Win in Court

[sdcarlee]

No Drivers License charge dismissed and the City agreed to never issue a bill of attainder and to leave the defendant alone. This was the trade of agreement to not sue the city. The argument was on the common rights, the prosecutor said the brief gave him an intellectual headache and he did not want to risk quo warranto nor the setting for a jury.

I'll post the contract later.

[NonEntity]

(01-23-2012 10:13 AM)sdcarlee Wrote:  No Drivers License charge dismissed and the City agreed to never issue a bill of attainder and to leave the defendant alone. This was the trade of agreement to not sue the city. The argument was on the common rights, the prosecutor said the brief gave him an intellectual headache and he did not want to risk quo warranto nor the setting for a jury.

I'll post the contract later.

This is interesting! Again, please provide links when you get the chance so that we can understand this in context. I'm really curious about "agreed...to leave the defendant alone." Does that mean what it sounds like, that he is free to drive without a Drivers' License?" I'd love to have you lay this out more clearly. It sounds like it would be worth the time and effort to fully document this for others to be able to reference. Perhaps you may want to make a posting of the details over on the Wiki.

:exclamation: Thanks so much for your efforts in this.

- NonE

[sdcarlee]

No links to this one, it is new. The defendant is a close friend of mine and He will be picking up the final paperwork tomorrow and it will be posted. I will also outline the argument as was submitted to the court. Yes it does mean what it sounds like and of course it will be on a local deal, we will see. I also have a local case so I will use nearly the same argument and I will see if I can achieve the same results.

(01-23-2012 10:52 AM)NonEntity Wrote:  

(01-23-2012 10:13 AM)sdcarlee Wrote:  No Drivers License charge dismissed and the City agreed to never issue a bill of attainder and to leave the defendant alone. This was the trade of agreement to not sue the city. The argument was on the common rights, the prosecutor said the brief gave him an intellectual headache and he did not want to risk quo warranto nor the setting for a jury.

I'll post the contract later.

This is interesting! Again, please provide links when you get the chance so that we can understand this in context. I'm really curious about "agreed...to leave the defendant alone." Does that mean what it sounds like, that he is free to drive without a Drivers' License?" I'd love to have you lay this out more clearly. It sounds like it would be worth the time and effort to fully document this for others to be able to reference. Perhaps you may want to make a posting of the details over on the Wiki.

:exclamation: Thanks so much for your efforts in this.

- NonE

[NonEntity]

(01-23-2012 06:54 PM)sdcarlee Wrote:  No links to this one, it is new. The defendant is a close friend of mine and He will be picking up...

(emphasis mine)

Well no WONDER there was such a positive outcome. You didn't mention your friend was the King!

- NonE

[Jace: Johanson]

I'll be interested to follow this as well. It's the sort of thing many have claimed they can achieve, but I've heard only one case where the guy appears to actually have done it (and I'm still pretty dubious, cause it's hard to verify).

It'll be awesome to see, no doubt.

[sdcarlee]

I have to get the document scanned to my usb so I can upload it. Yeah it's an awesome thing. The bottom line is the City Attorney found the case was in the best interest of the City to drop, Snuffy wanted His fees but the attorney said he couldn't get them since it was being dismissed Snuffy told the attorney fine but only if the City and it agents agreed to leave Him alone, the attorney agreed, a different Attorney may very well have tried it. I know Snuffy had just challenged the Jurisdiction at the Municiple court and was shot down, appeared at trial and challenged Jurisdiction again and was shot down. He proceeded with the trial and impeached the cop. The Judge continued the trial as usual, Snuffy appealed to Circuit. The first appearance in the Circuit the Judge shot down his request to be tried in His domicile, Snuffy told the Judge He had no right to do that it was a political decision the court had no jurisdiction over. The Judge asked Snuffy to take a seat while He moved some cases out of the way. When the court cleared, all that was left was 16 attorneys, He, I and the Judge. The Judge asked the prosecutor if Snuffy would waive the Jury Trial. Snuffy stood up belted out Yes but I will be challenging the courts Jurisdiction "no offense to you Judge" the Judge replied no offense taken you have that right. Snuffy belted out again that He was not a US citizen and that rendered the court without Jurisdiction. The Judge asked Snuffy to settle for 50 dollars, Snuffy said my rights aren't for sale and told the Judge about the other two Judges who dismissed his case on the same issue. The prosecutor stated to the Judge Snuffy will take this case to the Supreme Court over 50 measly dollars and they set the a new court date and that was this last one that got dismissed. Snuffy has no nexus to any adhesion contracts. He's an ex officer and was a Commissioner for 4 years. Snuffy taught contract law for a local college and started fighting the IRS years ago, he lost an IRS case with Larry Beacraft in the 90's and did 2 years. He hasn't lost since. Now Snuffy is about 65 yrs and just finished writing a book, it's called the Bessemer Bombing. The first bombing in a cityhall in America. Three weeks ago snuffy stood up in court while trying to help defend a friend under rule 17c and when this Judge asked him if he was an attorney Snuffy said no I'm not a part of that communist organization. The Judge said I have a feeling I'm going to learn something, Snuffy then gave a very quick brief on the 81st congress, I wish I would have witnessed that one. Snuffy is one of those guys that is very articulate and quick thinking, He is a lot of fun to hear. If I can't scan the document, I'll take a picture and upload it. I was there and signed as a witness, it seemed like another process to them but huge for us. Snuffy has hardly ever had any support in the court room, He's batting alone most of the time and that is because He doesn't advertise His dates. He told me when he first started fighting He would use something that He had read not knowing what would happen, He would blurt it out and it worked. He would then go find something else to read. Snuff is a true American.

(01-23-2012 10:04 PM)Jace: Johanson Wrote:  I'll be interested to follow this as well. It's the sort of thing many have claimed they can achieve, but I've heard only one case where the guy appears to actually have done it (and I'm still pretty dubious, cause it's hard to verify).

It'll be awesome to see, no doubt.

[sdcarlee]

This is the Document. I have his complete file and arguments.

[criminal politics]

(01-25-2012 04:36 PM)sdcarlee Wrote:  This is the Document. I have his complete file and arguments.

I think they were looking for the arguments!

[zonsb]

(02-01-2012 07:44 AM)criminal politics Wrote:  

(01-25-2012 04:36 PM)sdcarlee Wrote:  This is the Document. I have his complete file and arguments.

I think they were looking for the arguments!

The arguments would be good to have.

--

[sdcarlee]

Well I went to Circuit Court last week on my four charges. There was supposed to be a jury trial but when we arrived the court was packed out, atleast 200 people so we knew then there would be no jury.(3 murder cases being heard) Low and behold I was called first, Snuffy and I approached the bench with about 15 attornuts standing around. The judge asked if I had an attornutt and I told him Snuffy was my council under rule 17c, it didn't happen the judge protected his communist guild quickly. I said no problem, I'll handle it. The judge asked the prosecuting attornut if he was seeking jail time, the reply was if we can get it. (So in traffic court he went for the max and in circuit he's trying to get what ever) The judge asked him about a probationary sentence and the reply was if we can. The judge then asked me if I wanted an attornut, I said an attornut would not benefit me his duty is to the court and I will be raising jurisdictional issues that the attornut would not do.
The judge then asked me if I would take him in his limited capacity just for asking a legal question or procedural matter during trial and that I would have full control of my case at trial. I agreed to that but only in his very limited capacity. The judge asked if I could afford an attornut, I said not since the city ran a media campaign about me while pointing at the prosecuting attornut. The demeanor changed instantly, the judge seemed to get more helpful and didn't even require me to prove I could afford one or not, he just picked an attornut and asked us to exchange info for a tentative new court date around april 30th and to take as long as we needed. When the shadow attornut asked the charges and learned how they came about, he strongly said OH they don't have a case. I said I know and I was ready for a jury today and there better be one at the next trial or the court needs to go ahead and dismiss this.
That's the scoop for now, it seems the court knows it has a hot potato right now. Things are looking good for now.

[notavoter]

Fantastic so far!