It's the same standard, but they are offered more latitude. It's the difference between how you hold a teenager accountable versus a four year old. The rules may be the same, but you can't treat them exactly the same. That's just how I see it, at least.
@Vykk_Draygo The same standard means the same latitude. If you mean expected to follow the same laws, then yes. You must file proper motions. But a lawyer's standards include court decorum.
Sov cits hope to confuse things to the extent that the courts don’t want to deal with them anymore. They can drag these things out sometimes for years.
I’ve definitely seen some get some very sweet deals from the prosecution that really feels like a “just take this and go, I can’t listen to 82 more hours of this over a traffic ticket”
@@thedave1771 if me, Your honor, in order to avoid any controversy, the defendant searched for any full disclosure contracts or agreements with this state and found none. So, the defendant Agrees to pay for any verified damages the defendant cause this State The defendant wishes to settle up, so who does the defendant make the check out to? It’s not like the state was really damaged?
Less than 5% are true believers, others just trying to avoid license fees etc. An example is the “in honor” that would answer questions for $100/question, he is a true believer (aka nuts)
@@stevefromchicago8277, I have often thought that. Most are at the end of their rope with bills, taxes, and such, and this is their last resort on avoiding paying anything. If they don't want to pay taxes or registration fees, then get off the roads that are built and maintained with said fees. I'm sure more than a few of these people have gotten into accidents when they are at fault and I doubt they took care of the damages they caused. We need to see videos on these cases.
@@stevefromchicago8277 To be entirely honest, it's hard to know who truly believes what they say. Is it likely at least some are being disingenuous? Yes. Is it likely that only 5% of fewer of the proponents of this ideology believe it? Probably not. It's worth noting, that just because htey are trying to avoid fees doesn't also mean that they don't believe in the ideology. For examples of ideologies that seem insane to rational people, look at groups like the Black Hebrew Israelites, flat earthers, Holocaust deniers, etc.. People are quite capable of having absolute faith in patently preposterous ideas.
I think it's rare that someone becomes a SovCit based on principle. Rather, they run into trouble (suspended/revoked license, unpaid tickets, unpaid rent, unpaid judgements, etc.) and then adopt SovCit BS in response.
New to the channel and would like to thank you, Mike, for reducing my productivity. Yesterday I sat through the entirety of the Wang Oreo and the Wee Wee Junk hearings. Starting to see a theme around here! Anyway, thank you for all you do 🎉
His way of securing free lodging. Drop one MF for one month of 3 hot meals per day, a cot, hot showers, games, weights, electricity and running water all at no charge to him.
Her job would be so much easier, and all of the attorneys jobs would be so much easier if she would stop letting the defendants walk all over her. There is no need to bend over backwards. Tell them you’re not going to address those issues let them take it up on a pill which they will not do.
That judge must be dreaming if she thinks he can outsmart someone who's clearly spent countless hours watching videos of other intellectually deficient people prattling on about British Admiralty Law from the 1800s and flag tassles. What good are her multiple degrees and decades of courtroom experience when confronted by that level of mental prowess?😂
I didn't catch this the first time, but it's maddening how the judge and DA are saying they could make 1:30 work if they HAD to (ie not a great time), and he's like "Yeah, that works better for me anyway." Just no sense of consideration
The life goal of any SovCit is to do everything in his or her power to simply gum up the works of the legal system in any way possible. In the words of Barney Fife, it’s time to “NIP it!”
I would agree with you but I feel like they probably are at work so in a way it’s nice to allow people not to lose their job potentially if they had to be at home/in court
4am n I thought they were all jacked up on speed until I read some chat and it indicated this video is sped up...😂 Judge Webster moving this fast is better than sov cits..it makes her seem frantic 😂
How do you get dragged by a car from your hand being in the door? Unless you're holding on to something on the car or someone in the car, that isn't physically possible.
I've got the video on normal speed and Judge Webster's talking so fast that when I increased the speed I couldn't understand her so I had to go back to normal speed. LOL She's in a hurry to get this shit done. She's got 40 cases today? Wow, that's a lot.
@LTWM Hey Mike, whenever I mute myself I automatically move my mouse to the LEFT hand side of my keyboard. This reminds me to UNMUTE when I am done with whatever I was doing. Of course, if you are left-handed please do the opposite. LOL
@@NicolaMaxwell Obviously. I get that. My point is that "let's see if something interesting eventually happens" might not be the most riveting content. Clips of fun stuff, great. An hour of tedium, not so much
@@sandrablosser9888 When did I claim I was being forced to watch? Is "interesting things might be better than boring ones" really so difficult a concept? It's a valid point, and "go away then" doesn't address it
@@NicolaMaxwell "no one forces you to watch" is the functional equivalent of "go away then", and complaining is the exact kind of thing that DOES cause change
Hey bro I love your videos, I’ll use them to fall asleep to sometimes! But your intro song sends me into a 2010 UA-camr content spiral which I promised myself I’d never relive (and also wakes me up). If you could consider changing that I’d appreciate it! Otherwise fantastic live today!❤
Judge Webster engages those SovCits may to much! She needs to take lessons from Judge Oakley! He doesn’t take their nonsense! I watched her actually try to explain proceedings to a SovCit….Judge Oakley would never be that silly!
HELLO Mike ! Question: Can you reach out to your Friend DUI Guy and ask Him if ChIli DeCastro is doing a fundraiser to hire him for this fellow SoVcit (anarchist ) UA-camr Craig Hendry in Indiana. Craig is throwing Larry's name out there as a way to grift some money. *BTW: Craig is a Convicted drug dealer as was found guilty of Domestic violence against his girlfriend a few years back. Not the TYPE of people Larry associates with
so, are you going to dodge the question again, mike....or will you answer this time? how is the prosecution going to introduce evidence of jurisdiction at the traffic stop when the only witness they have, the cop, cant make legal conclusions on the stand?
The police officer doesn’t make a legal conclusion. He states where the offense occurred; the judge makes the legal conclusion there is jurisdiction or not. I know that is not what Black’s Law says but…
I can't tell if you're trolling or if you actually believe you're making a point. So here goes: The cop getting on the stand and answering questions about where and what happened is testimony. The cop's testimony is evidence. That's how the prosecution is going to introduce the evidence of jurisdiction. What part of that are you finding hard to comprehend?
I'm not sure what is more ridiculous about this question: the fact that you think you're so important that Mike would intentionally just ignore your question, when the truth is he's getting 100s of comments at one time and more than likely just didn't see it or it could be the fact that question itself isn't worth the few seconds it took you to type it out. If you REALLY wanted him to answer that question you would do the same as every one else and send him the question using stars so you could be sure he'd see it. As for the question itself, the fact that you actually had to ask it because you don't know the answer (and you truly believe it's an intelligent question) tells me that you spend wayyyy too much time listening to these UA-cam lawyers and not enough time actually studying the actual law.
@@sandrablosser9888 why are you strawmanning?i didnt bring up black's law, so why did you?are you a sovereign citizen? i know youre not going to believe this but, the cop DOES make legal conclusions. the cop makes the legal conclusions of: 1 the law applies to the driver 2 the driver broke the law 3 i have jurisdiction so, youre wrong. completely and utterly wrong.
@@jenw.1412 classic gaslighting response. and an ignorant one. see, he has already responded to me (very poorly, like a response worthy of a pseudo lawyer), so there goes your stupid theory. oh, and....if you think the question is sooooooo simple, then why didnt you just answer it? instead you wasted the time to make a completely ridiculous diatribe. sounds to me that you cant answer this very simple queation and are trying to cover that up by being a typical trolling bully.
Best quote of the year so far, "...can't double-jeopardy me MF". Judge says, see ya in 30 days. We'll try it again. LOL
The judge always says..."you will be held to the same standard as an attorney".... Pro pers are never held to the same standard.
It's the same standard, but they are offered more latitude. It's the difference between how you hold a teenager accountable versus a four year old. The rules may be the same, but you can't treat them exactly the same.
That's just how I see it, at least.
@Vykk_Draygo The same standard means the same latitude. If you mean expected to follow the same laws, then yes. You must file proper motions. But a lawyer's standards include court decorum.
Like most things in modern court, they're trying to cut down on appeals by giving them every chance the first time.
The judge over-informs and then under-enforces, in both cases to ensure that there is no room for appeal.
correct, by law, pro per and pro se are not held to these same standard as lawyers.
That was hilarious. Don't double jeopardy me, mudda fu**aaa. 😂 And it started off so well. 😂
Sov cits hope to confuse things to the extent that the courts don’t want to deal with them anymore. They can drag these things out sometimes for years.
Nice, no need to rush to judgement
I’ve definitely seen some get some very sweet deals from the prosecution that really feels like a “just take this and go, I can’t listen to 82 more hours of this over a traffic ticket”
@@thedave1771 if me, Your honor, in order to avoid any controversy, the defendant searched for any full disclosure contracts or agreements with this state and found none. So, the defendant Agrees to pay for any verified damages the defendant cause this State The defendant wishes to settle up, so who does the defendant make the check out to?
It’s not like the state was really damaged?
But that's the whole point, isn't it? To confound and disrupt government procedures? Or have I got that wrong?
I don't know what Judge Webster earns, but she's underpaid.
Question: What percentage do you think SovCits actually believe this nonsense vs. just using these ideas to avoid paying taxes and such?
Less than 5% are true believers, others just trying to avoid license fees etc. An example is the “in honor” that would answer questions for $100/question, he is a true believer (aka nuts)
@@stevefromchicago8277, I have often thought that. Most are at the end of their rope with bills, taxes, and such, and this is their last resort on avoiding paying anything. If they don't want to pay taxes or registration fees, then get off the roads that are built and maintained with said fees. I'm sure more than a few of these people have gotten into accidents when they are at fault and I doubt they took care of the damages they caused. We need to see videos on these cases.
Sovereign Citizens are the Flat Earthers of Law.
@@stevefromchicago8277 To be entirely honest, it's hard to know who truly believes what they say. Is it likely at least some are being disingenuous? Yes. Is it likely that only 5% of fewer of the proponents of this ideology believe it? Probably not. It's worth noting, that just because htey are trying to avoid fees doesn't also mean that they don't believe in the ideology.
For examples of ideologies that seem insane to rational people, look at groups like the Black Hebrew Israelites, flat earthers, Holocaust deniers, etc.. People are quite capable of having absolute faith in patently preposterous ideas.
I think it's rare that someone becomes a SovCit based on principle. Rather, they run into trouble (suspended/revoked license, unpaid tickets, unpaid rent, unpaid judgements, etc.) and then adopt SovCit BS in response.
What a cluster. I had no idea that Judge Webster could herd cats.
I love Judge Webster's new hairdo. I like these glasses. ❤️
New to the channel and would like to thank you, Mike, for reducing my productivity. Yesterday I sat through the entirety of the Wang Oreo and the Wee Wee Junk hearings. Starting to see a theme around here! Anyway, thank you for all you do 🎉
@@NicolaMaxwell I guess not! I’ve already unbuttoned my shirt, snorted some glue, and began making goat noises.
@@JKsCardShack😂😂
I'm waiting for the Lego version of Regier to come out!
Holy Oy Vey! McDonald's doesn't handle orders this fast and accurately!
if dummy tries to challenge jurisdiction, judge should be able to declare him incompetent
MFer Bombs never go over well in court🤣 = how to remain in jail longer😎
His way of securing free lodging. Drop one MF for one month of 3 hot meals per day, a cot, hot showers, games, weights, electricity and running water all at no charge to him.
After watching these videos, practicing law seems like trying to stuff 10 lbs of crap in a 2 lb bag. My hat is off to y'all.
Love Attorney Sharon Thorn's reaction to MFers not being double jeopardied.
This poor judge seems to land all the sovcits.
Webster HANDLES her docket, always.
I love how every attorney looked up in sync. Even the one who was already facing the camera tilted his head back further.
Just became a member of SovCit Patrol🎉
LOL @LadyBuc77 ("ahhh the joys of unstable relationships")
Best quote ever.
Her job would be so much easier, and all of the attorneys jobs would be so much easier if she would stop letting the defendants walk all over her. There is no need to bend over backwards. Tell them you’re not going to address those issues let them take it up on a pill which they will not do.
Short and sweet hearing in Texas, San Antonio and neighbors never disappointment.
Bummed that I missed the live edition. Judge Webster is rocking the new 'do and red lipstick
Loving her glam look
@@blue2134 She’s definitely ready for prime time, and it looks good.
It's hard to take the Judge seriously with those wild glasses 😂
Can this really be butler county without J Regier prosecuting? 😤
Gillett is a good prosecutor too. ❤️😇
They had to plug the Regeir-Bot back into his charging station.
@@kennethseay5277
Dang it didn't they give him the extended battery option yet!
JRegier is at the workshop for a firmware upgrade.
That was a shock to my system. Lol
Hello from Kansas!!
We stuck around for the last one 👌
She is a hardworking judge!
I hate when there is a lot of people on the screen because I can't keep track of them all.
Ah his other right hand.
LOL.
That judge must be dreaming if she thinks he can outsmart someone who's clearly spent countless hours watching videos of other intellectually deficient people prattling on about British Admiralty Law from the 1800s and flag tassles. What good are her multiple degrees and decades of courtroom experience when confronted by that level of mental prowess?😂
I didn't catch this the first time, but it's maddening how the judge and DA are saying they could make 1:30 work if they HAD to (ie not a great time), and he's like "Yeah, that works better for me anyway." Just no sense of consideration
The life goal of any SovCit is to do everything in his or her power to simply gum up the works of the legal system in any way possible. In the words of Barney Fife, it’s time to “NIP it!”
That is why the FBI has made the determination that they are Domestic Terrorists.
38:23 I got this synchronised head jerk from half the crew on repeat.
Why is attorney stroking clients arm for support like he is a child???
Judge, I require a trial by jury and not a jury trial, thanks
I can’t believe the judge catered to him like that. Wow. 😮I don’t she would do that for attorney
I need an update on the double jeopardy guy lol
Is this before or after Kirvin got slapped with contempt of court?
I always wonder why so many people show up to zoom court in their car.. it's a private space I guess.. but it's not a good look imo
As long as they aren't driving, it's ok.
@@lisawatson9570 yeah i understand, I just think it looks a bit unprepared and not the best look
I would agree with you but I feel like they probably are at work so in a way it’s nice to allow people not to lose their job potentially if they had to be at home/in court
Listened to this at 1.5x speed. 😂😂😂😂😂
Thank you...that helped me😀👍
I tried but the judge was talking so fast that I couldn't understand everything.
I’m still watching the Judge Webster stream. Dubus is coming up within the next hour potentially.
I've been waiting for Dubus to come back!
@@jenw.1412 The first sovcit in this video reappeared later today at around 2:30 pm ET. Judge Webster reached her boiling point on that one.
Ding! Ding! Ding!! The winner is,,,,the SovCit!
Your honor, judge Webster goes down in the first round!
Hello from rainy palm springs.
Yay! Fellow Palm Springs local lets me know I’m not the only law nerd on here 😂
4am n I thought they were all jacked up on speed until I read some chat and it indicated this video is sped up...😂 Judge Webster moving this fast is better than sov cits..it makes her seem frantic 😂
How do you get dragged by a car from your hand being in the door? Unless you're holding on to something on the car or someone in the car, that isn't physically possible.
How about immediate denial of this absurd jurisdiction nonsense.....
I've got the video on normal speed and Judge Webster's talking so fast that when I increased the speed I couldn't understand her so I had to go back to normal speed. LOL She's in a hurry to get this shit done. She's got 40 cases today? Wow, that's a lot.
@LTWM Hey Mike, whenever I mute myself I automatically move my mouse to the LEFT hand side of my keyboard. This reminds me to UNMUTE when I am done with whatever I was doing. Of course, if you are left-handed please do the opposite. LOL
Could we have some editing here? It's pretty tedious combing through an hour of procedural dullness to find 8 good minutes
@@NicolaMaxwell Obviously. I get that. My point is that "let's see if something interesting eventually happens" might not be the most riveting content.
Clips of fun stuff, great. An hour of tedium, not so much
No one forces you to watch. Fast forward to what you consider worth watching. Some of enjoy Judge Webster no matter what.
@@sandrablosser9888 When did I claim I was being forced to watch? Is "interesting things might be better than boring ones" really so difficult a concept?
It's a valid point, and "go away then" doesn't address it
@@NicolaMaxwell "no one forces you to watch" is the functional equivalent of "go away then", and complaining is the exact kind of thing that DOES cause change
@@NicolaMaxwell It's not my job to improve the content on someone else's channel
This woman from the state: HOT
I bet if you offered to give him a thousand dollars but he has to be under the jurisdiction hed be in the jurisdiction 😅
Hello 👋🏽 from Sunny 🌞🌵💕Arizona
Hey bro I love your videos, I’ll use them to fall asleep to sometimes! But your intro song sends me into a 2010 UA-camr content spiral which I promised myself I’d never relive (and also wakes me up). If you could consider changing that I’d appreciate it! Otherwise fantastic live today!❤
@@NicolaMaxwell i cant do it 😩🤣❤️
Denner is smart, he looks at his lawyer before he opens his mouth.
I am just amaazed usually they just talk themselves into jail.
He actually looks like he feels real remorse for his actions.
I see that very seldom on you Tube Court Cases.
Thank you. :) Ivan
Please give them s one way ticket to Morocco!!!
Bingeing on LTWM ❤ 😅
Mike, my flamingo died.
Judge Webster engages those SovCits may to much! She needs to take lessons from Judge Oakley! He doesn’t take their nonsense! I watched her actually try to explain proceedings to a SovCit….Judge Oakley would never be that silly!
User unknown is a cow?😅
Thanks 😊
I missed it by 2 hrs.
Being a judge seems to me like a horrible job. It's operational and you need to be on your game all the time. It sucks as a job I believe.
Do you see Ms Cummings stroking her client’s arm?
😅😅😅😅😅😅😅
HELLO Mike ! Question: Can you reach out to your Friend DUI Guy and ask Him if ChIli DeCastro is doing a fundraiser to hire him for this fellow SoVcit (anarchist ) UA-camr Craig Hendry in Indiana. Craig is throwing Larry's name out there as a way to grift some money.
*BTW: Craig is a Convicted drug dealer as was found guilty of Domestic violence against his girlfriend a few years back. Not the TYPE of people Larry associates with
Judge Webster needs to RETIRE!!!!!!
Why? Their are judges that are older.
so, are you going to dodge the question again, mike....or will you answer this time?
how is the prosecution going to introduce evidence of jurisdiction at the traffic stop when the only witness they have, the cop, cant make legal conclusions on the stand?
The police officer doesn’t make a legal conclusion. He states where the offense occurred; the judge makes the legal conclusion there is jurisdiction or not. I know that is not what Black’s Law says but…
I can't tell if you're trolling or if you actually believe you're making a point. So here goes: The cop getting on the stand and answering questions about where and what happened is testimony. The cop's testimony is evidence. That's how the prosecution is going to introduce the evidence of jurisdiction. What part of that are you finding hard to comprehend?
I'm not sure what is more ridiculous about this question: the fact that you think you're so important that Mike would intentionally just ignore your question, when the truth is he's getting 100s of comments at one time and more than likely just didn't see it or it could be the fact that question itself isn't worth the few seconds it took you to type it out. If you REALLY wanted him to answer that question you would do the same as every one else and send him the question using stars so you could be sure he'd see it.
As for the question itself, the fact that you actually had to ask it because you don't know the answer (and you truly believe it's an intelligent question) tells me that you spend wayyyy too much time listening to these UA-cam lawyers and not enough time actually studying the actual law.
@@sandrablosser9888 why are you strawmanning?i didnt bring up black's law, so why did you?are you a sovereign citizen?
i know youre not going to believe this but, the cop DOES make legal conclusions. the cop makes the legal conclusions of:
1 the law applies to the driver
2 the driver broke the law
3 i have jurisdiction
so, youre wrong. completely and utterly wrong.
@@jenw.1412 classic gaslighting response. and an ignorant one.
see, he has already responded to me (very poorly, like a response worthy of a pseudo lawyer), so there goes your stupid theory.
oh, and....if you think the question is sooooooo simple, then why didnt you just answer it? instead you wasted the time to make a completely ridiculous diatribe.
sounds to me that you cant answer this very simple queation and are trying to cover that up by being a typical trolling bully.
Looks like Booger McSneezy got a bunch on his camera…🤮
False advertising 😢