Submitted by M. R. Hamilton on
A case that has made its way through court recently provided a good learning lesson that warrants discussing before taking your case to court. In the case we learned this lesson recently, it would have prevented having to correct the judge later.
Judges are experienced at tripping people up to confuse them to get their consent while in court. The case in question is posted in the member forum on this site. The case involves a cocaine possession charge against a people of Texas. He filed a counterclaim challenging the government agents who have moved against him. The government agents could not defeat his lawful arguments, so he dismissed the case and found in his favor around $270,000 in damages.
The judge, however, held a hearing in the criminal court, which is not a real court, and made repeated attempts to get the counterclaimant to consent to his jurisdiction. Government agents always must get your consent even if you do so ignorantly.
In this case, the judge was attempting to get the counterclaimant to sign a document "waiving" his "right to an attorney and requesting permission from the court to represent" himself. He does not need to represent himself, because he is himself. The judge even admitted, "We cannot proceed until you sign this document."
So when the counterclaimant refused to sign the waiver, because he does not need the courts permission to be himself in court, the judge getting annoyed said, "Are you going to agree to proceed to trial without an attorney?" To which the counterclaimant replied, "Yes".
The problem he now had was he thought he was just answering the question about proceeding without an attorney. But he also agreed to proceed to trial even though his case had been dismissed. So now he had to go issue an order of contempt against the judge and correct the record.
This is typical of how government gets people to submit. Just read the 14th Amendment. It says that there are two things that must occur for a people to be a US Citizen. Most people read no further than the first clause in the whole sentence, which is,
All persons born or naturallized in the United States.
Well this fits most of us. But it is the second half that gets people.
And subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
Here again we first saw with pride the first half of the criteria and stepped forward to lay claim. But you have to be subject to the jurisdiction thereof. I am not subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
- M. R. Hamilton's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
What I remember from Bill T. was the statement of never allowing the judge ANYTHING, for or against you, because they are not authorized. They are only there to see to it that the court proceeds fairly (if I recall correctly). Right now I'm trying to anticipate all the orders of contempt I'll need . . . OH, wait a minute . . . isn't there a NEW POST that states something about not having multiple causes of action? Correct me if I'm wrong please but while I'm objecting to everything the judge drones on about and taking notes on each thing he says, can I just list each thing he says on ONE order that vacates his butt? I'll probably also have to list the case law for each thing too OR shouldn't the fact that I have challenged jurisdiction be enough case law to paste in his face?
My case is going to be interesting. My judge is a known screamer and I've never been one to take crap for long. I have to remember that no matter what goes on we are to remain "sociable". To me though, sociable is as sociable does. I'm predicting the judge losing his shit and me stating louder to him the fact that I rule his ass~! This is NOT going to play out nicely.
You can have multiple causes of action. If the causes of action are all related such as those in a chain of events as one would see in a foreclosure proceeding or a DUI case where there is a chain of injuries related to each other.
In your case, let the judge scream. If he starts screaming it will be because you are succeeding. Why would a judge get frustrated? Because you are not bending to his will. If he cannot overcome your lawful arguments, he will have to attempt to scare you into submission. You job is to let him look the fool. If you do not get excited and speak calmly and professionally, the world will see that you are right and he is wrong. Even the bailiffs will see that he is the one losing control of his emotions. If you have to prepare yourself mentally for this, then do so. What you can do is just acknowledge to yourself that if the judge is getting excited, it because he knows he can't beat you.
Orders are not orders until they are signed and filed. So no matter what he says, it isn't an order until he signs a paper.
M. R. Hamilton
I was arrested for dwi in texas..I have been to an arraignment and pretrial...since then i have been in a rehab program and the case has been set off what should i do since i cant challenge jurisdiction
"Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time." Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co. 495 F 2d 906, 910.
Habeas Corpus: See Bill Thornton's write up:
Some examples here:
One of the People of the united states of America.
You had written "All persons born or naturallized without the United States." I have been unable to find the term "without" in any copy of the constitution. What I do find is All persons born or naturallized in the United States. Emphasis added. Where did the without come from?
I have checked two places on this site where I discuss this and do not see where I used the term "without". It is neither on the Amendments page nor the article about People or citizens. Then I noticed it was above. That was a typo. I have corrected it.
M. R. Hamilton
Stay out of court and file a Notice of Special Appearance. Why play word games with a forked-tongued judge?
"It is easier to fool people than it is to convince people they've been fooled." ~ Mark Twain
i like the concept of not physically going to court, they will issue an arrest warrant for failure to appear, what next? if the cops pull you over and run your name you may be arrested for the bench warrant
i was threatened to be arrested at the airaignment ;for wasting the courts time after only two minutes and could not speak anymore
Hi is anyone from California know how to recover property under the right to travel laws after I filed my affidavit how do I get my property from tow yard can anybody help me