BUDDIES' RANDOM TRADES CORNER

[BUDDIEE18]

"Miranda Rights"

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/legality-of-drivers-license/message/13304

Re: [legality-of-drivers-license] Re: Ticket


I have learned what they are doing, it is called violence. I don't need to know what "type" of "legal" instrument the "ticket" is. I gave YOU what you can do to stop there process. Deal in facts and reality. Ask what are the facts that they are using to base their opinions on. They cannot. Remember "statutes" are the "will" of the legislature. I didn't make that up. The humans who dress in black ropes pretending to be the supreme "Court" stated that. "Statute * * * the written will of the legislature * * *" John P. King Mfg. Co. v Council of Augusta, 277 US 100, quoting Bouvier's Law Dictionary. "courts must look behind names [labels] that symbolize the parties to determine whether a justiciable case or controversy is presented." US v Interstate Commerce Commission, 337 US 426, 430 (1949). Stop dealing in "mental conceptions" and deal in reality. We are all human, with the same quanity and quality of Rights. No "statute" can compell me to do anything. My Rights allow me to do as I please provided I do not interfere in the Rights of another. "Courts" use violence to get you to do as they "will".

Look at a simple example: You are travelling on a highway when you come to a "seat belt" check point. You do not have your seat belt on, so they request you to produce a "license" and "registration". You do not have a "license". They demand you exit the car. You refuse and ask to be on your way as you have not violated anyone's Rights. They draw guns, or forceable remove you from your car. Who initialed the violence? They read you your "Miranda Rights" and arrest you. (Don't tell me it doesn't happen this way because it has happened to me.) Now they have violated your Rights, yet they tell you you have the Right etc. Do you not see the hypocrisy in this? They violated your Rights, yet tell you that you have Rights. Why bother with all the charade? To make it "look good", like you are getting a "fair trial"? I challenge their jurisdiction for 3 years that the "judge" finally dismissed the case. The DA then spent 2 years "appealling" the case.

I told you abount standing. There must be standing for a "judge" to even hear a case (criminal) or controversy (civil). My friend was at his "court" hearing on Wednesday (a "tax" controversy where they want him to go to an "IRS" summons hearing to bring his "books" and "records"). The "court" clerk asked my friend and a man pretending to be the "DOJ" to step outside to discuss the controversy before the "judge" returns. They went to talk. My friend returned and asked me about the man pretending to be the "DOJ" asking him to "volunteer" (note the word) to go to the "IRS" summons. I said to my friend ask him why should he go if the "IRS" does not have standing. He went in, asked the man pretending to be the "DOJ" that question, and the man walked out of the room stating lets go see the "judge". As this was the first time my friend ever had to be in front of a "judge" he was a little intimidated and did not bring this up to the "judge". One of the first things the "judge" told him was that he could be "sanctioned", which could include jail time. Notice, the "judge" initiated potential violence without my friend saying a word. We go back on the 4th of Jan. He will now ask the "judge" about the "IRS" having standing.

They use violence to get their way. Expose them for what they really are, criminals, acting as if what they do is lawful.

I could be like them and compell you to do things as I have written, but that is just using violence to force my will upon you. You have a choice to try what I am suggesting, or not to. Try making a choice with the humans, who We allow to run Our governmental system. You get no choice, just violence to steer you in the direction they want you to go.

Have fun in your "cases".

Sal Jr



In a message dated 12/23/2006 7:57:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, enlaw98@... writes:
I have and still do, disagree with your statements,
and until you can start to change your way of
thinking, then we are both wasting our time. I admit
that I have tried and have failed to get you to do
this. The officers know what they are doing, and they
are within their form of law, and the judge is doing
what he has the power to do for the most part. The
thing is that we do not know what they are doing, and
for the most part, we will not change our way of
thinking, so we lose, and do not know why. When we
learn just what type of legal instrument the ticket
is, and what form of law the officer is under, and the
court rules, and generally how the judge works, we
will be heard, and I believe that to be true. Some
day, some one else might get your attention, and you
might lesson to him. The best thing that I can say to
you, and the others now, is, take the position that
the officer and judge are correct in what they do, and
try to find out what they are doing that you do not
understand. To do this, you are going to have to
read, and put yourself in their shoes and look at it
from their point of view. I have aready given you
most of the stuff that you need to learn. enlaw