Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • What To Say in Court

    Uploaded by

    Ben
    626 views4 pages
    The defendant requested a trial by jury but was not provided one. They felt they were not receiving due process. They asked the court to produce a jury that day or reschedule. The prosecutor did not show up. When the prosecutor did show, they could not prove the court's jurisdiction according to the US Constitution despite being asked to do so multiple times. As a result, the petitioner requested the court to abate at law for lack of jurisdiction and order their release.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    What to Say in Court

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The defendant requested a trial by jury but was not provided one. They felt they were not receiving due process. They asked the court to produce a jury that day or reschedule. The prosecutor did not show up. When the prosecutor did show, they could not prove the court's jurisdiction according to the US Constitution despite being asked to do so multiple times. As a result, the petitioner requested the court to abate at law for lack of jurisdiction and order their release.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    626 views4 pages

    What To Say in Court

    Uploaded by

    Ben
    The defendant requested a trial by jury but was not provided one. They felt they were not receiving due process. They asked the court to produce a jury that day or reschedule. The prosecutor did not show up. When the prosecutor did show, they could not prove the court's jurisdiction according to the US Constitution despite being asked to do so multiple times. As a result, the petitioner requested the court to abate at law for lack of jurisdiction and order their release.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 4

    No jury

    Your honor, I specifically asked in my pleading that this be a trial by jury, in a court of
    record, under common law.
    This certainly is NOT any of that.
    I feel that I am not getting my due process. I would like to ask that the court produce a jury
    of people today or reschedule.

    Prosecutor did NOT show up


    (Only say the ones below that apply)
    For the record....

    • The respondent has failed to plea,


    • The respondent has failed to defend their side of the case,
    • The respondent did not request more time to answer,
    • The respondent did not object to the proceedings.
    • The respondent DID file a return, but only to pick apart how I had written my
    pleadings. The pleading CLEARLY challenged the inferior courts jurisdiction.

    The Supreme court has ruled that “Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be ‘assumed’, it
    must be proved to exist.” - Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca2d 751.211 P2s 389;

    Being the respondent failed in all of these areas, a Summery Judgment for Default is in order.

    And thereby law requires that the inferior court abate at law; AND the release of both person
    and property.

    I can get that document written up for this court right away.
    Prosecutor DOES show.
    Opening Remarks:

    For the record, I am one of the people of the state of ________________

    I would like to read the US Constitution Article 6 Clause 2:

    “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance
    thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United
    States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound
    thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.”

    We are here because I have asked the respondent to show by what ‘CONSTITUTIONAL’
    authority the inferior court acts, and why the violations or charges against me should not be
    dismissed for lack of personam jurisdiction.

    I would also like to remind the court of 2 case laws that apply here today.

    The first one is Rodriques v. Ray Donavan, from the year 1985

    • “All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not
    human/creators in accordance with God’s laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are
    unconstitutional and lacking due process….”Rodriques v. Ray Donavan (U.S.
    Department of Labor) 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348 (1985).

    Being the U.S. Constitution is the supreme law, and I am one of the people, and NOT a
    government authority, I ask that the defendant use want applies to me.

    The second one is from Marbury v. Madison


    • “All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and
    void.” Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 180.

    I specifically asked in my pleading that the respondent prove according to the Constitution
    Of The United States. Not some statute, code, or rule or interpretation of the constitution
    that is already unconstitutional as brought out in Rodriques v. Ray Donavan
    I will require that all of the respondents answers are sourced from the Constitution Of The
    United States.

    (If they try to explain their side using their statutes:) OBJECTION!! The defendant is
    not using the U.S. Constitution as their source of answers. I specifically asked in my pleading
    that the respondent prove according to the Constitution Of The United States. Not some
    statute, code, or rule or interpretation of the constitution that is already unconstitutional as
    brought out in Rodriques v. Ray Donavan

    If they try to prove their jurisdiction according to the


    ACTS
    The State has no power when working in private peoples business to overrule mothers
    and fathers and let other people, persons, or corporations take kids from parents.

    The Adoption and Safe Families Act (A.S.F.A.) :


    SEC. 401. PRESERVATION OF REASONABLE PARENTING.
    Nothing in this Act is intended to disrupt the family unnecessarily or to intrude
    inappropriately into family life, to prohibit the use of reasonable methods of parental
    discipline, or to prescribe a particular method of parenting.

    Social Security Act 1935 [Original Legislative Intent of the Congress not for CPS to
    take kids]

    TITLE XI- GENERAL PROVISIONS


    DEFINITIONS SECTION 1101
    (6)(d) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing any Federal official, agent, or
    representative, in carrying out any of the provisions of this Act, to take charge of any child
    over the objection of either of the parents of such child, or of the person standing in loco
    parentis to such child.

    Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (C.A.P.T.A.)


    SEC. 2. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an annuitant, as defined under
    section 8901(3) of title 5, United States Code, who is participating or who is eligible to
    participate in the health benefits program offered under the Retired Federal Employees
    Health Benefits Act (74 Stat. 849; Public Law 86-724), may elect, in accordance with
    regulations prescribed by the United States Civil Service Commission, to be covered under
    the provisions of chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code, in lieu of coverage under such
    Act.
    Conclusion after Prosecutor could not prove jurisdiction
    Let the record show that the prosecutor was not able to defend the inferior courts jurisdiction
    according to the Constitution Of The United States.

    The Supreme court has ruled that “Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be ‘assumed’, it
    must be proved to exist.” - Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca2d 751.211 P2s 389;

    Also,
    “Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the
    court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but, rather, should
    dismiss the action.” - Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026;

    THEREFORE, I pray for an order that the inferior court abate at law, cease and desist from
    all actions against petitioner and restore the petitioner to their original state for lack of
    constitutional authority and personam jurisdiction. I ask for the release of both person and
    property.

    You might also like