegations of any affidavit or oral testimony of any witness. State ex rel Advanced Dictating Supply, Inc. v. Dale, 269 Or 242, 524 P2d 1404 (1974)

    now notice the word "can," Tao-of-law is showing how to circumvent this jurisdiction and it is to use words but use words and statements that lead somewhere. So when I am standing there and have a ticket then the allegation of the ticket is the proof of jurisdiction as far as that judge is concerned. What was out of control of that judge is the cop and his words of admittance into anything that I can use ie. prior constructive words that lead me to a place that does not yield jurisdiction under peace and dignity. This is why traffic stops and interaction with the cop need to be recorded because it is the proof if done correctly. Me? I usually screw things up like Phone in pocket that I cannot reach without getting shot....you know, the mundane things.
     
  13. TRYNEIN

    TRYNEIN Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2012
    Messages:
    1,942
    Likes Received:
    4,144
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    third cove on the right
    You have 72 hours to rescind ANY contract....even and especially tickets.

    REFUSED FOR CAUSE....
     
    michael59 likes this.
  14. Krag

    Krag Planet earth Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    Messages:
    4,108
    Likes Received:
    2,891
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are a lot of ways around the unnecessary laws without dealing with the cops and courts. In business, cash deals, lots of others that Boston T. Party spells out in his books. On driving rights some of the states don't require insurance, having a friend in Alabama, Tennessee, NH etc. may be feasible. Family's can use FMCA as a mail forwarder.
     
  15. michael59

    michael59 heads up-butts down Site Supporter ++ Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2014
    Messages:
    6,838
    Likes Received:
    3,268
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    20 years logging
    Location:
    on the low side of corporate Oregon
    so? Oh crap ur gona have to explain.

    and, not withstanding but I just had a doo-zie drooped in my lap that falls in with this thread only it deals with buildings....I just can not think that a guy who was evicting a thief that he never offered to rent to would think that a state fire marshal who actually called him, that-that fire marshal was there to evict the thief..... sometimes I shake my head and wonder why?
     

Share This Page