Show Notes:

R.I.P. first-class anti-authoritarian activists Muhammad Ali and Powell Gammill.

Objecting to and debunking the jackass assertion that Muslims haven’t contributed positively to society.

Recent posts: CAFTB Call of Shame and new success story Travis Gets Criminal Charge Dismissed in Washington.

How to respond if the judge actually confirms there is no evidence to prove jurisdiction: “Well, if there isn’t any evidence to prove jurisdiction; then shouldn’t the complaint be dismissed on grounds of the prosecution’s lack of evidence?”

The subtle distraction and diversion tactics the judge and prosecutor will predictably employ to avoid actually answering your tough questions of evidence responsively.

Quoting the absurd admissions and statements from the prosecutor and/or judge to include in, or amend to, your motion to dismiss.

Carol from the CAFTB: “I need to take a break so I can breathe.”

“How do you respond when the judge claims the injured party is ‘the people‘?”

Fairness and due-process do not allow arguments to be made outside the pleadings and facts.

Letting the long gaps of silence (see the latest CAFTB CoS for example) speak for itself.

How to navigate a judicial prosecution.

The No STATE Project radio show is mostly a weekly wrap-up of various ongoing adventures in legal land.

The mistake that a few people make of assuming the motion to dismiss, on its own, will result in a quick and easy dismissal.

It’s all about ending cruel and institutional exploitation of the vulnerable.

Still waiting on Joe’s dismissal paperwork.

Proof-of-concept of the Marcratic method further proven by the international success stories from Ireland, England [+1], Canada [+1], Israel, and Australia.

A big thank you to all who support the production efforts and expenses needed to continue producing the content-rich media found here on the website.

The more serious the charges are; the more strongly you’ll need to relentlessly zero-in on the prosecution’s lack of evidence.

“Objection; citing statute (legal opinion) is not a responsive answer to a question of fact.”

Countering the common judicial lie “I don’t need evidence; I have a statute.”

Disengaging helpless critics that refuse to accept the evidence you’re providing while simultaneously continuing to claim you are not producing the evidence in question.

The limited discovery you should expect to receive when depending on attorney representation.

“Once you have attorney representation, you many not be able to get rid of them.”

Assuming the assertions that the judge, prosecutor, and cop are making are not fully support by the facts, and keeping the burden-of-proof on them to put-up evidence or dismiss.

Overcoming the common courtroom logical fallacy of appeal to tradition.

Asking clarifying questions to get to an answer to your questions of existence of evidence to prove their assertion of jurisdiction.

Adventures in gardening in the scorching Phoenix summer heat.

Making the proper objection (speculation, assumes facts not entered into evidence or pleadings, relevance, non-responsive, ect) assertively.

Corpus delicti has two fundamental parts: the act and the result. They usually focus only on the act and don’t want to get into resulting injury, damages, or loss because none actually exists with victimless crime charges.

“Objection; is that because you say so, or because the prosecution’s evidence does?”

Update on the California Tax Study we announced last week.

Refraining from challenging interpretive issues of law, and instead pursuing the prosecution’s (lack of) facts and evidence to support their claims.

Caller’s Topics:

Alex from CA: complements on the brilliant work on the books and website material <> how does a judge perceive a motion to dismiss? Is the motion basically requesting per[...]

Show Notes:

While statists celebrate death, we remember the life and works of Nick Menza and Miles Davis.

Learning to apply effective Socratic questioning and keeping the burden-of-proof on the one making the claim, as exampled in the new, lengthy Call-of-Shame with CAFTB (resulting in a 30 day hold!).

Jay‘s frustration sticking to the issues raised in her questions when the prosecutor and judge divert, disrupt, lie, and distract away with their (non-)responses.

You should be constantly clarifying the prosecutor’s positions and assertions, and never taking any affirmative positions yourself.

Repurposing the parking ticket study into a California Tax Assessment Study to demonstrate that the judges in California are so corrupt and dishonest that they’ll commit several felonies to help out their FTB buddies.

Defending the discussion of veganism on an anarchist radio show in the spirit of resolving contradictions and hypocrisies.

Demonstrating the effectiveness of the Marcratic method by taking into account the international success stories from Ireland, England [+1], Canada [+1], Israel, and Australia and considering the number of evasive high-level bureaucrats we’ve challenged.

Under the hood of the statist exploitation machine.

Badges and arbitrary titles don’t grant extra rights.

Pending paperwork for another ticket kicked from court in Wales, a felony complaint dismissed in Texas, and Joe’s latest success story.

Defending the golden-rule against violent aggressors.

Adversary Proceedings Don’t Require an Adversary.

The difference between a tort and a crime.

Supreme Court Holds Plaintiffs Must Allege “Concrete” Injury to Bring a Claim.

How to counter the common judicial lies of “that doesn’t apply here” or “that’s an issue for trial.”

The misadventures of the black-robed gone wild.

Upping your leverage by utilizing judicial notice and the resistance you can expect.

Disproving a Common Argument – Law is Philosophical, it Requires no Evidence.

Don’t engage in extended questioning with cops that are fishing for revenue.

Goal-post adjuster Michael W. Dean now has evidence of a felony kicked out in Texas, now where will he move the goal-post?

Rory Gallagher’s “Laundromat”.

Recognizing when the judge is committing due-process violations and judicial misconduct.

Countering the prosecutor’s common diversion tactic with the response of “what evidence will satisfy you?” or “what facts are you looking for?”

Former cop turned judge, “The Untouchable” Lawrence Joseph O’Neill, issued an order to show cause, but disallowed the defendant to speak freely so he could proceed to show cause by way of limiting his speech to a yes-or-no answer to the question of “are you going to comply with my order to testify against yourself?”

The CAFTB will never accept and acknowledge that there are exceptions under the anti-injunction tax act.

A mandate is not discretionary.

Caller’s Topics:

Ken from MO: challenging the essential element of damage/injury needed to maintain a valid cause for action <> Allen v Wright federal suit ruling regarding standing to complain, does it apply in criminal actions? <> stocking-up on legal defense options <> what questions are included in the script? <> and using the script and role-playing to better your pro per litigation performance in court.

Matthew from Australia: asking “are the standards of this court based upon baseless assumptions?”

Jake from CA: first time attempting the unsigned plea of guilty maneuver during an arraignment <> the judge predictably entered a plea on the defendant’s behalf when the defendant asked if the court was bound by supreme court rulings <> filed more motions, discovery request, and judicial notice after the arraignment (for another separate case) <> so far, no prosecuto[...]

Show Notes:

Responding to those who postulate that filing a traffic ticket in federal court will provide you a more fair venue than the state courts; most of our successes have not been in the federal courts.

Success Story: Lee in NYC gets another traffic ticket dismissed, totaling 7 charges being dismissed from court over the past year; all by questioning the prosecution’s evidence to prove jurisdiction.

The trolls and pseudo-critics will continue on asking for proof that complaints have been dismissed from court despite providing them with the proof.

Privileged, ruling-classes are inherently violent and coercive in nature.

Seeking restitution by filing a claim against their insurance for damages caused by their legal-attack through the city’s risk management department.

The consequences the judge faces if they fail to act on a habeas corpus petition.

Going through the motions of a Faretta hearing to establish a pro per’s ability to defend themselves.

An attorney/public defender will generally serve to limit your defense, not help; they will not touch certain factual challenges to the prosecution’s (so-called) case.

“If you cannot challenge the prosecution’s fundamental claims; that is direct evidence that the game is rigged.”

Filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus when SHTF.

Ironic DMCA take-down request from a lying USDOJ attorney that was based upon a “naked denial of good faith,” ‘suppose they would know…

Irony is the IRS wanting to force the defendant to provide incriminating testimony while they (the IRS) refuse to provide testimony on the facts that establish their case, irony deficiency much?

Learning from experience and role-playing.

The frictionless lies that come from attorneys and the bureaucratic ruling-class.

Former cop turned judge, “The Untouchable” Lawrence Joseph O’Neill, issued an order to show cause, but disallowed the defendant to speak freely so he could proceed to show cause by way of limiting his speech to a yes-or-no answer to the question of “are you going to comply with my order to testify against yourself?”

How not to be a freeloader; realize 1) nobody owes you a damn thing, and 2) other people are not your property.

A excrement of truth from the corrupt system: “The worst thing in the world is the prosecution and conviction of an innocent person, or a conviction based on perjured testimony.” -U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer

Here’s a novel idea: 100% use of video recording for 100% of those who have the itching willingness and power to obediently destroy the lives of neighbors and strangers alike without feeling the need to provide the evidence to justify their actions.

Caller’s Topics:

Gabe from the NSP Skype group-chat: can you talk about filing federal lawsuits for a deprivation of rights? <> and how to deal with a denial of habeas corpus from his jailers after being jailed for simply asking for clarification of the judge’s position.

Norman from MI: updates on recent adventures in legal land <> the prosecutor did not want to talk to the defendant outside of court <> lessons learned: beefing-up the role-playing and utilizing media-reps with the next bureaucratic legal-attack <> Louder Than Love: The Grande Ballroom Story <> a friend got picked up at his house for a felony “insufficient funds” charge; the complaint was ultimately dismissed <> getting the prosecution’s response to her lack of facts to prove jurisdiction <> plea bargaining with the prosecutor and using their lack of a case as leverage <> the prosecutor insists she doesn’t need a witness to proceed with the complaint <> the prosecutor motioned for Dennis’ case to be dismissed in the 11th hour citing lack of a witness (yes, the same one she claimed she didn’t need; shocker, right?) <> the huge[...]

Show Notes:

Rejecting the moral sanction of monstrous double-standards.

Breaking down the latest success story: ticket kicked from court in Wales this week by utilizing the potent combination of Socratic questioning and effective damage-control.

Legal opinions require basic supporting facts to substantiate their claims.

If it were so obvious that their laws applied, then why don’t they just put the evidence out there to quell the questioning?

Jurisdiction is a threshold issue and an essential element of the prosecution’s case.

Train-wrecks where the judge convicted a defendant while there is no competent witness to testify to an essential element of the charges.

Ian Freeman’s DMV Administrative Hearing.

Avoid getting knocked off you game by the judge’s and prosecution’s gaslighting to confuse you into making affirmative statements.

Predicting the responses of the judge and prosecutor based upon the years of asking the same questions of evidence they need to substantiate their cases.

“Min-archists” ought to be properly reclassified according to their true nature as “min-statists” because they still believe in the legitimate existence of the STATE, there cannot be varying degrees of anarchy.

The sheer amount of mental gymnastics one has to perform to support their non-factual versions of reality.

Revisiting Joe’s nolle prosequi success story.

The better odds of success litigating your own legal attacks instead of using an attorney.

Having to use an attorney is not evidence of jurisdiction.

Selective enforcement of their own laws and codes.

Learning to counter common judicial lies.

Properly using the unsigned plea of guilty.

Led Zeppelin Live at the Royal Albert Hall circa 1970.

Challenging presumptive dogma.

Subpoenas have to be stamped to be valid.

Judges wrongfully limiting alternative defense theories.

Armando’s defeat over the Michael Scott law firm.

Caller’s Topics:

Allen from NY: should I worry about a notice of appending suspension? <> and how to best approach this particular type of legal attack.

Bill from CO: what are the first steps to fighting a speeding ticket using the Marcratic method? <> and utilizing a Brady request.

Joe from HI: another success story: charges resulting from a police raid finally dismissed after a ~13 month legal attack! <> the motion to dismiss was wrongfully denied many times before it was finally granted by a different judge <> a rare case of where the judge didn’t bail the prosecutor out as easily as they normally do <> the nature of the charges <> litigating pro per as an act of activism <> turning down a “no consequence” plea deal offered from the prosecution after the defendant expressed his enthusiasm in favor for a jury trial <> using your key leverage-points effectively during litigation <> the anti-drug war sentiment on the overtaken Hawaii islands <> what it takes to achieve successful effective damage-control with a legal attack <> reporting the recent success story on Free Talk Live <> being one of the few who persistently seek clarification of the prosecution’s accusations <> the difficulty of interfacing with people who reject reason and rationale, yet demand your cooperation <> the consequential psychological fallout generated from an invasion of your personal space like a police raid of your home <> the low threshold of probable cause that was used to raid the victimless defendant’s home <> standby counsel immediately requested to be dismissed from the case after the defendant dared to ask the prosecution for their evidence to substantiate their charges <> and take-away lessons from legal land.

Tom from TX: how do you deal with a license bureau that’s stonewalling because the court made a determination before their own deadline for the d[...]

Show Notes:

Remembering Little Walter, who’s birthday happens to be on May Day!

Responding to the pseudo-critics that claim the likes of Marc and Vin James are “frauds” for suggesting effective Socratic questioning when approaching a legal attack and referring to the many successes of others doing so as legitimizing proof-of-concept evidence.

New Success Story: Robert Gets Ticket Kicked in New York. Congratulations!

Categorizing effective and ineffective litigation strategies.

People’s romantic delusion of fair and unbiased STATE court proceedings.

Explaining how and why STATE courts are one of the grandest frauds ever perpetrated on mankind.

Risking navigating around the differing reciprocity laws from STATE-to-STATE.

Requesting telephonic hearings.

What happens when you don’t pay a traffic ticket that you received while driving a rental car.

Learning from the line of questioning in Scott Bales, Robert Diab, and Kolby Granville exchanges.

Even if the courts alter their record of your proceeding, there is nothing they could insert in there that would meet the prosecutor’s burden-to-prove evidence of jurisdiction.

“Stealing and killing is wrong, unless you need to build a road.”

Don’t blindly sign anything from the STATE without expressing some level of duress; institutionalized oppression is not okay.

Missouri repealed its executive order to exterminate Mormons as late as 1975.

Contact Marc if you are interested in attending a workshop at the next Anarchapulco.

When to file the motion in limine.

What happened to Metallica after the black album?

Only an idiot would give the prosecutor a free-pass on their burden-of-proof.

Experimenting with having the judge take judicial notice that you are not a “U.S. citizen.”

Running through a few bass riffs.

Filing a complaint with the municipality’s risk management.

Getting a judge to handle your case seriously and fairly.

Jack Fields, assistant county attorney in Arizona, actually tried to answer Marc’s questions of evidence in good faith: claimed that “it’s a basic tenant of law“, “it’s a legal principal of sovereignty“, and “the constitution is a compact and agreement between the government and the people.”

Jack Fields pulled the plug on the call when Marc asked the statist double-standard question; we all should be asking this question to our local bureaucrats.

Caller’s Topics:

Ken from MO: trying to find the exact statute or ordinance that a small Texas town cop is claiming the defendant violated <> being extorted right on the roadside once upon a time <> weighing how to approach a resolution to the prosecution’s legal attack <> the necessity of having a personal recording of your own proceedings <> and joining the NSP Skype group-chat to role-play courtroom litigation with others.

Shelby from OH: the risks of neglecting a summons to appear in court for petty violations such as traffic violations <> “why throw the baby out with the bath water?” <> and playing devil’s advocate for having some form of centralized authority: “sometimes violence is necessary” to collectively provide people with products and services. (yikes)

Ginger from TX: a big thanks the the NSP Skype group-chat folks <> after a number of motions, the court clerk’s office called asking if there was any other paperwork that the defendant wanted to file <> how do you counter unfair paperwork interference? <> what about filing a motion to compel the prosecutor to provide their evidence of jurisdiction? <> if you are claiming you are not a citizen of the United States, aren’t you taking an unnecessary burden-of-proof upon yourself? <> and knowing when to make the appropriate objection.

Dallas from TX: update on his property taxtortion legal attack [...]

Show Notes:

Remembering the late Lonnie Mack, Prince, and Duke Ellington. R.I.P.

Building a foundation of relevance.

Getting clarification if the prosecutor is claiming his witness (the cop) is not qualified to determine if the defendant has broken the law, hence impeaching their own witness.

Q: Why doesn’t the prosecutor object to the defendant asking the setup questions of their common assumption that the law applies to the defendant just because of their location? A: because the prosecutor will typically allow questions of legal determinations if it supports his assertions.

A denial of effective cross-examination is a serious violation of due-process.

Why issues of fact are better to challenge than issues of interpretive and contrarian law.

A warrant for your arrest authorizes the police to use deadly force to apprehend you; it’s a euphemism for a death warrant.

Contact Marc if you are interested in attending a workshop at the next Anarchapulco.

There should be no sacred cows/legal claims that are left unchallenged.

Thomas Ball’s self-immolation in the “live free or die” state; there is no safe haven from overzealous statists.

The importance of the role-playing with the script in real-time, like with the folks in the NSP Skype group-chat.

Brady’s Blind Spot: Impeachment Evidence in Police Personnel Files and the Battle Splitting the Prosecution Team. – Great find, research credit pending.

Ray Persinger initially refused to speak with Marc because the video of his disruption of PorcFest last year got so much attention.

Ray Persinger agreed that their rules and codes apply based upon physical location, but can only cite their codes when asked for the evidence their code applies in the first place.

Openly asking bureaucrats the statist double-standard question on-the-fly.

Caller’s Topics:

Ginger from TX: in a classic railroading hearing, how do you respond to the prosecutor’s “objection; relevance” to your question of “is there an injured party?” <> how would you proceed in cross-examining the witness in a steamrolling proceeding? <> and what do you think about the procedure and aftermath from Ian Freeman’s trial resulting in community service?

Dan from CA: what can one do to avoid traveling all the way to Texas to litigate bogus criminal trespass charges?

Seth from HI: success story: the defendant gets the judge to change his mind and verbally dismisses the case utilizing the Marcratic questioning method! <> discovery was never given to the defendant in a railroading proceeding <> and prepping for an upcoming hearing.

Jeffery from IN/NY: challenging a seat-belt violation ticket <> experiencing the predictable responses from the judge and prosecutor during trial <> requesting an appeals hearing to reverse a bad judgement <> getting post conviction relief for the summation of expenses it costs defending oneself against an invalid complaint <> questioning the prosecutor on what evidence they have to prove jurisdiction <> varying arraignment procedures from state-to-state <> administrative hearings that guise as real court hearings <> missed the first hearing due to being on dialysis <> walking through the first actual hearing <> adverse reactions from almost everybody when they see you challenging the system with unrelenting tough questions of fact <> and supporting the research and production efforts.

Michael from NY: a retired cop newly introduced to and learning the material here on the website <> escaping the local cash-before-kids bureaucracy <> starting points for learning how to apply the Socratic method in court <> coming back to New York to do a workshop <> appealing to a local organization, Americans for Legal Reform, to help organize an educational event <> horrendous family court sto[...]

We catch-up on the latest from Maine’s top tax authorities and finally comment on the recent US v Lopez ruling out of the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that we have been meaning to get to, but not been able due to our much-appreciated recent caller–packed broadcasts.

Show Notes:

Maine tax supervisor has no evidence to prove jurisdiction, but they suddenly feel confident enough to escalate their legal-attack despite failing to meet their burden-of-proof.

When drafting a petition for a writ of prohibition, who better to have on a witness list than Maine legislators John Patrick, Earle McCormick and Greg Bernstien?; all who could not produce the evidence in question. And so; if there are no witnesses that can testify with personal firsthand knowledge, then the complaint can’t meet it’s factual burden-of-proof and you should move the court to dismiss.

Greg Bernstien, desperate for a response, claims he’s “not the jurisdiction guy” instead of producing the “obvious” evidence to prove jurisdiction.

Countering a favorite go-to line of the judge’s “I cannot give you legal advice” when you are asking them a question of evidence they cannot directly answer, as if asking for evidence is somehow requesting “legal advice“…

The bystander effect in prisons and in litigation.

Getting a committee of bureaucrats together for a fact finding mission to locating the evidence to prove their laws apply to us.

Understanding that effective damage control is a form of peaceful activism and comes with inherent risks and expenses in both personal time and labor, but pays greatly in future dividends.

The lying attorneys Stanly Boone and Bobbie Jo Montoya claimed the defendant (their victim) “made a naked denial of good faith.”

Research artist James Corbett.

Cops have legal sanction to lie to you, all the more reason not to participate in their fishing expeditions.

Police have long been absolved for lying if there is an objective reason for doing so.

Is refusing to answer questions on the roadside “reasonable suspicion” for cops to escalate their interrogation?

Law school professor and former criminal defense attorney tells you why you should never agree to be interviewed by the police. +6 million views!

Debunking the assertion that applicability of the law is “philosophical” in nature.

“…our focus is on the objectively reasonable basis for the stop, not the officers’ subjective intentions or beliefs, the facts justifying the stop must be known to officers at the time of the stop.”

Scientists: Earth Endangered by New Strain of Fact-Resistant Humans.

The importance of getting statements from the prosecution before your first hearing to include their statements within your motion.

Using media reps to help document the counts of misconduct and due-process violations.

Update on Scar‘s recent success story in legal-land where he was getting blind denials from the judge on his motions, then suddenly the judge vacated his judgements and subsequently granted the motion to dismiss.

Ask for the grounds for the denial of your motions when the judge uses the vague explanation “that doesn’t apply“; ask “can you give me the grounds for the exception here?”

Effective damage-control: after the motion to dismiss was granted, the driving suspension was also removed and insurance properly readjusted!

Possibly interviewing the judge on what caused them to do the right thing and dismiss the charges in the face of the prosecution’s lack of evidence to prove their assertions.

Predicting the spin from the critics on this success story based on past pseudo-criticisms.

It’s counter-effective to make affirmative statements in court because you consequently introduce an undue burden upon yourself where there was none before.

The post NSP – Apr 23, 2016 – Co-[...]

Show Notes:

Digging Little Barrie‘s theme music for Better Call Saul.

Many a statist’s sins have been committed and justified under “common law.”

“Their jurisdiction is [ultimately] their willingness to kill you.”

Problems with invoking common law when you are challenging their evidence to prove jurisdiction, such as the case in the motion to dismiss.

Filing a motion to dismiss for prosecutorial misconduct when the prosecutor continues to make arguments outside the evidence and allows a witness to testify without personal knowledge.

Countering the assertion that jurisdiction is a “philosophical question” or “it’s a matter of law” when you’re challenging their evidence of jurisdiction.

Avoid raising issues that often get characterized as fallacious sovereign citizen/FMOTL/UCC strawman defenses.

Keep the burden-of-proof on the prosecutor where it belongs: “just using what they’re presenting to you and questioning that is more than sufficient to prove the prosecution has no case.”

Familiarizing oneself to the various types of courtroom misconduct and logical fallacies so you can quickly recognize and document it on-the-fly during your hearing.

You should always object when the prosecution uses logical fallacies in their arguments.

Jurisdiction is an element of the charge that must have factual support.

Calling out lying attorneys on their lies when they are leveling unsubstantiated charges against you.

Another big thanks to all that sent support, please consider contributing on a recurring basis so we can continue to bring you reports from the fringes of legal-land.

Marc on Voluntary Virtues with Michael Shanklin.

Irrefutable presumptions are considered a violation of due process.

Some high level attorneys have claimed that there is evidence of jurisdiction because they can put you in jail, similar to the blunt assertion of force argument.

Possibly the most commonly violated rule: 602.

Clarifying anarchy.

Properly using the unsigned plea of guilty.

The exploitative nature of statist on the most vulnerable in society.

Adventures in gardening.

Asking the judge if they are concealing evidence from you.

Common courtroom intimidation tactics.

Caller’s Topics:

Iyan from CO: the judge claims there is prima facie evidence of jurisdiction in response to the motion to dismiss <> invoking common law in objection to the judge’s out-of-hand denial of the first motion to dismiss <> the difference between judges and magistrates <> there was no evidence to prove jurisdiction within the discovery material from the prosecution <> the difference between a judge and a magistrate <> and working on making better responses and objections.

Gary from TX: pretrial hearing set after an arraignment for a speeding ticket violation <> the prosecutor didn’t care when the defendant explicitly requested to not make any sort of appearance under Texas rules for civil procedure <> the defendant challenged the fact that the complaint did not constitute a valid cause for action <> and what are the elements of a valid cause of action?

Scar from AZ: is jurisdiction an issue of fact? <> update on a flurry of AiLL: the court vacated judgements on 2 complaints, the judge made a series of absurd statements to cover for the prosecutor’s lack of evidence in another case <> overcoming the prosecution’s and judge’s non-responsive replies to your requests for evidence <> and brief litigation role-play.

Sjohn from OH: the prosecutor was perplexed when the defendant said he wanted to “plea guilty to the facts“, which ultimately led to the judge kicking the defendant out of the courtroom in a rage <> the judge had a hard time directly answering “am I entitled to a fair trial/hearing?” <> getting a copy of the recorded heari[...]

Show Notes:

The sick irony of a judge who tells a defendant that “you seem to think the laws don’t apply to you” in response to questions of evidence when it’s them who enjoy complete immunity and sidestep their own laws all day every day.

Jennifer Rubin, Professional Liar Part 2.

New success story: Kevin from California got his “driving on a suspended license” citation kicked from court. Congratulations!

Aggressive copyright misuse (bullying) to silence legitimate dissent.

Always coming back to the issue of the prosecution’s lack of evidence to prove territorial jurisdiction.

Countering the common judicial lie that jurisdiction is not subject to challenge during pretrial procedure, but rather an issue subject to challenge exclusively at trial.

Avoid making affirmative statements and court and teach yourself to instead defer to Socratic questioning whenever tempted to do so.

If the judge preemptively claims that “the court has jurisdiction” to bail-out his prosecutor friend from actually specifying his evidence, always follow that up with “is that because you say so? OR because the prosecution’s evidence says so?”

A big Kopimi thanks to all those mirroring.

Remember: it’s their opinion that they have jurisdiction; not their argument.

Prosecutors are required to disclose any and all exculpatory evidence.

The epidemic of Brady violations.

The effective purpose for formally filing a request for judicial notice; to lock in the, already stated, requirements the prosecution must meet to prove their charges.

Open invite to any and all critics and challengers.

Utilizing a motion to recuse the judge when you are falling victim to a steamrolling.

Using your limited time with the prosecutor to question them on their evidence.

Disqualifying/impeaching the witness.

Using the prosecutor’s condescending behavior and misconduct against them.

Caller’s Topics:

Kevin from CA: chronicling multiple events of travel harassment from California traffic enforcement <> ended up with a suspended license for the high crime of failing to pay a red-light camera ticket <> the judge was selectively choosing which rules to enforce <> the judge forced a plea on the defendant after he said he “doesn’t want to plea” <> the court clerk pretended like they didn’t get the defendant’s paperwork even though it had a “received” status in their system <> young prosecuting attorneys <> the judge pushed the issues raised in the motion to dismiss off down to the next judge for the next hearing <> the judge totally ignored the request for judicial notice and Brady request <> the judge was very reactive when the defendant asked the prosecutor what evidence they had to prove jurisdiction <> the judge lies and claims “jurisdiction is a trial issue” <> the young prosecutor claimed you cannot cross-examine the witness in criminal cases; only in civil cases <> the prosecutor finally approached the defendant with a proposal to dismiss the case after the defendant made it abundantly clear, several times, that the prosecution didn’t have the evidence in question <> assertively objecting and verbally calling-out the judge on prosecuting the case instead of the prosecutor.

Shelby from OH: defining jurisdiction, legally and factually <> making a case that the laws and codes do apply <> interpreting the 10th amendment <> appreciation for sticking to factual, Boolean issues <> how else would you arbitrate recourse and redress without STATE-monopolized courts? <> mischaracterizations of anarchy and anarchists <>

Matthew from Australia: are you a scofflaw?

Joey from MI: debriefing us on a rather unconventional example of successful damage-c[...]

Show Notes:

Irony of the Week: bullies complaining that they are being bullied by their own bullying being publicized.

Albuquerque cop shoots fellow undercover cop on a $60 meth bust.

Marc spoke with infamously dodgy Jerry Cobb about the double-standard in the standard operating procedures for arresting a murderer when the murderer is one of their own.

Calling yourself “government” means you never have to extend your empathy beyond your badged, privileged-class brethren; they do not look at us as equals.

NYPD cop who killed unarmed Brooklyn man texted union instead of calling help.

In an environment where “cops can never be wrong,” how do you judge cop-on-cop violence? Who is wrong?

Hackers constantly trolling the Bush monarchs.

Ted Cruz may be in DC Madam’s black book.

Smarter criminals know that government positions offer better cover for them to do their deeds.

“A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.” – David Hume

There are no states or citizens because there is no duty to protect.

Using mass non-compliance and/or defensive force to resist eminent, aggressive legal-opinion enforcement.

Treading lightly in a society where asking questions can be considered a threat to officer’s safety and gives them all they need to justify drawing their firearms on you.

Criminals calling themselves “government” have long conflated their toughest critics anarchists with communists, sovereign citizens, and other dubious organizations to justify unwarranted targeting peaceful people who wish to not be criminally abused.

Dean confronting Pitt Meadows City Council is north of 4,000 views!

CIA leaves explosives on school bus after training exercise.

It is a federal crime to make false statements to cover up the facts, why does Jenifer Rubin get a free pass?

Filing formal complaints against professional liars.

Exposing government hypocrisy by asking the very effective statist double-standard question.

Domestic black sites.

Courageous acts of dedicated activism.

Government target the most vulnerable in society.

Agitated critics.

Doing your part to lessen the unnecessary suffering authoritarians afflict upon us.

Caller’s Topics:

Chris from KS: update on Raymond‘s successful hunger strike campaign <> Schwab children could leave Kansas for Chippewa nation <> “96-percent of our children are removed and alienated from family, friends and their siblings for no substantiation of abuse” <> massive show of support (video footage in documentary form pending) <> the criminal cartel <> requesting a change of venue <> and interacting with the locals about Raymond’s situation and activism.

The post NSP – Apr 2, 2016 – Co-host: JT appeared first on MarcStevens.net.

The post NSP – Apr 2, 2016 – Co-host: JT appeared first on MarcStevens.net.