State Citizen Challenges Jurisdiction. Case Dismissed!

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 19 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 625

  • @jacobbey1465
    @jacobbey1465 5 років тому +7

    Good for you.....let's get back to the original Constitution and not the 2nd Constitution of 1871

    • @Will_JC
      @Will_JC 3 роки тому

      jacob bey
      Are you okay with emailing me? I want to privately talk about something, but if emailing is uncomfortable for you, I have one NON-email option you can consider.

    • @larsongramckow7495
      @larsongramckow7495 15 днів тому

      Yeah the original constitution didn't include the second amendment, the fourth amendment, the entire bill of rights...

  • @iwoman3174
    @iwoman3174 6 років тому +18

    I think this is my favorite....“When enforcing mere statutes, judges of all courts do not act judicially” and thus are not protected by “qualified” or “limited immunity,” SEE: Owen v. City, 445 U.S. 662; Bothke v. Terry, 713 F2d 1404
    “…judges who become involved in enforcement of mere statutes (civil or criminal in nature and otherwise), act as mere “clerks” of the involved agency…” K.C. Davis, ADMIN. LAW, Ch. 1 (CTP. West’s 1965 Ed.)
    “Not every action by any judge is in exercise of his judicial function. It is not a judicial function for a Judge to commit an intentional tort even though the tort occurs in the Courthouse, when a judge acts as a Trespasser of the Law, when a judge does not follow the law, the judge loses subject matter jurisdiction and The Judge’s orders are void, of no legal force or effect”! Yates Vs. Village of Hoffman Estates, Illinois, 209 F.Supp. 757 (N.D. Ill. 1962)

    • @jasonshane3243
      @jasonshane3243 5 років тому +2

      See also Maine vs thibadeaux

    • @Will_JC
      @Will_JC 3 роки тому

      Are you okay with emailing me? I want to privately talk about something, but if emailing is uncomfortable for you, I have one NON-email option you can consider.

    • @AmericanConstitution
      @AmericanConstitution Рік тому

      See Carl Miller knowing your constitution...on UA-cam

    • @DrDangerPuppy
      @DrDangerPuppy 4 місяці тому +1

      OMG this is precisely what I was looking for and couldn't find in my notes. Thank you!

  • @tylerdurdenski4334
    @tylerdurdenski4334 11 років тому +9

    Murdock Vs Pennsylvania 319 USSCR 105
    No state can convert a secured liberty (right) to a privilege and issue a license and fee for it
    Shuttleworth Vs Birmingham 216 USSCR 216
    States that one can ignore the license and engage in that right with impunity

  • @wearytraveler3524
    @wearytraveler3524 8 років тому +8

    I have no doubt that the police officer was told to remain absent specifically so that this case could not be heard!

  • @leojmullins
    @leojmullins 5 років тому +6

    We live in a lawless age that means might is right. Appealing to the law against lawless men of might (govt) is a waste of time.

    • @Will_JC
      @Will_JC 3 роки тому

      Leo Mullins
      Are you okay with emailing me? I want to privately talk about something, but if emailing is uncomfortable for you, I have one NON-email option you can consider.

  • @russellstone9056
    @russellstone9056 10 років тому +20

    "In order to protect these rights governments are instituted among men and DERIVE THEIR JUST POWER TO GOVERN BY THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED." ~ Declaration of Independence and first organic law of the United States of America.

  • @tomrogers4828
    @tomrogers4828 8 років тому +4

    Your problem is not what you are bringing up. You need to communicate it all to the court through paper not your voice.

  • @johngibbs569
    @johngibbs569 10 років тому +6

    Great Job Jerry I remember when I met You in Greensboro a few years back and You were telling us about your case. I am glad You received the results You deserved keep up the Good Fight brother and may the Good Lord continue to bless You and your family!

  • @ericwsmith7722
    @ericwsmith7722 6 років тому +2

    So if i steal this guys car,,,,, take it to my house, the cops have no jurisdiction to take it back , or arrest me... wonder what type or car he has.. before it was impounded and he was tossed in jail ! lol

  • @JEHERETIC
    @JEHERETIC 12 років тому +2

    I cannot find this presidential veto anywhere on line, I would love to read it further

  • @6StimuL84
    @6StimuL84 8 років тому +11

    Should have required she issue a warrant for the sworn servant that did not show up as ordered....What they would have done to you. Then billed them for the unlawful waste of your time....
    Personal liberty largely consists of the right of locomotion- to go where one pleases only so far restrained as the rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways to transport his property thereon by horse drawn carriage, wagon or automobile is NOT a mere privilege which may be permitted or prohibited at will, but the common right which he has under is right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Under this Constitutional guarantee one may, therefore, under normal conditions, travel at his inclination along the public highways or in public places, and while conducting himself in an orderly manner neither interfering with nor disturbing anothers rights he will be protected, not only in his person, but in his safe conduct. ll Am.Jur. (1st)Constitutional Law, Sect.329, p. 1135
    "Complete freedom of the highways is so old and WELL ESTABLISHED a blessing that we have forgotten the days of the robber barons and toll roads, and yet, under an act such as this, arbitrarily administered, the highways may become completely monopolized. If, through LACK OF INTEREST, the people submit, THEY MAY LOOK TO SEE THE MOST SACRED OF LIBERTIES TAKEN FROM THEM, ONE BY ONE, BY MORE OR LESS RAPID ENCROACHMENT." (emph. added)
    ROBERTSON v DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ,180 Wn 133, 147 (1934) Dissenting Op.

  • @CodenameDad
    @CodenameDad 7 місяців тому +1

    It was dismissed because the officer didn’t show up, period. It happens ALL THE TIME. And the only states that this loophole would ever come close to working in your favor,are those southern states that faught in the civil war.

  • @SawatDee-g3z
    @SawatDee-g3z 2 місяці тому +2

    Put the court on notice of U.S. vs TWEEL 550 f 2d. Its a tax case but the fundamental foundation will apply and would love to see it go to the Supreme court for other things like this and others. ~FREEMAN~

  • @scottryanlangley9782
    @scottryanlangley9782 10 років тому +7

    Question? I received 2 tickets in the mail, I had to sign guilty or not in order to get a trial or risk being arrested for not responding. By signing not guilty did I just contract with them & subject myself to their jurisdiction?

    • @ericwsmith7722
      @ericwsmith7722 10 років тому +3

      first, pay NO attention to ANY part of this video, its 100% nonsense, sorry to burst your bubble, understand this, I 100% guarantee that you will have to go to court in the same town, city or were ever you got the tickets, knowing that why would they not have jurisdiction ? this video is based on the notion that they are only citizens of there own, and only subject to laws they feel like obeying .... if your not laughing by now, then sorry your stupid then, but if what a say makes sense to you let me know and ill let you know the best way to try and get out of tickets, and not its not 100% fool prof , any one who says they have a 100% way of beating all tickets is lying, pure and simple.

    • @kitevans6146
      @kitevans6146 7 років тому

      What happened

    • @CanIbeWithThee
      @CanIbeWithThee 6 років тому +4

      You sure did

    • @fjccommish
      @fjccommish 6 років тому +7

      @@ericwsmith7722 Get in ze train to ze camp.

    • @bradleylomas7525
      @bradleylomas7525 5 років тому +3

      Scott Ryan Langley should have taken the letter and put it back inside another envelope and send it back where it came from. Easy way to remove there authority

  • @yvonne-transitioning
    @yvonne-transitioning 6 років тому +2

    Are you in jail yet. Too bad you haven’t had access to a normal education, you seem intelligent. Hey bud you gotta follow our laws. Just remember you are being monitored by the FBI.

  • @AmericanConstitution
    @AmericanConstitution Рік тому +1

    The jurisdiction he is challenging is subject matter... Citizens at the state level are Sovereign and citizens at the u.s. level are tax tittle 26 citizens and the case he means is Erie V. Railroad....

  • @brekinla
    @brekinla 11 років тому +3

    Better to pay up front as it only costs more later. If you can live without a drivers license then you pretty much ignore the lower courts. That is the systems big club to keep the peons in line.

  • @oldbaldone1
    @oldbaldone1 8 років тому +21

    It was dismissed due to the officer did not show up, it was not jurisdiction. it is not a valid legal argument.

    • @jaymorgan.
      @jaymorgan. 8 років тому +7

      Challenging jurisdiction is a valid legal argument. Look up federal rules of civil procedure rule 12b1.

    • @6StimuL84
      @6StimuL84 8 років тому +6

      Bullshit...
      1 AmJ2d Section 70 Actions
      Loss and wrong both elements which MUST exist in combination as the ESSENTIALS of a cause of action.
      State had neither element and no case, therefore no jurisdiction....
      And law is simple...No loss and wrong, no jurisdiction...Period.
      You cannot wrong a legal fiction.....

    • @michaelroberts5999
      @michaelroberts5999 7 років тому

      James Barnes bullshit, if the officer testified it would have been open and shut conviction for this turd.

    • @chikehenderson8709
      @chikehenderson8709 6 років тому +6

      jurisdiction has nothing to do with arguing, invalid claim = no jurisdiction to test man.

    • @claytonroberts344
      @claytonroberts344 6 років тому +8

      Maybe the cop did not show up bc they told him not to so they would not have to come clean on this.

  • @normanpearson8753
    @normanpearson8753 3 роки тому +2

    Puerile nonsense from word one .It won,t work !!

  • @BRENDAH6699
    @BRENDAH6699 10 років тому +11

    The only way to over rule the courts is to go above them and their jurisdiction. In other words you must become God-realized. Unfortunately, most people of today have completely forgotten their divinity. The only thing a person can really own is their state of consciousness. Arguing with another man over a speeding ticket takes two. Learn to cut out the middle man.

    • @Steelmage99
      @Steelmage99 5 років тому

      Mythological figures hold no jurisdiction in modern civilised societies.

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 2 роки тому

      Learn to stop talking like a knob .

    • @xxxluvi
      @xxxluvi Місяць тому

      @@Steelmage99 the Bible is wat the courts go by 😂 🤡

  • @crackahcrackah
    @crackahcrackah 11 років тому +6

    Current state governments are corporations. Not only that, but one isn't given the option of telling these corporations that they do not want to be a traffic ticket customer.

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 4 роки тому +1

      Some people didn't want to be a member of the "I'm in court for mass murder" club , ,but ...that's the law .

    • @teddyflowers2798
      @teddyflowers2798 4 місяці тому

      I heard corporations can’t give out orders. I thought it was a federal offense

    • @larsongramckow7495
      @larsongramckow7495 15 днів тому

      Because that's bullshit

    • @larsongramckow7495
      @larsongramckow7495 15 днів тому

      ​@@teddyflowers2798states aren't corporations

  •  4 роки тому +8

    Just proves that courts operate merely on assumptions and presumptions until rebutted you must rebut all before proceeding.

    • @Will_JC
      @Will_JC 3 роки тому

      JOHNNY HAYNES
      Are you okay with emailing me? I want to privately talk about something, but if emailing is uncomfortable for you, I have one NON-email option you can consider.

  • @jessicaarmstrong3169
    @jessicaarmstrong3169 8 місяців тому +1

    Having a case dismissed because the cop failed to show up, is NOT THE SAME as winning a case.

    • @Teutonick143
      @Teutonick143 7 місяців тому

      You weren't charged, you won

    • @jessicaarmstrong3169
      @jessicaarmstrong3169 7 місяців тому +1

      @@Teutonick143 no, it's not the same.
      There's nothing to win or lose, if there's nothing to challenge.

  • @StriderHoliman
    @StriderHoliman 10 років тому +14

    He's right... and the system is corrupt.

    • @Mxxx-ii9bu
      @Mxxx-ii9bu 3 місяці тому +1

      Almost everything he said was wrong. He's not properly educated on this material. His sources are social media gurus.

  • @2018wrxaddict
    @2018wrxaddict Рік тому +1

    Always remember there are 12 presumptions of the court, and one of these is jurisdiction. All 12 presumptions must be challenged/rebutted before appearing in a courtroom.

  • @PatrickHenry2K
    @PatrickHenry2K 12 років тому +5

    There must be a contract/obligation (Article I Section 10) to connect statutory law to a living man which is governed under the original jurisdiction of the United States over admiralty/maritime cases (Article III Section 2). Add the commerce clause (Article I Section 8) to that mix and you have a bona fide slave with absolute consent. I realize contract law derives from common law so thats the main channel in which liabilities are given. Otherwise no contract, injured party or cause of action.

  • @tylerdurdenski4334
    @tylerdurdenski4334 11 років тому +6

    The Constitution Article 6 paragraph 2, the Supremacy Clause. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, Period
    Marbury v. Madison
    It is also not entirely unworthy of observation that, in declaring what shall be the supreme law of the land, the Constitution itself is first mentioned, and not the laws of the United States generally...

  • @MrBrianohamill
    @MrBrianohamill 8 років тому +1

    One question:
    Does the "State" (a subdivision of the federal government distinct from the union state) need jurisdiction of the soil if you are a federal aka US citizen? I don't think so, but am interested to hear to opinions.

  • @v8zcar
    @v8zcar 4 місяці тому

    Can I argue jurisdiction while being sued for a debt? I have filed revocation of election, verified non citizen status using everify ( i did the passport application process with affidavits last year) I have more to record, 1779 declaration i think it is and a couple more. Do I go to court as the all caps ? Or all in now? As far as I am concerned, I corrected my status, but not sure how to operate. Rescinded voters registration. I have a job, bank acct and a driver's license, those are my only contracts. Oregon state here. Thk you in advance

  • @marksterling324
    @marksterling324 11 років тому +4

    You are SOOOOO Wrong. How can a court create case law when it has no Jurisdiction over the person? The prosecution in these cases will not fight because they cannot win. They have no standing. Its that simple. To argue otherwise would establish case law, and thats something they dont want to do.
    The real question is one of courage, something most Americans dont have. This young man has courage. You should salute him.

  • @keensweep
    @keensweep 11 років тому +5

    I am glad you point out the commerce issue. I was not involved in commerce nor by lawful definition traffic. A license holder does not give up any rights. We are born with inherent rights unalienable by man including ownership of private property and travel. A registration does not change ownership. Our public roads are built by the people for the people. I believe we can of act in multiple capacities and in this case I was not actin in any public capacity rather one of the people traveling.

    • @DjHoodz1
      @DjHoodz1 5 років тому +2

      This is the comment I have been looking for, the fact that being a license holder does not give up any rights. If I am making money on the roads driving people or goods around for profit, I need a license. If I am traveling from point A to B in my Automobile, I do not require a license period.

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 4 роки тому

      The judge will disagree ,don't try to convince others ,just the judge .

    • @keensweep
      @keensweep 2 роки тому +1

      @@normanpearson8753 judge knew I was right but cannot let it be known which is why he left the court that day. Not only was this case dismissed, several audience members learned truth that day. A couple of them who actually stopped me outside to ask wtf happened.

  • @skwid12
    @skwid12 11 років тому +1

    good work .just wondering if using the term citizen is a good idea?

  • @irishlakotapoet
    @irishlakotapoet 9 років тому +1

    how does one contact you Jerry?

  • @stevenlovell3300
    @stevenlovell3300 5 років тому +1

    The only reason this case was dismissed was because the police officer didn't show up.
    It had nothing to do with your challenge

  • @xgameonx5799
    @xgameonx5799 6 років тому +3

    what happens if someone challenges a judge's jurisdiction and the judge just says he has Jurisdiction?

    • @bradleylomas7525
      @bradleylomas7525 5 років тому

      XGAMEONX bring to the courts attention how they don't have jurisdiction in the form of questions to be answered.

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 4 роки тому +3

      He'd be right .You never hear of a case being thrown out for lack of jurisdiction .It's a non-starter .

    • @karenmmcthree
      @karenmmcthree Рік тому

      ​@@bradleylomas7525Can you get them to vacate a void judgment?
      Lack of due process or lack of jurisdiction

    • @bradleylomas7525
      @bradleylomas7525 Рік тому +1

      @@karenmmcthree you have to take them to court to do that. It's best to do an article 3 court (higher court).

    • @karenmmcthree
      @karenmmcthree Рік тому

      @@bradleylomas7525 Absolutely and I challenged it but they ignored me

  • @KivaTV
    @KivaTV 10 років тому +5

    First of all, if you know NOTHING about the Constitution FOR the United States of America and CONTRACT LAW, please don't comment.
    YOUR so-called government (state, city, courts, etc) is a CORPORATION ( created in 1925), like McDonald's is a corporation. Technically they have NO JURISDICTION over you! They only get it when you CONSENT to THEIR statues, codes, and ordinances which ARE NOT LAW!
    They said because he travels on the roads they ASSUMED jurisdiction, and if you KNOW and study ALL-LAW, you will automatically KNOW that a judge just cannot ASSUME jurisdiction it must be proven on the record or there is no case. Notice, traveling on the roads (land, soil, etc), not PAPER! lol Corporations are DEAD, PAPER, ENTITIES that are NOT tied to Land or Soil!
    Go study and research the Supreme Law of the Land and UCC, USC Title 18. Cops aka Policy Enforcers on the roads pulling you over for BS, in a way, is like a MCDONALDS employee putting lights on their car and doing the same thing! LMAO WAKE THE F*CK UP and FREE yourSELF!

    • @MrHydroguy
      @MrHydroguy 5 років тому +2

      Ok what do you say or do when they just assume jurisdiction and continue to proceed ignoring you? It's one thing to know your rights it is another to enforce them. Wouldn't you agree?

  • @dylanhayes5820
    @dylanhayes5820 8 років тому +9

    Title 28 USC 1608 7/27/1868 ... 15 statutes ch 249 section 1 expiration is what is broken when jurisdiction is demanded, AND IS NOT MET WITH AN ANSWER....not a lawyer...so dont ask ?'s...amazing what u can learn on youtube

    • @jaymorgan.
      @jaymorgan. 7 років тому +5

      Because these corrupt courts NEVER have a true valid claim. I believe it has to do with ''Failure to state a claim'' if you challenge jurisdiction and 15 statutes/249....rule 11...and rule 12b1/12b6 is what will make them shyt themselves. lol I remember the prosecutor ambushed me outside to talk to me to make a sweet deal before I walked back into the court room but I refused and it got tossed. I had my friend do the same thing and the prosecutor admitted he has no jurisdiction so they bounded his driving under suspension/marijuana charges over only to let it expire.

  • @minnow008
    @minnow008 11 років тому +1

    if you had won. every case in NC prior would be thrown out. every prison emptied. tread carefully my friend.

  • @dxguy
    @dxguy 7 років тому +1

    They don't have to present anything or debate it with you. You NEVER win or lose a motion, the judge only rules on it - then you can appeal if you like. They merely rule against you and you are free to appeal the case when you lose.

  • @blackpage716
    @blackpage716 9 років тому +9

    I agree with the sovreign citizen movement However, it over looks one major fact.
    The currency. We use THEIR currency. Another example of allowing ourselves to be governed.

    • @blackpage716
      @blackpage716 9 років тому +2

      trey young
      Im very aware of that. I guess people cannot grasp simple concepts.....

    • @constitutionalrepublican1611
      @constitutionalrepublican1611 6 років тому +1

      In the 33 years I have been alive I have never touched cash.
      Its actually illegal according to my state constitution to use any money that's not gold or silver, to which is how I receive payment.
      I am retired marine and am a self employed business owner, which has others operate underneath me, I have never so much as touched a paper bill.
      Its not easy but it is very much doable.

    • @kaindeschain8590
      @kaindeschain8590 6 років тому

      So stop using the money, roads, water and electricity the government builds or subsidizes. Stop living under the freedoms granted by police and military protection. THEN you're a sovereign freeman.
      I'll wait

    • @kaindeschain8590
      @kaindeschain8590 6 років тому +1

      @@constitutionalrepublican1611 so when you buy groceries you give them gold or silver pieces?

    • @constitutionalrepublican1611
      @constitutionalrepublican1611 6 років тому

      @@kaindeschain8590 I'm self sufficient, I grow my own food and make my own drinks.
      As for any store bought goods, I have sourced a middle man( woman) to which transfers my gold and silver into cash currency to purchase at a store, she brings me back change in silver or copper or lead.

  • @bryantschroder5479
    @bryantschroder5479 5 років тому +1

    Case was dismissed because COP DID NOT SHOW, not because jurisdiction was not proven. Besides your in the wrong court. Traffic courts are not court of record. They are unable to hear these types of issues.

  • @AllenNelsonBoisjoli
    @AllenNelsonBoisjoli 8 років тому +5

    good try guys...they prolly told the cop not to show so they didnt have to get into the argument that you brought up

    • @chelle315
      @chelle315 5 років тому

      A cop does not skip court for 1 citation, they have more citations to deal with when court is in session, he was there.

  • @MrBrianohamill
    @MrBrianohamill 8 років тому +5

    Anyone who says that this is not a win should think real hard. The court is NEVER going to say "ok, you win because we don't have jurisdiction."
    And of course this gets thrown out because they don't want it as a case that can be cited. There goes the summer home, the ten cars, vacations overseas...

    • @DavidS94938
      @DavidS94938 Рік тому +1

      So even though it is a loss, you think it is a win. Because nutso

  • @rexnonpotestpaccare5043
    @rexnonpotestpaccare5043 6 років тому +1

    Put a agricultural commercial lien on there building for a 100k they'll leave you alone..

  • @desireenichole7911
    @desireenichole7911 8 років тому +1

    can anyone tell me what native Americans can do about legal situations like this?
    I'm an enrolled tribal member but I'm not aware of my rights as one if I indeed have any;
    I heard natives have different laws their under???
    true OR false???

  • @ieha2012
    @ieha2012 11 років тому

    Where did you get you Doccument for the Act of 1867, I looked every where I can only find rewritten copys not the real thing ( ie..copy)

  • @jrc3ky
    @jrc3ky 11 років тому +8

    The District of Columbia is a corporation. NOT a sovereign state.

    • @vengeance2825
      @vengeance2825 Рік тому +2

      Close. The District of Columbia is the seat of our government, an intended neutral area. The "United States" in so far as it is a federal corporation(28 USC §3002(15)(A)) has its physical address within DC. The National Government/Federal Government is sovereign within its sphere of jurisdiction. While it is not a state admitted into the union, nor can it be, it is a State for purposes of international trade. We can see evidence of this in the IRC.

    • @aaronshoyt
      @aaronshoyt 9 місяців тому

      And a US Citizen is a federal Corporation and a slave..

  • @ProsecutorX
    @ProsecutorX 8 років тому +3

    the lunatic fringe .. best entertainment on the planet... come one, come all ... free laughs :) thanks guys i appreciate you.. not for the reason you want .. but .. take what you can get I'd suggest with these rantings :) have a great day and keep these videos coming

    • @justaman-km1hl
      @justaman-km1hl 8 років тому +1

      stop trolling.

    • @ProsecutorX
      @ProsecutorX 8 років тому +2

      Your funny.. I like trolling you :)

    • @6StimuL84
      @6StimuL84 8 років тому

      You boot licking Tobies are soooo precious.

  • @atomgonuclear
    @atomgonuclear 11 років тому +1

    Here is where you lose your jurisdiction argument. If you have ever used some form of government service by the new state of north carolina. This includes police, firefighters, or unemployment. By using services provided by the state under no obligation then you automatically become a member of the jurisdiction. You can't have it both ways. If your out of jurisdiction then you don't have the right to use those services. Taxes and roads don't count. Those you are obligated to under force

    • @warrentoles3127
      @warrentoles3127 11 місяців тому

      Na.. the United States is an investment under your portfolio. These people owe you money. You don't ever have to listen to them

    • @warrentoles3127
      @warrentoles3127 11 місяців тому +1

      Your a beneficiary! You PAID.

  • @bryanbarrett8985
    @bryanbarrett8985 6 років тому +3

    If you have any adhenshion contract's you are a 14 th Admendment Citizenship STATUS, If you don't have ALLODIAL TITLE LAND PANTENT, you are a 14 th Admendment Citizenship STATUS tax Slave, Married Certificate Registration Voter's Registration Tax Bill anything at all you are a 14 th Admendment Citizenship STATUS, All courts don't operating under Constitutional law but Admirlty Maritime Defacto inferior Psuedo Courts LEGAL LEAGLIZE TERMINOLOGY COLORABLE LAW not LAW at All, These courts can't hear you, You are a living breathing blood and flesh man how can a Fitcioious piece of paper hear you??? They can't and won't!!!! File your Affadavits of STATUS with the Secretary file it with your local Countries,

  • @alancosens
    @alancosens Рік тому

    So, it was dismissed because the officer didn't show, not at all because the court though the guy's jurisdiction challenge had any validity whatsoever.

  • @justaman6972
    @justaman6972 11 років тому +1

    Jerry and Steve is this applicable in Florida? If so where would I locate said nexus to establish the evidence of military rule and non-consent? PM me if you like, this is very powerful and i have been at this since 91' studying ,learning and researching, so this will be a fine addition to unraveling the ball of red tape. Thanks.
    Respectfully in truth and liberty,
    Defender of the Republic

  • @kegginstructure
    @kegginstructure 6 років тому +5

    Hard to prove, but I wouldn't doubt that the officials of the current state government asked the officer to not show up. They didn't want to even come CLOSE to having that argument enter a court officially, because then a dismissal could be run up to the federal courts. The last thing they want is to find out that the citizens of North Carolina have been paying taxes to the wrong government, and the police have been arresting people and jailing them based on laws passed by the wrong government. That would be such a chaotic situation that the lawsuits for civil rights violations would turn certain lawyers into gazillionaires.

  • @TedBronson1918
    @TedBronson1918 9 років тому +5

    You seem to forget that North Carolina had been in a state of rebellion for 4 years. That rebellion had been suppressed by the national government with the cooperation of the states not in rebellion. What you refer to as the "second state" is nothing of the sort. The rebellion failed and the national (federal) government was put in the position of having to rebuild a republican form of government in that state and the others who rebelled. It didn't matter at that point if the North Carolinians didn't run it. They were not going to allow the rebels to just pick up where they left off in 1861- that would have been ridiculous. The things done politically at that time were a direct result of North Carolina's own illegal actions and rebellion. You should listen to the Memoirs of Ulysses S. Grant (free as an audiobook on Librivox.org). He deals with the problems of secession and the legal quandaries the nation had to resolve after the rebellion far better than I can do it here. Plus, it is an excellent book. But in short, the Reconstruction government was instituted to A) suppress further rebellion, B) remove the rebellion leaders from political power, C) educate the citizens so as to break up the old power structure of slave owner supremacy and make all votes count equally.... that list is incomplete and just off the top of my head. Anyway, my point is that you are ignoring the circumstances of history. Like I said, read Grant's Memoirs. Your case may have been dismissed, but I doubt it is for the reasons you think, though I might be wrong. Have a good day!

    • @LegalTyranny
      @LegalTyranny 5 років тому

      Holy shit you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. Next time READ THE FUCKING RECONSTRUCTION ACTS. We're lorded over by BAR members. They created new nations. You obviously don't even know about the new state constitutions that had to be created. People like you are maddening.

    • @russellstone9056
      @russellstone9056 2 роки тому

      The states joined a confederacy in 1776 voluntarily, The Articles of Confederation were enacted voluntarily. The capitol was and is in Philadelphia. The constitution, enacted by Esquires, unlawfully usurped the Articles of Confederation and established a foreign "government" City-State in the District of Columbia. "The District of Columbia is a foreign corporation with regard to a state." US citizens are subjects and considered residents of DC.

    • @TedBronson1918
      @TedBronson1918 2 роки тому

      @@russellstone9056 Read the Preamble to the US Constitution first of all. Second, the men who wrote it and then submitted it to the various states were their elected representatives. They gathered to work out a more effective form of government because the Articles were ineffective. The Constitution required the validation of of the states to become the the Law of the Land instead of the Articles of Confederation, and that process took months and months because of the debate surrounding it and Amendments made. The District of Columbia is a Federal city seperate from any State so that no individual State will have a special preference, get special funding or treatment because of their status as hosts of the Federal government. In the earliest years of the new USA that would have cause huge problems. THAT is why the the District of Columbia exists - period. Someone who calls it "foreign" needs to read an actual history book instead of learning from youtube. What some lawmakers may have done by using/abusing that status since then is another matter entirely. Take the time to read books. They're far better than videos and have a lot more information.

    • @russellstone9056
      @russellstone9056 2 роки тому +1

      @@TedBronson1918 I agree that reading is often better than watching a video although in some learning studies, lectures and videos were far better for retaining knowledge. The District of Columbia (US) IS a foreign corporation with regard to a state. Look it up. Why is it you say that the Articles were insufficient? Because they didn't have a dictator in place? What is one of the first things Washington did after being appointed dictator? He rode to the Alleghenies and slaughtered a bunch of farmers over a whiskey tax. The farmers were trying to preserve the value of their property through the winter by distilling it. Raping people through massive taxes wasn't as readily accepted then as it is now. People had some sort of backbone and bearing for right and wrong.

  • @bighitmachine
    @bighitmachine 9 років тому +5

    The war between the north and the south had nothing to do with freeing an indigenous people called (slaves), by people who acted outside moral conduct. The emancipation act was merely a smoke screen for the REAL issue > CAPITALISM.
    1. The north told the south, you gotta let those slaves go. Why ???
    a. It was easier to buy labor (A SLAVE) one time for a set price ,than to pay for labor yearly.
    2. The south began to rise and upset the balance of the union by way of their southern economy due to (SLAVE) labor.
    a. The north say this as a THREAT.
    3. The north invited the south to the table to negotiate..
    a. The south said they weren't interested in giving up their (SLAVE LABOR).
    4. The north said you are upsetting the balance of the union, since the north is where the constitutional ratification took place, it was the political location of the union government.
    5. Once again the south said , that sounds like a personal problem to us, (paraphrasing) and further more we will withdraw from the union.
    6. The north said, (you can't do that.
    7. The south said we can, and we will. They walked away from the table, AND The Rest IS History called > THE CIVIL WAR
    If you still don't get it, here's a (hypothesis) that will bring it home..............
    Saddam...... was said to have weapons of mass destruction which was a means to the end of justifying an intention without alerting the public to what the REAL HIDDEN AGENDA WAS.. This way of doing things is nothing new here..

    • @jakevoss4917
      @jakevoss4917 9 років тому +3

      The comparison drawn here is so inaccurate I don't even know where to start. You are right about the Iraq invasion though.

    • @bighitmachine
      @bighitmachine 9 років тому +2

      Depending on what perspectives you have on the subject matter, that could be so, certainly Everybody is entitled to draw conclusions based upon his or her own research, that's what makes it interesting to dialogue....

    • @Reaction1s
      @Reaction1s 9 років тому

      +Sound Man
      this is almost accurate imo. the difference being that the southern states were aligned with "those wealthiest of capitalists" from England. one should read the Henry Charles Carey currency letters and also reseach "the American System" and "resumption " for the usurpation of the Federal Gov.
      "resumption" finally ended in 1933 when US finally was drawn to war against Germany because Germany used " the American System" which was sucking the wealth from those Capitalists as Carey's "American system" was suppose to do.
      these truths were hidden from the people because there are some who felt and feel that only a worthy few that should control the rest. Read "silent weapons for quiet wars".

    • @CanIbeWithThee
      @CanIbeWithThee 6 років тому

      Word!

    • @macgyveratlarge2133
      @macgyveratlarge2133 5 років тому

      @@jakevoss4917 Donald Rumsfeld had a hardon to take down Iraq after the first gulf war.
      He used the 911 attacks as a leverage point to get Bush on board with it.
      As far as the "weapons of mass destruction," everyone and their brother knows full well they were run into Syria, but the State Department decided to play ignorant.

  • @harleyborgais
    @harleyborgais Рік тому +1

    FYI, to take jurisdiction not given or refuse that which is, are treason to the Constitution just like making war against it in any other way, or aiding or adhering to those who do. That carries a penalty of no less than ten years up to life in prison or death by lethal injection in US Codes see:
    "It is most true that this Court will not take jurisdiction if it should not; but it is equally true that it must take jurisdiction if it should. The judiciary cannot, as the legislature may, avoid a measure because it approaches the confines of the Constitution. We cannot pass it by because it is doubtful. With whatever doubts, with whatever difficulties, a case may be attended, we must decide it if it be brought before us. We have no more right to decline the exercise of jurisdiction which is given than to usurp that which is not given. The one or the other would be treason to the Constitution. Questions may occur which we would gladly avoid, but we cannot avoid them. All we can do is to exercise our best judgment and conscientiously to perform our duty. In doing this on the present occasion, we find this tribunal invested with appellate jurisdiction in all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States. We find no exception to this grant, and we cannot insert one."
    supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/264/
    www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript
    www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381
    www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3591
    You can start by submitting the evidence to the several grand jury departments of several federal courts around where the alleged crime would have occurred, file criminal charges if you can put together "probable" evidence, or civil suit for violation of duties like neglect to prevent deprivation of rights under color of law (allowing anything to the Contrary of the Constitution and Laws made in Pursuance thereof, not any Thing to the Contrary). You can submit evidence to impeach judges and legislators to the House Reps too, and if they dont do their duty you can use the other methods as "checks and balances" to remove them from office and prosecute them for that!
    www.NRDL.org/howtosuegovt/

  • @W.451
    @W.451 9 років тому +4

    My B.S. meter went off watching this. The case was dismissed because the traffic cop didn't show, happens all the time.

    • @vitalrights7390
      @vitalrights7390 9 років тому +3

      +Watcher4510
      When is the last time you had your BS meter cleaned and calibrated?

  • @rundreamachieve
    @rundreamachieve Рік тому +1

    congrats on the win but when they called your NAME, you stood up acknowledging that you were that ALL-CAPITAL-LETTER corporation. No man or woman belongs in a courthouse. You never had to appear ESPECIALLY as a state citizen. Court had no jurisdiction over you

  • @ikannunaplays
    @ikannunaplays 11 років тому +7

    I'm giving this video a thumb's down for a misleading title. I've had my court cases dismissed for the cop not showing up without having to argue jurisdiction.
    Most tickets can be beaten just by contesting and showing up in court. If the cop does show then you still have a chance depending on the ticket. If it was speeding ask for the information use to determine the vehicle's speed, then ask when was the equipment last calibrated and calibration certificate. Same for red light camera's.

    • @PORTUGAL1010
      @PORTUGAL1010 11 років тому +1

      For red light cameras you ask when the cameras were last calibrated and for the calibration certificate?

    • @ikannunaplays
      @ikannunaplays 10 років тому +2

      Yes, the law varies from state to state on how often the equipment needs to be calibrated. But they all require they are calibrated and there is a certificate proving that it was by an independent third party. This goes for all equipment cameras, radar, lidar, police vehicle speedometer, etc... Anything they might use.
      For a camera speed is determined by taking tge FPS of the camera and how far you traveled in the cameras view. If the FPS, viewable angle or area change it can affect the calculation of speed. Small changes will not make a huge difference on speed but it is a valid argument and the argument is why they have calibration cycles and certificates. But its your gain if they fail to follow the maintenance routines.

    • @KivaTV
      @KivaTV 10 років тому

      I'm giving YOU a thumbs down for NOT KNOWING what really the h*ll is going on out here! SMDH

    • @ikannunaplays
      @ikannunaplays 10 років тому

      KivaTV elaborate please.

    • @KivaTV
      @KivaTV 10 років тому +3

      Brad Schlangen
      The judge is NOT going to tell you the REAL reason you win a case.
      Even IF the Policy Enforcer showed up, by LAW he cannot be a witness or victim and neither can the city or state. If they let the Real reasons a case is won show to everyone else, they will wake up and the courts are going to lose a loooot of money and people are going to start suing them for a whole bunch of stuff...Kidnapping, human trafficking, ponzi and insurance schemes and much more lol
      That's why we neeeeeeeed to study to show thyself approved!
      I got tired of this non article 3 judge here taxing my bum for non sense
      tickets and saying 'ignorance of the law is no excuse' ughh She was right though and it is no excuse for her either!
      People Record your Affidavit of Corporate Denial, FAST!

  • @nerolsalguod4649
    @nerolsalguod4649 6 років тому +3

    Anything that is Not rebutted , esp by affidavit , becomes Tacit Procuration , and therefore stands as fact and proof.
    Jurisdiction by thier own definition and proclamation Must be proven and not just declared.

  • @DarylBuck
    @DarylBuck 11 років тому +7

    If ya can't dazzle them with your brilliance...

  • @keensweep
    @keensweep 11 років тому +8

    Or here in CA. Im dealing with crooked courts too. What gets me the most is our servants who are supposed to be the guardians of our freedoms are doing more to confuse or fool us than they are doing to help us. The judges really do just ignore evidence and proceed under assumption. My hope is as more of us start defending ourselves the courts will be less able to get away with these things. I for one will no longer just pay as my judge reminded me.. " you know you could have just payed this"

    • @harleyborgais
      @harleyborgais Рік тому +4

      When these courts TRIED to hold me in jail, for not paying $1500 for a taser I threw in the road when the officer threatened "I'm going to tase you" while I was begging for money and holding up AZvBoehler showing its a right of free speech...Well I showed I have a right to release unless there is probable evidence I am a danger to anyone, pending criminal conviction (az const), the purpose of bail (az.crim.procedure) is to assure appearance so they need probable evidence I wont but I always do go to court, and I get cases dismissed a lot (7+ so far), so they had to just let me go on "Own Recognizance", and dismiss the "trespass" charge, meaning they admitted the arrest was unlawful, and now I have to sue to overturn the prosecution for assaulting an officer.
      But "There shall be no imprisonment for debt, except in cases of fraud." In the Az Constitution and most or all other States making it "the common law" and "the supreme Law" as well, so they could not hold me in jail for never paying my court 'fines' or for that taser.
      I started to 'represent' myself and keep the 'public defender' as 'advisory counsel' (even though he said he would not do it, or submit the motion, I did, and I got it! He did it! He was surprised too, and he actually started to smile after that!).
      Now I have been learning to initiate indictments and impeachments myself and hold our judges and legislators accountable, so I am trying to upgrade these main pages to have clearer links to all this info as soon as I can manage:
      www.NRDL.org/howtosuegovt/
      www.GovernPublicServants.com
      www.HowWeExist.com

    • @joeythompson262
      @joeythompson262 9 місяців тому

      How awesome! I need some pointers jailed and they have been trying to arrest me the past few days.. all because of my property tax stand

    • @keensweep
      @keensweep 9 місяців тому

      @@joeythompson262 I wish I was more able to help. Its been a decade since I was on point with this stuff and medical issues have had an effect on my memory. I do know taxes would be related but are different than challenging traffic stuff. The information is out but it takes a lot of studying to find the few truths you will need to stand on.

  • @garretcastlebright8996
    @garretcastlebright8996 8 років тому +11

    You want the truth? You can't handle the truth!!!!!

  • @safetyfirstintexas
    @safetyfirstintexas 12 років тому +1

    42 cfr 1983-Every person who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, Suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress,

  • @Colgate64
    @Colgate64 5 років тому +4

    The Court dismissed the case because the Policeman didn't appear. Happens every day in traffic court. Has absolutely ZERO to do with jurisdiction.

  • @quevicular
    @quevicular 10 років тому +16

    you contracted a drivers license, you gave them subject matter jurisdiction before you even got to court, your GUILTY!!! Cuntstitution means jack squat. When will you people wake the hell up. You are creating a commercial agreement with them and must pay. You became a debtor, pledger and a constructive trustee, using their license to DRIVE COMMERCIALLY. The vehicle is now their property when you registered it. If you maintained your right to free travel unencumbered and ran your own plates and didnt agree with their corporate name when getting pulled over, you would be fine and free to go. Give NOTICE to the DMV and the MOT that you give them back the title and retain full possessorary rights to claim the car as your private property. 9/10ths of the law is possession. You publicise this and they ,(anybody) has 21 days to come forward and claim if the vehicle is theirs. If not, then your claim stands. Get a fee schedule together, a conveyance bond and your private plates NOT FOR HIRE. Take the man, not officer to court and charge him for obstruction, conversion of your private property(name), theft, intimidation of your private property if they impound the car, and lay boots to these thieves. File your statement of claim DEMANDING and Requiring Common Law jurisdiction and demand to be paid before the court even proceeds. Deny ALL lawyers from coming in on the defense because they have NO first hand knowledge of the facts at hand and you can nail the lawyer for perjury and demand an arrest for him because he is in your court and is in CONTEMPT, because you are laying the claim and not his stupid, sorry perjuring ass. Put in your statement of claim, affidavit of obligation and fee schedule all of this info and they will not show. Everything you say mention for and on the record and DEMAND the transcripts free of charge because you were forced to appear in any court whereas you had already set up court in your conveyance and the asshole cop tried to overthrow the real Law. Always address the cop in private capacity and never as an officer or you are done. You NEVER acknowledge their jurisdiction, ever. Fancy uniforms and guns and other apparel are for cowards and thieves and degenerates who think they are better than others and can get authority over them. Peace.

    • @stopdemockery
      @stopdemockery 10 років тому

      Wow! If I ever get in trouble with corporate agents, I'd like to have you in my corner.

    • @quevicular
      @quevicular 10 років тому +2

      Thanks brother. Very kind of you. I just received my Lawful Traveller package that Trent Goodbaudy has. I gave him some good insight and im going to apply what I have experienced to solidify this process. People seriously need to get off their asses and apply this knowledge. Go to www.freedomfromgovernment.org

    • @stopdemockery
      @stopdemockery 10 років тому

      ChiefJustice Middleton ~ Thanks for the link. I'll check it out. You might appreciate my Real Democracy Petition to End Political Corruption at secure.avaaz.org/en/petition/Humanity_Start_real_democracy . The banksters' demockery only works for them. It's time we tried out actual democracy.

    • @StrategySpectacular
      @StrategySpectacular 10 років тому

      this is some great stuff i think you should make videos or have a talkshoe radio show its free to use unlike blogtalk, but yeah you can help alot of us idiots (wink) lol

    • @Farawaystone
      @Farawaystone 10 років тому

      My License is for if and when i decide to conduct commerce. To cash a paycheck or other business, My signature is a signature of Convenience, Not Compliance! But Believe what ever You want.

  • @Rowgue51
    @Rowgue51 9 років тому +28

    Stop with these misleading titles already. The case wasn't dismissed because of jurisdiction arguments. It was dismissed because the officer didn't show up to testify. They have no choice to but to dismiss at that point because his testimony is the only evidence the prosecution has.

    • @LLOOYYYDD
      @LLOOYYYDD 8 років тому +7

      +Rowgue51 lol yes but this is the only way these sovereign citizen nutjobs can convince themselves that their "movement" is of any value. Its a fuckin joke how deluded these guys are

    • @LLOOYYYDD
      @LLOOYYYDD 8 років тому +1

      ***** please go away

    • @marneycohen9165
      @marneycohen9165 7 років тому +3

      I got two cases dismissed after claiming common law...they wouldn't even let me speak in the courtroom...so much for a fair trial...both dismissed and I stayed in the public domain even though I was told I could not...I didn't move and the prosecutor basically put his hand up asked for witnesses and said case dismissed...and if you want the case ID#'s I'd be happy to provide...jurisdiction under common law...courts don't have it and you can ask for their oath of office under the common law...

    • @LLOOYYYDD
      @LLOOYYYDD 7 років тому +1

      Marney Cohen yes I would LOVE to see the transcripts of the cases please

    • @marneycohen9165
      @marneycohen9165 7 років тому

      Case ID: 3017920
      Case ID: 2982364
      In the Province of Nova Scotia, Canada...check out the Freedom of Information Act...
      AND please note I am not a Cohen (only by marriage) But Debt is another topic that the world has been hoodwinked by. It's up to everyone to know their rights, thing is most do not unless you have the passion or the desire to dig for truth...trust me, the government is not going to give you full disclosure on anything!

  • @LukeSkywalker-wj8nv
    @LukeSkywalker-wj8nv 8 років тому +6

    sounds like oregon and the state of oregon

  • @JEHERETIC
    @JEHERETIC 12 років тому +10

    A dismissal is a win, that is great but where do we go from here? We need more people to wake the heck up, but again, they love their illusions and boob tube dramas more than life its self

    • @rexnonpotestpaccare5043
      @rexnonpotestpaccare5043 6 років тому +3

      JeHeretic place a commercial lien on there house & personal vessel.. Via there business card..

    • @ChasingMayzie
      @ChasingMayzie 6 років тому +1

      Yeah, JeHeretic, do that and go to federal prison for racketeering for 38 years like Bruce Doucette did when he tried it. www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/05/23/sovereign-citizen-bruce-doucette-sentenced-38-years-prison

    • @LegalTyranny
      @LegalTyranny 5 років тому +1

      @@ChasingMayzie Oy vey!!!

    • @johnstanley8091
      @johnstanley8091 5 років тому

      There is recourse for their actions

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 4 роки тому +1

      No ,it isn't .It's as if it never went to court .

  • @Reaction1s
    @Reaction1s 9 років тому +1

    yes. i belive this is accurate. the problem is that this person was proving himself in insurrection and rebellion of the occupied state. this is NOT the way to "Free" one's self.
    the US gave all of us the legal title over ourselves to do as one shalt.
    one needs to read the Liber code, 40 stat 411, and the reestablishing of the great Trust put forth in the last line of the Declaration of Independence.

    • @Reaction1s
      @Reaction1s 9 років тому +1

      +Randy Crager
      many paths lead to the mountain, but surely there is but one summit.
      I have no problem with being wrong. I would be in good company.

    • @jaymorgan.
      @jaymorgan. 8 років тому

      Can you send me the breifs you gave the cop or give me a hint to beat a bogus speeding ticket?

  • @63maddog
    @63maddog 8 років тому +1

    Not a shred of truth expressed here.

  • @Colgate64
    @Colgate64 5 років тому

    Misleading title. The case wasn't dismissed because he challenged jurisdiction, It was dismissed because the cop didn't show up.

  • @joshpierce9089
    @joshpierce9089 8 років тому +3

    why did i get thrown into contempt for challenging in jurisdiction

    • @agb1953
      @agb1953 8 років тому +1

      +josh pierce - Your have to present a valid legal argument to prevail in court. I'm betting all you die was deny the court's jurisdiction.

    • @kitevans6146
      @kitevans6146 7 років тому +1

      U ever find out?

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 4 роки тому +1

      Because they're hardly likely to put you in a wrong court . It's not an issue .

  • @RolanRoyce
    @RolanRoyce 11 років тому +9

    So when they take your license just drive without one. What they gonna do, take away your license again? Of course, make sure you drive a cheap disposable car because they will no doubt impound it.

  • @moonbeamrider1
    @moonbeamrider1 12 років тому +3

    All you have to do in court is DEMAND a verified criminal complaint. Never enter any plea. I have done this so many times on traffic tickets and even on a drug charge. All of them were dismissed. Never enter a plea. Never declare yourself a citizen. You are a People.

  • @LivelysReport
    @LivelysReport 11 років тому +1

    That case is so interesting... two states, one re-instituted under military force... can not be a free state... I sure would like to know more about the different jurisdictions one can present...

  • @arricammarques1955
    @arricammarques1955 7 років тому

    DOB: Date of birth signifies an event-YOUR NAME as it appears capitol letters
    corporate-state fiction. Two things that are in conflict. Ticket(s)., INVOICE
    Accepted as Value, There is not witness, no signature on copy of ticket
    Ask for original citation, which you don't have. Issuing officer-city council
    liable for ticket.

  • @PatrickHenry2K
    @PatrickHenry2K 12 років тому +4

    @JonDeth Your not going to necessarily create case law being 'sovereign' because the statutory realm is their(govt) creation.
    Statutory law = law of fictions/dead-> This is where corporate personhood resides. This is the ONLY place it can reside, common law doesn't recognize injuries to legal fictions.
    Common law = law of man/living-> This is the foundation for our nation. We have failed to understand CONTRACT, CAPACITY(TITLE), and CONSENT. Look up DEAN CLIFFORD and JURISDICTIONARY.

  • @rastafaraganj
    @rastafaraganj 6 років тому +1

    if you challenge the jurisdiction or courtroom you must do it a certain way but it is legal and possible but u must go about it a certain way...

  • @Muma_M
    @Muma_M 9 років тому +1

    If only soviet union known this :D...so if i am getting things right, there is no USA (overlaping juridictions issues) ? Did south wrote a capitulation or peace treaty ---very very important diference between those two ;)? If i am right i think this jurisdiction issue is a small peace of a biger problem - sovereignty of USA :D hence sovereignty of any state in the world :D
    If you go deeper inside this issue a very serious ''problem'' can be made :
    1. Definition of sovrereignty ?????? : according to the semantics as a root of definition for an any word that is written, and by wich semantics did they use it in dictionary, and wich dictionary is meritory to determine this??? Was this signed by any authorized person. (Rabit hole continues :D)
    2. Sovereignety defines authority, authority defines jurisdiction (authority is a peace of shiit if it has no jurisdiction) (Rabit hole continues :D)
    3. By this principal every individual is sovereign ???? Hence, you ARE authority to the '' authority -state''??? (Rabit hole continues :D)
    4. If you engage a DEAL with a state( legaly deal is youre signature on any given document issued by the state, Birth certificate, ring a bell :D ) you are quiting youre sovrereignty by signing ANY '' deal '' with a state. (Rabit hole continues :D)
    5. Sovrereignty excludes democracy !!!! :D_____If you re a sovereign (what ever that means and defined as :D) and you need to make a law ( i will simplify in order to be more practical ) you need a concsent of every sovereign man in order to put it on the law, meaning for every law to be applied on every sovereign man, EVERY one must sign its approval of this legislation.
    If Couple of sovereign man (majority in democracy) signs it and the other sov.man (minority in democracy) refuses to sign it -by the premis and sovrereignty its a not a law ( law can be defined as consent of the sovereign men in a unit of a land,sea,aerospace :D-------and VERY important UNIT OF TIME) so again democracy is just a deal on a UNIT of a land and sea, wich can be changed or abolished if one of those consent signatories retract from a deal, bcs man sovereignty is a granted by birth and its fundamental right and defines youre existance, and by that he has a right to pull off the deal, specially if it harms him or his group. (Rabit hole continues :D)
    6. You are NOT obligated to pay taxes bcs its youre soveregin land, its youre assets produced by you with youre tools and it is youre right to carie that and use it in any sovereign orientated states. (grey zones are this deals and comerciall acting with other state legislations and laws) (Rabit hole continues :D)
    7. What is COMMONS???....i gues close definition is consent of an every sovereign man to use defined COMMON, not soveregin ,unit of land and sea etc. for a agreed purpose-common purose ...so what is commons, its a basis of a state or any politicaly and socialy organized entity. (Rabit hole continues :D)
    ______Conslusion (maybe)______ authority has been imposed on us by group of sovereign man -hence non consensus,hence non commons hence non state, meaning its invalid since its not consensus. (Gray zones are what is an unit of commons, how many people counts in that number??? Who can defiend wich person is not a part of consensus)Meaning all sovereiggn man on earth must have consensus in order to common makes it in to an obligatory law, in reality that canot be done i supose youll agree, maybe someday i dont know...just living now not tomorrow dont give me a hard time on that :D
    If we cant do that on entire earth, lets create a common commons if you know what i mean ( UN is a start but we all have issues of colectivism and imperilistic interests and methods of a named org. so by this i dont mean UN nooooooooooooo UN :D) And ofc there are gry zones and rabit holes here...maybe the depest ones:D But lets do an analisys localy ....
    I live i europe an and i find this colectivist issues ( colectivism (by mine definition) is an authority without consent of soveregin man, EACH one of them, imposed on the others) are booming and freaking geting faster. I think from an aspect of NWO you can reckognize them by this symptom of collectivism . Like to hear youre thoughts and aspects on this issue.....cheeers

  • @213eddy
    @213eddy 5 років тому

    I GOT A FAILURE TO SIGNAL TO TURN AND FAILURE TO DEVOTE ATTENTION AND I RAN A RED LIGHT WILL THIS WORK IF I GO TO COURT CAN I SAY I DON’T CONSENT I CLAIM COMMON LAW AND WAIVE THE BENEFIT??

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 4 роки тому

      Wii lit buggery .

    • @Will_JC
      @Will_JC 3 роки тому

      213eddy
      Are you okay with emailing me? I want to privately talk about something, but if emailing is uncomfortable for you, I have one NON-email option you can consider.

  • @keensweep
    @keensweep 11 років тому +5

    I challenged nature cause and jurisdiction. They have threatened to suspend my license even though i was acting in a private capacity at the time of the stop. The DA said almost nothing and the judge over ruled or denied anything I entered. The same judge that told me at my third arraignment he thought " I was one of those people who think the law does not apply to them" was the same judge that judged my trial and then denied my appeal..FFS

    • @UniverseAlphaOmega
      @UniverseAlphaOmega 2 роки тому +4

      He was practicing law from the bench they aren’t supposed to

    • @keensweep
      @keensweep 2 роки тому +3

      @@UniverseAlphaOmega Its been a long journey. Thier madness inspired me to keep learning.

    • @stopcensoringme6481
      @stopcensoringme6481 2 роки тому +1

      @@keensweep 14 amend at line/annotate 361 says no license needed

    • @keensweep
      @keensweep 2 роки тому +1

      @@stopcensoringme6481 I believe we are capable of acting in multiple capacities. All that commercial stuff is for while acting in commerce. The registration, plate, and drivers license being displayed for use in commerce is not proof of commercial activity but being prepared for commercial activity. Those things not required for acting in private, including possessing and using common means of conveyance for travel. We take our certificate of title for automobiles down to the Ol dmv and register those automobiles as motor vehicle.. aka commercial vehicle

    • @stopcensoringme6481
      @stopcensoringme6481 2 роки тому +2

      @@keensweep you know your stuff but do you know your drivers license is a contract and a scam
      I am no longer eligible to obtain or hold a driver’s license in any state of the Union because domicile in the “State” is a prerequisite to being issued one. Therefore, this correspondence shall also constitute a formal request to rescind my state driver’s license, if any and purge all records of same. Every state of the Union:
      3.1. Requires a “residence” or “domicile” in order to issue a driver’s license.
      3.2. Cannot lawfully issue driver’s licenses to non-domiciled persons.
      3.3. Cannot enforce the vehicle code against non-domiciled persons.
      3.4. Requires everyone being issued a state driver’s license to surrender all other driver’s licenses before being issued a new one, because a person can only have domicile in ONE place at a time.
      California Vehicle Code 12805. The department shall not issue a driver's license to, or renew a driver's license of, any person:
      [. . .]
      (f) Who holds a valid driver's license issued by a foreign jurisdiction unless the license has been surrendered to the department, or is lost or destroyed.
      [www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=5072529233+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve]19
      __________________________________________________________________
      “A person may have more than one residence but only one domicile. “
      [Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 485 under “domicile”]
      By way of example, California requires domicile or “residence” as a prerequisite to issuing a driver’s license:
      California Vehicle Code
      12505. (a) (1) For purposes of this division only and notwithstanding Section 516, residency shall be determined as a person's state of domicile. "State of domicile" means the state where a person has his or her true, fixed, and permanent home and principal residence and to which he or she has manifested the intention of returning whenever he or she is absent.
      Prima facie evidence of residency for driver's licensing purposes includes, but is not limited to, the following:
      (A) Address where registered to vote.
      (B) Payment of resident tuition at a public institution of higher education.
      (C) Filing a homeowner's property tax exemption.
      (D) Other acts, occurrences, or events that indicate presence in the state is more than temporary or transient.
      (2) California residency is required of a person in order to be issued a commercial driver's license under this code.
      (b) The presumption of residency in this state may be rebutted by satisfactory evidence that the licensee's primary residence is in another state.
      (c) Any person entitled to an exemption under Section 12502, 12503, or 12504 may operate a motor vehicle in this state for not to exceed 10 days from the date he or she establishes residence in this state, except that he or she shall obtain a license from the department upon becoming a resident [domiciliary] before being employed for compensation by another for the purpose of driving a motor vehicle on the highways.
      [www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=49860512592+2+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve]
      The “State” they are talking about in the California Vehicle Code above, incidentally, is a “federal State” or federal area within the exterior limits of the Republic of California. This is the only area within that state not protected by the Constitution and in which the government may therefore license or make into a privilege the exercise of a Constitutional right to travel. In that sense, the entire state vehicle code is “private law” that applies only to those who, through exercising their private right to contract, place their “res” or legal identity in a virtual place not protected by the Bill of
      Sec. 151.004. "IN THIS STATE". "In this state" means within the exterior limits of Texas and includes all territory within these limits ceded to or owned by the United States.
      Rights. Other states of the Union implement their vehicle codes by EXACTLY the same mechanisms.
      1. Compelled Participation in Government Franchises:
      1.1. Thirteenth Amendment: Prohibition against involuntary Servitude. I am being asked to represent a public office in the U.S. government as a franchisee, that I am not eligible to occupy, cannot lawfully occupy, and which I do not consent to occupy FOR ANY AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION.
      1.2. 18 U.S.C. §912: Impersonating a public officer. A private person in possession, use, or control of public property and engaging in a “trade or business” (“public office” pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(26) is guilty of impersonating a public officer. Those who only offer government ID to public officers are indirectly compelling people to impersonate such officers.
      1.3. 18 U.S.C. §654: Anyone who uses or compels the use of a public number in connection with your private property without your consent is guilty of conversion.
      1.4. 42 U.S.C. §408(a)(8): Penalties
      2. Government ID Available Only to “U.S. persons” domiciled on federal territory: Includes driver’s licenses and state ID that connect me with domicile on federal territory and status as a statutory but not constitutional “U.S. citizen”.
      2.1. 18 U.S.C. §911: Impersonating a statutory “U.S. citizen”. By compelling me to misrepresent my status as a statutory and not constitutional “U.S. citizen” pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §1401 in exchange for the Privilege of being able to conduct commerce using government ID, those responsible are compelling me illegally to impersonate a statutory but not constitutional “U.S. citizen”.
      2.2. 42 U.S.C. §405(c)(2)(C)(i): Evidence, Procedure, and Certification for payments.
      2.3. 18 U.S.C. §1028(a)(7): Fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents, authentication features, and information
      2.4. 18 U.S.C. §1028A: Aggravated Identity Theft
      2.5. 18 U.S.C. §1201: Kidnapping. Whether I am physically moved or my legal identity is moved to a foreign jurisdiction without my consent, the result is the same and it is a crime
      Sec. 521.1426. DOMICILE REQUIREMENT; VERIFICATION. (a) The department may not issue a driver's license or a personal identification certificate to a person who has not established a domicile IN THIS STATE.
      Sec. 521.021. LICENSE REQUIRED. A person, other than a person expressly exempted under this chapter, may not operate a motor vehicle on a highway IN THIS STATE unless the person holds a driver's license issued under this chapter.
      Sec. 521.029. OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE BY NEW STATE RESIDENTS. (a) A person who enters this state as a new resident may operate a motor vehicle IN THIS STATE for no more than 90 days after the date on which the person enters this state if the person:
      (1) is 16 years of age or older; and
      (2) has in the person's possession a driver's license issued to the person by the person's state or country of previous residence.
      Sec. 521.056. NATIONAL DRIVER REGISTER. (a) The department may process file check requests under the National Driver Register on behalf of current or prospective employers of individuals employed or seeking employment as operators of motor vehicles or railway locomotive operators if the individual:
      (1) has given written consent to the release of the information; and
      (2) has a license IN THIS STATE.

  • @wesmatron
    @wesmatron 11 років тому +1

    What makes someone a citizen?

    • @Steelmage99
      @Steelmage99 5 років тому

      Being born under the right circumstances.

  • @yeldarbq5166
    @yeldarbq5166 10 років тому

    this is the first reference i have heard in regards to that part of the constitution regarding "no new state shall be erected within the jurisdiction of an existing state". This makes STATE OF WHATEVER and UNITED STATES UNLAWFUL!

    • @jmowreader9555
      @jmowreader9555 8 років тому +1

      You're stupid. Here's how the "no new state shall be erected within the jurisdiction of an existing state" thing would actually work.
      The state of XYZ has three counties on the western border that are liberal, and 33 counties that are very conservative. The liberal counties have higher population than the conservative ones and outvote them in elections. The conservative counties want to send conservative senators to Washington, so they decide the best way to do it is to break away into their own state. Without the consent of both Congress and their state legislature, they can't break away.

  • @RolanRoyce
    @RolanRoyce 11 років тому +5

    That's what always happens, the cops don't bother showing up for traffic ticket cases and therefore the case is dismissed. Why don't they show up? Obviously their superiors must have ordered them not to, otherwise they would be in trouble for skipping court. The cops can't waste tome on ticket cases because the salary they would be paid to do so would be more than the state would get from the ticket. I've seen so many cases where the cop doesn't show up that it must be standard procedure.

  • @sirarnie9837
    @sirarnie9837 10 років тому

    These so-called "freemen" were denied due process because of the reconstruction act, that is his argument? That is so stupid, North Carolina joined the Confederacy and broke away from the Union. Due process was given due to the act and NC ratifying the 14th Amendment enabling it to being readmitted to the Union in 1868. So in sum, NC shouldn't have waged war.

  • @Spirit_Of_Prophecy_777
    @Spirit_Of_Prophecy_777 8 років тому +2

    asking a tyrant, not to be a tyrant? a guy with guns and fists "enforcing" his decisions?
    once you step foot into his courtroom, you are within the jurisdiction of the court (according to law)
    denying the party is you, (john james doe) the court cannot proceed against an incorrect party, they must prove the named party IS you
    peace )

    • @normanpearson8753
      @normanpearson8753 4 роки тому

      And you get thrown in jail for talking like a knob .

  • @PatrickHenry2K
    @PatrickHenry2K 12 років тому +2

    Check out Dean Clifford's trust law videos, he ties in the difference between OUR jurisdiction and THEIR jurisdiction. We must know HOW to establish facts ON THE RECORD and how to correctly apply COURT PROCEDURE. I highly suggest looking up JURISDICTIONARY for the structure of how to defend yourself in court but also understanding IN PROPRIA PERSONA in conjunction(in your proper person, Black's 5th). Being pro se is still being considered an AGENT of the court and ADMITS JURISDICTION!
    NVrepublic

  • @deetjay1
    @deetjay1 8 років тому +6

    Oh brother...Free staters are so lame...

    • @patricminderhout
      @patricminderhout 6 років тому +1

      David Johnson not sheep , like you or you might be a government employee

  • @lance3748
    @lance3748 2 роки тому

    3:20 Dismissed because officer did not show up.
    That's not a jurisdiction reason. It happens.

    • @Honey639-10
      @Honey639-10 Рік тому

      True. But does that prove their reasoning within this video is not valid?

    • @lance3748
      @lance3748 Рік тому +1

      @@Honey639-10 It does not prove one way or another.
      The vast majority of the time these characters crash and burn in court.

    • @Honey639-10
      @Honey639-10 Рік тому

      @@lance3748 I don't doubt it! I do not have much knowledge around state vs US citizens - sounds too good to be true; but it is, right? 😵‍💫Side note- I had a friend that went to court for an OUI/DUI -the officer on duty had passed away... charges dismissed. What a world.

  • @hdthor
    @hdthor 2 роки тому

    Unfortunately, possession is 9/10ths of the law. The newly created NC, even if by military force, now has physical possession of the soil. So NCAR is going to have an uphill battle on confronting that.

  • @oldbaldone1
    @oldbaldone1 8 років тому +4

    Another false claim.

  • @ButcherBird-FW190D
    @ButcherBird-FW190D 2 роки тому

    So PoPo did not show up. Fair enough, and I'm happy for you. Either way; that has nothing at all to do re: your challenge of jurisdiction. It's utterly stupid.

  • @jamesmonroe6
    @jamesmonroe6 3 роки тому +1

    GOOD INFORMATION. INTERESTING

  • @robinbrowne5419
    @robinbrowne5419 5 років тому

    The courts have no interest in debating what happened in 1865. The statute of limitations means it is too late. The case was dismissed because the cop did not show up. And the judge was probably sick of hearing nonsense over a simple traffic stop.

  • @robertsmith-cj6gl
    @robertsmith-cj6gl 2 роки тому

    Trustee? Beneficiary? Administrator?
    Which one are you?

  • @andrewpetersen6116
    @andrewpetersen6116 8 років тому +1

    Are they bored?

  • @0529mpb
    @0529mpb 7 місяців тому

    Uhhh. Police officers have to miss traffic court all the time. It happens every day in every jurisdiction. Often, it's better to have an officer cover for one who has called in sick than to tie him up in court.

  • @icarusrising728
    @icarusrising728 2 місяці тому

    The dismissal was only based on the witness not being present and nothing to do with reconstruction

  • @luisalbertoandrade5492
    @luisalbertoandrade5492 4 роки тому

    Secrets of the legal industry will break it down for you