It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If I were to stand in front of a U.S. Judge and say this... What would the result be?

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Any Lawyers or people familiar with The Law chiming in would be much appreciated




CHALLENGES TO THE COURT BEFORE PROCEEDINGS CAN START


1. A. Your Honour and the prosecutor have taken oaths of office to support and uphold the Constitution of the United States of America and that of this state. Is that correct?


B. Pursuant to your oaths, you are required to abide by those oaths, in the performance of your official duties, including those before this Honourable Court. Is that correct?




2. I, John R. Doe, hereby notify this Honourable Court that I am a living, breathing, natural-born American Citizen, with, and claiming, all Rights guaranteed to me in the federal and state Constitutions, and with my name properly spelled in upper and lower case letters, not as it appears on the court documents.


www.landrights.com...

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: IMPORTANT: Using Content From Other Websites on ATS - Please Review This Link.
edit on 1/6/2011 by Mirthful Me because: EX Tags & Link




posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Yeah...that's a great idea...
you should totally do it.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by nivekronnoco
Yeah...that's a great idea...
you should totally do it.


I'm serious. It's regarding Admirality Maritime Law, and I'm curious if it's true or if it's Internet rumor.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
My guess, you will tossed into some institution for a psych evaluation, where they will give you all kinds of drugs to fry your brain, make you insane, so they could keep you locked up for "your own safety and the safety of others".



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
From my experience with judges (nothing major, but a lot of small violations) he would just get mad and sentence you to the maximum fine/ penalty - which he probably wouldn't have done otherwise.

It would then be up to you to get a damn good lawyer to sue on the grounds of an illegal hearing.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by derickonfire
From my experience with judges (nothing major, but a lot of small violations) he would just get mad and sentence you to the maximum fine/ penalty - which he probably wouldn't have done otherwise.

It would then be up to you to get a damn good lawyer to sue on the grounds of an illegal hearing.



Best reply so far. For a minute I thought I was at the "other" forum



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by derickonfire
From my experience with judges (nothing major, but a lot of small violations) he would just get mad and sentence you to the maximum fine/ penalty - which he probably wouldn't have done otherwise.

It would then be up to you to get a damn good lawyer to sue on the grounds of an illegal hearing.


For a judge to let his own personal prejudice interfere with how he mete's out sentencing is a tyranny that brings shame to our country.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by kaspermartyrphantom
 


Idiot Legal Arguments
www.adl.org...

if you try it, tell us about it when you get out.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
I'm not a lawyer but have learned a lot about the legal system over the last 2 years or so. If you tried to pull this stunt in front of a US judge you will probably find yourself thrown in a jail cell or levied a hefty fine for contempt of court or some other sort of trumped up charge they can imprison/fine you for.



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:52 PM
link   
The court can't hear you they are fictions. You are a living person fictions have no eyes or ears. Keep studying your on the right track but you have a ways to go.

You don't ask that gives them jurisdiction. You tell them. You don't sign anything and you don't cross the bar. They will ignore it all cause they can't hear you. If the judge asks you for your name ask him if you will be entering a contract with him if you give it. Be a beneficiary at all times.

They will trick you or intimidate you into contracting with them they have guys with guns to enforce thier fraud you have to ask yourself if it is worth it and what good it will do. Keep studying you really need to know your stuff before you tangle with them,



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   
From what I have read on this Admilarty law stuff is that you cant have it bothways. Either you work within the system or you work within the soverign citizn area. Dont take my word for this though, do your own due diligence and read Mary Croft's book. It is very enlightening. It's heavy going in that it's advice interwoven into her life story.

Look for a soverign citizen forum and ask this question there. I think you will get better quality feedback from like minded people many of whom will have done the research or have the expereince.

I would strongly advise all ATS'ers to read this womans work as it's at least one way of resisting the increasing tyrrany that seems to be decending on the US and other western "democarcies" inlcuding my own country.

I quite accept the view that they just might throw someone who takes the soverign citxen apporach into gaol but this form of resistance is worth a try.

hope this helps



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
recourse and remedy, without prejudice UCC 2-207

although the judge knows he can be sued, you better have a law degree because they're going to ream you if you flinch and don't know what you're talking about



posted on Jan, 5 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
I guess I'm missing something, as I have no idea why a judge would throw your ass in jail for this (perhaps for the original offense, if this defense is invalid). I would love to hear from an actual legal expert as to why that is being floated as a possibility. I hope further posters will state what their qualifications are.
edit on 5-1-2011 by PeasantRebellion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by PeasantRebellion
 


The judge would accuse you of mocking the court. With my long history of saying yes your honor or no your honor, the judge might let you speak when he asks you if you wish to say anything. But if you come across like a total smart--- then the joke is on you my friend. My advice to you is , keep it simple yes sir, no sir(your honor), and do not speak until spoken to.
edit on 6-1-2011 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 12:13 AM
link   
The sovereign/freeman stuff is very interesting. It is definitely a rabbithole you can go down. www.usavsus.info... is a great resource also.
edit on 6-1-2011 by KnowledgeIsPowre because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Why would you go that route when you could easily write a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Also, You need to make sure that the "law" they are trying to enforce contains an enacting clause as called in your state constitution.


Challenging jurisdiction is one of the best defenses you can make, because if you use the right argument it is almost impossible for you to loose! If they attempt to tell you that you can't question their jurisdiction you can easily shut them up with these court rulings!

"Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but, rather, should dismiss the action." Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026.

"The law requires proof of jurisdiction to appear on the record of the administrative agency and all administrative proceedings." Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U. S. 533.

"Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term." Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P 27.


If the law is lacking the enacting clause, is is a void law also and you can easily find the enacting clause for your state via google and then go to your local law library and SEE that the law is lacking it and go from there.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by kaspermartyrphantom
 


I flagged this because I think it's COMPLETELY relvant to what is happing in the USA and has been for decades.. and it's getting worse.. by the day..

I have a friend who is doing drug rehab through the Oregon INACT program, although he is not a drug user, pharmiciidial or not illegal, he treated as one.

FYI, judges will have FULL power to bring the hammer down without any regard to your character or clean criminal record,... it will not matter. If you should decide to accept this mission you are about to engage in, I would SINCERLY point your toward a EXCELLENT lawyer and ask him the same questions as you posted above.

I was a victim of the state, and being treated as a dead-beat dad due to my ex-wife complusary lying to the counslor and my lawyer backing down at the last minute NOT to challenge the states movement to let the children remain with their mother..... WITHOUT investigating her boyfriend, or the living conditions.......

I.........like what you are proposing, and have NO experience in legal matters, but my personall experiences tell me you certainly have a fight on your hands. However, if your crimial record is tainted in the least amount, you will probably encure the entire wrath of the judge, who now is judge, jury and exicusioner in the small courts and moving to mid-levle courts.

*looks at your in all seriousness*....this is something you should absoulutly & deeply do..,,get expert council, If it was me, I treat this nothing less than a general gathering all the neccessary data before going to war.. the more ... the better..

I wish you well my friend..



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Everything in a court room happens because you consent to it. Learn how not to consent.



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by kaspermartyrphantom
7. A. Since I am guaranteed a fair and impartial trial, how is that possible when you, the presiding judge, the prosecuting attorney and all the witnesses against me work for and are paid by the state that is the plaintiff in this case, and my opponent? In this situation, it is impossible for me to have a fair trial. Is that correct?


...thats not correct and you blew your show up right there...

...its the jury that has to be fair, impartial and not employees of the plaintiff (the state in your case)...

...saying what you wrote in court is a bad idea, a waste of the courts time, grandstanding...

...file it as a motion prior to trial but research how to do that properly and do not soley rely on spellcheck...

...research every legality you're referring to and state the legal precedence...

...no suppositions in the motion... only facts...

...do not ask questions in the motion... your repetitive "is that correct?" is, well, stupid because they are not going to answer you... the judge, the pa, the witnesses - they are not on trial.. you are...

...the best advice is get a lawyer...



posted on Jan, 6 2011 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by kaspermartyrphantom
 

Psychotic Fear would paralyze you.
Then things get worse.
Sorry.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join