They can only monitor those who are participating in commerce. This means they have to prove first, that you are doing commerce. Going to the corner store, the market, or to visit a friend is not commerce. The license instrument comes under administrative Law, and must be identified as to who it is for. The Division Of Motor Vehicles is an Agency that works on policies and statutes that are not law, although they tell you it is Law. A judge ceases to sit as a judicial officer because the governing principle of administrative law provides that courts are prohibited from substituting their evidence, testimony, record, arguments, and rationale for that of the agency. Additionally, courts are prohibited from substituting their judgment for that of the agency. Courts in administrative issues are prohibited from even listening to or hearing arguments, presentation, or rational. ASIS v. US, 568 F2d 284. You can also say to them, “With all due respect, you are breaking the Law, and I do not wish to participate in breaking the law with you. You may not be able to get the affect on the spot from a policy enforcer, (police), they will probably find a psuedo reason to give you a ticket/summons/suit. It is more and more clear, that they are the one who is breaking the Law. This is why it is imperative that you start suing or countersuing them. The ticket is a suit, so counter it. Usually they will give you a court date for the ticket/summons/suit. Now there are a few ways to do it. Send the ticket back within 3 days to the court, via certified mail, and mark in large letters, “No Plea”, on the back, which means you are notpleading to their jurisdiction. You may get a Notice that it is being referred to Superior Court, which says YOUR not guilty plea has been entered. So you send them a “Writ of Error” to correct them saying you put in a “not guilty plea, when you did not. This is coming from possibly an interim “Centralized Infractions Bureau”, or something like that, different in different States. When Superior Court receives it, they will send you a notification of the court date which will also reflect that you made a “not guilty plea”. So you send them a“Writ of Error” as well to correct that you have not made a Plea. Also send a“Writ of Discovery” to the Superior Court, asking for the Delegation of Authority, requesting any information you need to prepare a proer defense for yourself, inlcuding names and Bond numbers of Officers of the Court, etc. This is being done because some of the Superior Courts, are in fact not a Superior Court, they are administrative courts who have changed their name to “Superior Court” (trickery). You ask for the Delegation of Authority to determine what they can and cannot do and exactly what their jurisdiction entails. You will find that it does not include Traffic Court, as there is no such thing as Traffic Court. If any court proceeds with Traffic Court, they have no Delegation of Authority, (as it does not exist), and they are violating their Oath of Office, warring againstthe people, and committing treason. US v Will, 449 US 200,216, 101 S Ct, 471, 66 LEd2nd 392, 406 (1980) Cohens V Virginia, 19 US (6 Wheat) 264, 404, 5LEd 257 (1821) “When a judge acts where he or she does not have jurisdiction to act, the judge is engaged in an act or acts of treason.” . Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct. 1401 (1958). “No state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.” . Boyd v. U.S., 116 U.S. 616 “The court is to protect against any encroachment of Constitutionally secured liberties.” Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 “The Constitution of these United States is the supreme law of the land. Any law that is repugnant to the Constitution is null and void of law.” At this point, the Superior Court really wants to get rid of it. They may call you into Court, to negotiate, (because they want finance from you). They even say that they want to make a deal with you as if you are on a game show. Once you are not willing to negotiate, they set up a “trial” date. Clearly this is a pseudo trial. They will not call you in to pick a jury, they will not have a jury, let alone have a jury of your peers. . In going to Trial you would demand a trial by jury of your Peers, in line with your Constitutionally secured rights. . HOWEVER, YOU CANNOT HAVE A TRIAL WITHOUT AN INJURED PARTY. You cannot, as a matter of Due Process of Law even be called or summons into a Court or Tribunal without having an INJURED PARTY. The injured party is the Accuser and he or she must squarely and surely identify you as the Accused. The accused (you) has either committed an injury to a body (corpus delecti) or injured property or have breached a contract. If so, then the accuser (injuired party) must be present and the contract must also be placed as evidence for review. The Accuser (injured party) must put the judicial machinery into action by FIRST writing a sworn affidavit that states the injuries that were committed. Then the summons comes and it must be signed by an Article III judge, which states that the matter has been duly investigated and probable cause for such summons and / or warrant is justified. (See Amendment IV). These are all matters of Due Process of Law and if one of these elements are missing and or corrupted in anyway , the entire matter must be dismissed. . Amendment VII In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. You may return to court, stand your lawful position, as they may attempt a so-called trial, with the police officer, as the only witness. (Note: You are always an alleged defendant, never refer to yourself as a ‘defendant’). The Magistrate who usually acts unlawfully, upon recognizing that you know your rights will ask if you want to “Nolo Contendo” wherein you contend (not appeal) his judgment, and go before a lawful Article III Judge, instead of him, who is a Magistrate. (Yes, that is right, they actually say that). They know they are a Magistrate, and must admit it, once you have proved it. It is important that you fill out the form for the “Nolo Contendo”, right there on the spot before leaving. Because for one, you have a certain amount of days, (5 or so) to submit it, or else it will be closed. If you mail it to them, you ought not trust that they will process it correctly and in time, etc. Once they close it you must re-open it and pay a fee. . In the end, it usually gets thrown out, because an Article III Judge knows that he ceases to sit as a Judge, and has no judicial power if he takes testimony,rationale, etc., from an agency ,or regarding an agency, of which “traffic” is an agency, its policies are administerial and unconstitutional. There is only Civil Court and Criminal Court. Traffic Court is a farce! It has already been determined by Supreme Court as unlawful. However, if the people still answer to it, then they give it life. An old Roman Maxim applies: “He who would be deceived — Let Him!” Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities. Burns v. Sup., Ct., SF, 140 Cal. 1. Identification: Proof of identity. The proving that a person, subject, or article before the court is the very same that he or it is alleged, charged, or reputed to be; as where a witness recognizes the prisoner as the same person whom he saw committing the crime; or where handwriting, stolen goods, counterfeit coins, etc., are recognized as the same which once passed under the observation of the person identifying them. The requirement of identification as a condition precedent to admissability is satisfied by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what its proponent claims.
Posted on: Sat, 09 Aug 2014 00:04:25 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015