Keeping the Court on Your Side of the BAR

[22towhgimqi9g]

 

 

Common Law Courts

Here is some help for you who don't quite get the exact wording and identity status you should be using to beat illegal accusations against you in court. You need to have this stuff down to such a point where there is no way for them to proceed. You need to be informative, patient and quick witted. They will constantly challenge your ability to keep control of the court.

You must challenge this kind of tactic first then in the same breath, go Corpus Delecti on them. Ask them immediately if the injured party will be testifying today. If they insist you testify or plea, refuse. If they insist you "appear", refuse to be told you must. If they call you a defendant, deny it and call yourself a claimant who requires this be a court of record kept in the people's court on your side of the half-wall known as the BAR and instead you tell them what you require.

PROOF OF JURISDICTION.

You tell them if they refuse to cooperate with things staying in your defined area, with your defined words, that it is THEY who are out of line and do not allow them to skip steps or return the court to their side with trickery or by starting anything over. Keep the court in your favor in common law by insisting they produce a victim if they wish to continue.

If they continue to refuse to move the proceedings forward by continued non-cooperation, just say something like "let the record show that these proceedings are over, the judge has abandoned the court, the citations are discharged, the claimant's case is proven and the man is free to go." You can return the next day or two for a written copy of the proceedings and will then have proof of exactly what violations may or may not have occurred. This will help a lot when you sue the pants off of them through the Bonding Codes.

[3pxnf1i5wm28p]

Do you have court transcripts to validate the success?

[1175f68bbbxha]

this was my arraignment on May 13, 2014 (the corporate agents recordings suck)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/j66rdwugvw4yxto/Arraignment%205.13.14.wma...

this was a hearing on May 21, 2014 for what they arrested me for she found me not guilty.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/izi6dqxji8nw6ow/5%20-%20Warrant%20Hearing...

let me know if they don't play

[22towhgimqi9g]

Everything plays ok Rosanna, but boy is it hard to hear and follow the conversation. Is there something specific on the recording that you want us to hear? Did you win your case? Were you able to successfully file charges against anyone or do you plan to? Are these transcripts posted for the purpose of showing a successful defense?

[1175f68bbbxha]

Oh boy now I am confused.... you said it plays ok but hard ot hear and follow. The biotch arrested me for "court costs' that is UNCONSTITUTIONAL...the first link (their bad recording) is my stand and answers in the arraignment the next morning. she is unconstitutional issuing warrants for court costs, she has thrown out my pleadings I entered in the case, etc I issued a ORAL Habeas Corpus to her and she let me out on OR.

In the next link for that hearing I repeated my self from above, and had filed a Writ of Prohibition to the 3rd district and a counterclaim for the unlawful arrest. She admits she can't find my Negative Averment I filed. She did NOT find me guilty for what she arrested me for. Then set a TRIAL date for new charges and "hells bells" let's just forget about a PRETRIAL.....that is DUE PROCESS.... unbelievable....nothing is run by laws just the shit that comes out of their ass.

[Native Born Citizen]

In the next link for that hearing I repeated my self from above, and had filed a Writ of Prohibition to the 3rd district and a counterclaim for the unlawful arrest. She admits she can't find my Negative Averment I filed.

Please read: United States v. Kelly, Dist. Court, D. Utah 2005

On October 18, 2004, Defendant filed a document entitled "Affidavit of Specific Negative Averment" in which she set forth a host of creative assertions such as "Affiant denies that the United States District Court is the district court of the United States;" "There is no evidence that the United States Code exists, and Affiant believes that no evidence exists;" and "There is no evidence that the United States of America, a fictional corporate entity exists, and Affiant believes that no evidence exists."

On November 19, 2004, and again on January 18, 2005, defendant filed requests for dismissal based on the Government's failure to respond to her Affidavit of Specific Negative Averment. The Government responded to both of these requests, arguing that its action should not be dismissed.

ANALYSIS

Defendant argues that because the Government did not respond to her Affidavit in a timely manner, the contents of the Affidavit must be accepted as true. Defendant further argues that if the contents of her Affidavit are accepted as true, the Government cannot maintain its action against her. Defendant, however, is mistaken in her assumptions as to the legal significance of submitting an affidavit. An affidavit is not itself a motion or form of written discovery which would require a response from the opposing party. There is no basis in law for dismissing a case based solely on a party's failure to respond to an affidavit within a certain amount of time. Nor is it the function of an affidavit to bring a legal argument before the court. See 3 Am. Jur. 2d. Affidavits § 20. Furthermore, it is questionable whether Defendant's collection of rather non-sensical assertions and conclusions could qualify as an affidavit having any evidentiary value.

In an earlier proceeding before the Court, Defendant was warned that many of her documents, as well as her arguments, had no legal significance and that she should retain an attorney for her defense of the Government's action. It appears that Defendant has not acted upon that warning. In her Affidavit, Defendant makes one assertion with which the Court must agree: "Affiant denies that Gloria M. Gubler Kelly is a Bar attorney with license to represent Gloria M. Gubler Kelly." The truth of this assertion is obvious, and the Court solemnly renews its recommendation that Defendant seek out one who is indeed a licensed member of the bar to assist her with this case.

and 

State v. KINSTLE, 2012 Ohio 5952 - Ohio: Court of Appeals, 3rd Appellate Dist. 2012

And no, you were not arrested for "court costs" but rather for failure to appear. The judge and the warrant explain it clearly.

You also cannot file counterclaims in a criminal proceeding. That requires a civil proceeding. As to the writ of prohibition, how is that one proceeding? I am trying to understand the filings in these cases, quite a spaghetti...

You filed a "negative averment" in 2013, which the court returned, observing that the case had been closed. The document was stricken from the court records and returned, although it is unclear if the document remained 'filed' with the clerk. Documents may be stricken from the docket, although Ohio statute appears to require that such documents remain "filed".

What did you subsequently file and in which cases? In order to help you, one needs to understand the context of your filings. You, for example, had assumed that an affidavit of indigence need not be refiled in a new case. The judge explained to you why that is incorrect.

As I understand the Court is a court of records, so it would be helpful to see the docket and its filings in detail. Alas, the clerk does not seem to have the documents online as far as I can tell.

In the document that was returned to you in 2013, you argue

pursuant to both Ohio and Federal R. Civ. P. 60(b)(2,3,416 )(d}(3} 

Note that the Federal Rules do not apply in State courts nor does this appear to be a civil procedure am I correct?

Furthermore, the judge explained in the letter, which appears to have been filed in the record

As said in a prior entry, this case is closed but for the collection of court costs and the defendant's compliance with the suspended fines and sentences in this case. 

Before proceeding on appeal, it would be helpful for you to establish that the document, in addition to being stricken was also removed from the clerk's records. Furthermore, you need to explain why civil rules apply to what appears to be a civil case, and finally you need to explain why your filing was appropriately given that the case had been closed.

The cases in question appear to be:

• 12 CRB 01533 A&B
• 12 CRB 01534 A&B 

[3mpr08f14sh8x]

I went to traffic court on a catch-up day after an ice storm.  I was there for going a little faster than the car in front of me, though I haven't figured out how I did that. And I was "driving without a license" as I refused to pay a $135 to Cheyenne, WY mafia, so they had SC mafia pull my license. They were planning to extort over $900 from me that day. When I was called, I stood behind the "bar." The judge asked me to please step around to the podium with the microphone, but I told him "I see you have a gold fringe around the flag, though you've gone to great lengths to hide it." He said, "Yes, I guess I do." I said, "I'll keep my feet solidly on solid ground on this side of the fence!" He asked me about why my license was suspended, and did I plan to do anything about it. I 'sprained, and said, "No, I don't plan to do anything about it."Then, before I could give the rest of his victims any more ideas, he dismissed the case. They extorted not one red cent from my slim pocketbook. My sweet wife was there and couldn't believe I actually got out of it. She was expecting them to put me in jail!

[22towhgimqi9g]

Good for you Bill,

Atta Boy! You stand your ground, show the judge you're not budging and you know what you're there for and you know what you're doing, as soon as he recognizes that you know how to make his life difficult, he will dismiss the charges.

BUT; you shouldn't have let that stand as Stare Decisis. You should have said, no your Honor, this case is DISCHARGED! ERASED! NEVER HAPPENED! Not dismissed which translates to "you're still guilty, we just let you off".

You want them to discharge the case entirely. This means they fully admit that they had no "jurisdiction" in the first place and they need to erase this action from their files or face charges and the possible loss of their livelihood and all the rest of their worldly goods besides.

Anything you can do to stand on your side of the "BAR" and make clear your status as a free man, traveling "upon the land" in the usA and not "in the territory" of the USA, secures your place as the court of record in common law. It doesn't hurt to have all of this kind of thing in writing as to exactly what the penalties etc. are for violation of your status as a free man and violation of your rights.

Good Job!