I don't recall where I found this; may have even been here somewhere but I'm posting it because it's a good show to a Judge who refuses a defendant his rights under the Constitution as well as the rights stated in The Bill of Rights . . .
Secret Law / American Slave Doctrine.
How can one prove to themselves that they are mere property of a government of unknown origin?
A man (we'll call him Jim) and two friends were facing a municipal judge (David R. Koss) in Longview, Washington in February of 2002. The claim by the State of Washington was that these three men were guilty of "illegal sport fishing." They had been accused of having too many pounds of smelt.
A charge that was later dropped because the 'judge' admitted that "the State of Washington forgot to set a limit on smelt fishing."
The D.A. even admitted that he didn't even have any evidence, but that was not considered a bar to prosecution, as they had a "State" game warden who accused them, as such evidence was not required.
These men entered the courtroom and waited until the municipal (muni-corp) judge entered. The 'judge' entered in his black dress to a silent standing ovation and then gave everyone permission to sit down.
He then started his monolog about his duties and the duties of the court, with included a statement of the (so called) rights of the defendants.
Jim, actually the one who got the group into this mess, had been studying his constitutions and the processes of the courts and how they differed from the law as set down by the framers.
Jim, when approached by the game warden started asking him questions on his lawful authority and then made the mistake of cornering him in a lie. This irritated the game warden so he wrote them all up on misdemeanor charges out of spite.
Now back to the secret law / slave issue.
The 'judge' stated that he was required by law to read everyone their rights and to make sure that they understood them.
He stated, "You have the right to plead guilty. You have the right to plead not guilty. You have the right to plead 'no contest' and pay a fine, and you have the right to an attorney. Do you all understand these rights as 'I have given them' to you?" Everyone except Jim and his two friends rattled their heads in a manner to indicate that they did.
The court then proceeded in its process of raping the public at the threat of imprisonment for any objection made.
One by one the victims were raped and sent on their way - until Jim and his friends were called. Even though Jim was last, he still had an audience, as he had told some of the other slaves that were complaining of the actions of the State, that if they stayed around, he would prove that this (muni-corp) court was a slave processing court operating under secret slave law.
Jim, being very polite after his name was called, stated, "Your honor, may I ask a question?
Judge: "What is your question Mr. Smith?"
Jim: "I'm confused about my rights and would like to ask a question."
Judge: "What is it that you don't understand about your rights? Would you like for me to read them to you again?"
Jim: "No, your honor, I understand the ones that you read, but I have been studying this document called the constitution and it has this section called the Bill of Rights. I notice that you didn't mention any of those rights and I was wondering if you would go over all those with me and make sure that I understand them?"
Judge: "No I won't."
Jim, polite and hesitant: "Please forgive me your honor, but I'm confused, are you saying that I don't have any of the rights listed in the Bill of Rights?"
Judge: "You have the rights that I said that you have."
Jim. "Your honor I'm confused, so please bear with me, because I'm just trying to understand exactly what you are saying. Are you saying that none of the rights secured to me by the constitutions apply to me?"
Judge: "I'm telling you again, you've got the rights that I told you that you have."
Jim: "Your honor, I'm even more confused now. You've just stated that you are not proceeding under the constitutions and the common law in which I have rights. Would you please tell me what system of law you are proceeding under.
Judge: "No, I will not."
Jim: "Your honor, please bear with me because I'm even more confused now. By denying me any knowledge of the law that your are proceeding under, you are denying me the right to a defense. Your honor, since (Jim now speaks very fast to make the record) only a slave can be denied a defense, are you making a declaration of slavery against me?"
Judge: As he stands up and literally runs out the side door of the court room. "I'm not going there."
Jim: "But your honor, I have more questions."
Courtroom side door is slammed shut.
After a few minutes the 'judge' comes running back to his desk.
Jim: "Your honor, I still have more questions."
Judge, while banging his little wooden hammer frantically: "Court is dismissed!"
Jim: "But your honor, I still have more questions."
Judge, still pounding his little wooden hammer: "I said court is dismissed. I can't answer any more questions."
Jim in order to get a copy of the record: "Your honor, I would like a copy of the record. How do I get a copy?"
Judge: "This isn't a court of record, there isn't one available."
A friend points to the recorder and says: "That sucker's lying, that's the recorder right there still recording."
Jim: "Uh, your honor..."
Judge: "I didn't say that there wasn't a record, I said this isn't a 'court of record', you'll have to contact the clerk to see if it's available to the public."
Can we say "OOPS?"
What more can anyone do to prove that the courts are operating under secret slave law?
This just goes to show that b if people ask the right questions or makes the right statements, he can overcome the judge. Judges know they are committing fraud.
M. R. Hamilton