[00:00.000 --> 00:09.600]  At least 138 people have died in Haiti as authorities struggle to contain a cholera
[00:09.600 --> 00:13.400]  outbreak that has infected at least 1,500.
[00:13.400 --> 00:18.360]  Medical facilities in the port city of Saint-Marc have been overwhelmed with hundreds of patients
[00:18.360 --> 00:22.960]  lying on blankets outside Saint Nicholas Hospital.
[00:22.960 --> 00:27.960]  Jewish settlers have broken ground for some 600 housing units in West Bank settlements
[00:27.960 --> 00:32.840]  since an Israeli government-imposed moratorium on construction expired last month.
[00:32.840 --> 00:38.200]  The rush appeared to be driven by fear Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would renew the
[00:38.200 --> 00:41.000]  settlement freeze under pressure from the U.S.
[00:41.000 --> 00:47.040]  Ajit Afran, who monitors settlements for Peace Now, an Israeli pacifist group, estimated
[00:47.040 --> 00:54.720]  settlers had some 13,000 construction permits issued before Netanyahu announced the freeze.
[00:54.720 --> 00:59.700]  The New York Times reported Friday the U.S. would deny military aid to Pakistani troops
[00:59.700 --> 01:04.560]  linked to the killing of unarmed civilians during offensives against the Taliban in the
[01:04.560 --> 01:05.560]  Swat Valley.
[01:05.560 --> 01:10.640]  However, also on Friday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pledged $2 billion in military
[01:10.640 --> 01:13.560]  aid to Pakistan with no strings attached.
[01:13.560 --> 01:20.280]  U.S. officials continue to question whether Pakistan has cut ties to the Taliban.
[01:20.280 --> 01:25.280]  France was forced to start importing electricity Thursday as unions announced strikes would
[01:25.280 --> 01:27.400]  spread into the next two weeks.
[01:27.400 --> 01:32.800]  Production had been cut at four nuclear power plants because of a 10-day rolling strike,
[01:32.800 --> 01:37.920]  while at least 12 of France's 58 reactors were closed for maintenance.
[01:37.920 --> 01:42.760]  Work has also stopped at two of the three liquefied natural gas terminals.
[01:42.760 --> 01:47.800]  All of France's oil refineries are out of action, and a quarter of its gas stations
[01:47.800 --> 01:49.240]  are without fuel.
[01:49.240 --> 01:54.680]  President Nicolas Sarkozy said, quote, �We cannot be the only country in the world where,
[01:54.680 --> 01:59.760]  when there is a reform, a minority wants to block everyone else.� Sarkozy has pressed
[01:59.760 --> 02:05.300]  right-wing allies in the Senate to speed up approving the bill by the weekend, possibly
[02:05.300 --> 02:11.520]  through a special procedure to sidestep dozens of amendments filed by opposition socialists.
[02:11.520 --> 02:17.200]  Seventy-one percent of France supports the strikes.
[02:17.200 --> 02:22.920]  The Federal Housing Finance Agency said Thursday taxpayer bailouts of housing finance giants
[02:22.920 --> 02:29.640]  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could cost up to $363 billion through 2013.
[02:29.640 --> 02:33.900]  The agency, which has regulated the former government-sponsored enterprises since they
[02:33.900 --> 02:39.440]  were seized at the start of the financial crisis in 2008, says the figure was based
[02:39.440 --> 02:45.360]  on a potential, quote, �deeper second recession.� Together, the two lending giants hold about
[02:45.360 --> 02:52.360]  $1.6 trillion worth of loans, two-thirds of the nation's mortgages.
[03:15.360 --> 03:38.360]  �Well, I received my remedy today, came in a box just like they say, I accept it,
[03:38.360 --> 03:50.640]  don't buy it right away, it's not too young, it's not later, we are real leaders, and if
[03:50.640 --> 03:51.640]  not, we're later every day.�
[03:51.640 --> 03:52.640]  Okay, folks.
[03:52.640 --> 03:53.640]  We are back.
[03:53.640 --> 03:54.640]  We're taking your phone calls.
[03:54.640 --> 03:57.640]  And right now, we are speaking with Justin in Texas.
[03:57.640 --> 04:00.040]  Okay, Justin, you said you had something else for us.
[04:00.040 --> 04:01.040]  Go ahead.
[04:01.040 --> 04:02.480]  Yeah, I have one more question.
[04:02.480 --> 04:12.560]  I can't remember exactly the statute of whenever criminal complaints are filed and say you have
[04:12.560 --> 04:21.760]  a pending case, I can't remember, they should cancel the, since everything from the beginning
[04:21.760 --> 04:31.360]  was criminal activities brought on by the public officials, it cancels the crime or
[04:31.360 --> 04:39.360]  the alleged crime out, and I can't remember that statute to eliminate this entirely.
[04:39.360 --> 04:47.640]  I want to just make this disappear, and I have these 14 criminal complaints that I want
[04:47.640 --> 04:53.120]  to push to, I want this thing to go away, I've pushed it all the way up to the Court
[04:53.120 --> 04:58.480]  of Criminal Appeals, and of course, they're there just for our amusement, they're going
[04:58.480 --> 05:00.480]  to affirm a trial court.
[05:00.480 --> 05:03.000]  Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute.
[05:03.000 --> 05:09.760]  Did you make these allegations against the grand jury to the Court of Criminal Appeals?
[05:09.760 --> 05:14.880]  I attached it and put it in as points of issues.
[05:14.880 --> 05:15.880]  Good.
[05:15.880 --> 05:16.880]  Yes.
[05:16.880 --> 05:19.920]  Five criminal charges against all of them with the grand jury.
[05:19.920 --> 05:25.720]  When you gave them criminal complaints, their magistrates like all the rest.
[05:25.720 --> 05:27.000]  Right.
[05:27.000 --> 05:34.720]  And I got them put in front of the grand jury once, it'd be nice if you could do it again.
[05:34.720 --> 05:40.560]  Well I was able to get in front of the, hand delivered to the former of the grand jury,
[05:40.560 --> 05:46.160]  so if I can, God willing, I was able to do that.
[05:46.160 --> 05:51.920]  I can't remember the statute, there's a statute that I can't remember that cancels out.
[05:51.920 --> 05:55.120]  No, it's not statute, it's case law.
[05:55.120 --> 06:02.880]  Okay, case law, okay, case law that cancels out the entirely allegation to the crime that
[06:02.880 --> 06:09.200]  they say that they're charging with, since I have 14 criminal complaints that supersede
[06:09.200 --> 06:12.200]  theirs, then everything, you follow what I'm saying?
[06:12.200 --> 06:13.200]  Yes, you have to.
[06:13.200 --> 06:14.200]  That's the point.
[06:14.200 --> 06:16.600]  You show due process violations, then.
[06:16.600 --> 06:17.600]  Right, right.
[06:17.600 --> 06:20.600]  You have a right to dismissal.
[06:20.600 --> 06:22.600]  Right, right.
[06:22.600 --> 06:29.280]  So, I guess that's pretty much it, that's my only.
[06:29.280 --> 06:33.640]  So Justin, you got in front, you were able to hand deliver criminal complaints to the
[06:33.640 --> 06:36.240]  grand jury of the foreman here in Travis County?
[06:36.240 --> 06:37.240]  Yes.
[06:37.240 --> 06:38.240]  That's awesome.
[06:38.240 --> 06:41.040]  And I have proof of it.
[06:41.040 --> 06:45.320]  Can you please just repeat for our listeners who may just be tuning in, how were you actually
[06:45.320 --> 06:51.720]  able to do that without the prosecutor getting in the way and preventing you?
[06:51.720 --> 06:58.280]  Well, it was quite interesting, and it was pretty fun, actually.
[06:58.280 --> 07:04.560]  The first day, it was actually over a period of two different days.
[07:04.560 --> 07:10.160]  My wife is sitting here, and, well, hang on, hang on.
[07:10.160 --> 07:13.200]  Yeah, if you could move to another room.
[07:13.200 --> 07:14.200]  Okay, okay.
[07:14.200 --> 07:17.680]  Well, here's what happened.
[07:17.680 --> 07:27.320]  The first day, the first day I went in as someone that was curious about the process
[07:27.320 --> 07:34.720]  of the grand jury, and I am also a paralegal, I don't work for any demon spawns, but I decided
[07:34.720 --> 07:40.040]  to go to school, and I've been studying for a number of years, and I just graduated last
[07:40.040 --> 07:41.040]  month.
[07:41.040 --> 07:47.080]  So I went in there under the blanket umbrella of, I'm interested in this whole process of
[07:47.080 --> 07:48.080]  how it works.
[07:48.080 --> 07:54.280]  So I started asking the bailiff that was there, I asked him some questions.
[07:54.280 --> 07:55.480]  How does this work?
[07:55.480 --> 07:57.720]  I just played stupid, basically.
[07:57.720 --> 08:04.040]  I walked in there with the notepad and pen, and I just started asking questions, and he
[08:04.040 --> 08:10.160]  began to tell me, he said, well, the grand jury members, they convene certainly in secrecy,
[08:10.160 --> 08:16.760]  you know, obviously, and he said, well, they turn, if you notice, they turn their badges
[08:16.760 --> 08:17.760]  around backwards.
[08:17.760 --> 08:22.160]  So I said, oh, okay, and he said, I said, how often they meet?
[08:22.160 --> 08:27.000]  And he said, well, you know, theoretically, they'll be in tomorrow at one o'clock.
[08:27.000 --> 08:30.720]  And I said, oh, okay, well, great, great.
[08:30.720 --> 08:35.720]  So he gave me information that I needed to know coming in the second day.
[08:35.720 --> 08:43.520]  So I was like, okay, well, the second day came, and I hung around right before lunch,
[08:43.520 --> 08:47.720]  and I started seeing them come in one by one.
[08:47.720 --> 08:55.880]  And around one o'clock that day, it was the day before I had trial, we're sitting down
[08:55.880 --> 09:01.480]  in the hallway right there where they walk through, and they cover their badges and turn
[09:01.480 --> 09:03.280]  around backwards.
[09:03.280 --> 09:08.280]  And my wife, she said, there's some right there, that one, that's one right there.
[09:08.280 --> 09:13.960]  Look, he has a badge, and there's two people walking together and they're hiding their
[09:13.960 --> 09:15.440]  badges.
[09:15.440 --> 09:16.440]  And I said, really?
[09:16.440 --> 09:17.440]  And I was like, should I?
[09:17.440 --> 09:18.440]  Should I?
[09:18.440 --> 09:19.440]  And I was like, yes, yes, yes.
[09:19.440 --> 09:27.400]  So I went up to him, and it just so happened that God's will that he was the foreman.
[09:27.400 --> 09:34.000]  I introduced myself, and I said, I had 14 criminal complaints against public officials.
[09:34.000 --> 09:37.040]  And he said, well, I'm the foreman.
[09:37.040 --> 09:40.320]  And I said, whoa, OK, well, great.
[09:40.320 --> 09:42.840]  And he said, well, come right in here to the office.
[09:42.840 --> 09:44.440]  And I said, I've already been in there.
[09:44.440 --> 09:46.280]  He said, well, come right in here.
[09:46.280 --> 09:47.280]  I came in there.
[09:47.280 --> 09:52.840]  And of course, lo and behold, the man the day before, he was there.
[09:52.840 --> 09:58.840]  And he bowed up, like I said, he bowed up, and he didn't like it.
[09:58.840 --> 10:05.400]  And then that's when he actually went and got reinforcements and was saying, you know,
[10:05.400 --> 10:08.600]  the foreman turned around and he said, can I accept these?
[10:08.600 --> 10:13.360]  And the bailiff said, well, you can do whatever you want to do.
[10:13.360 --> 10:16.520]  And the other two guys that were standing there, there was three of them, plus the foreman,
[10:16.520 --> 10:18.520]  so that's four guys standing there.
[10:18.520 --> 10:19.520]  And they were all bowing up.
[10:19.520 --> 10:24.920]  You know, I was like, I was a bit nervous because this is the first time ever, you know,
[10:24.920 --> 10:25.920]  these are public officials.
[10:25.920 --> 10:30.320]  And I'm thinking, you know, oh, you know, I didn't know what to do.
[10:30.320 --> 10:34.380]  And I was like, I was surprised that I was able to actually get to the foreman.
[10:34.380 --> 10:38.880]  So I already had a certificate of service period, like I said before.
[10:38.880 --> 10:48.520]  And it was already stated, 14 criminal complaints, what they were, and the date on it, and he
[10:48.520 --> 10:49.520]  signed it.
[10:49.520 --> 10:56.080]  And then he stated that he, like I said before, earlier, before the break, that he couldn't
[10:56.080 --> 11:01.640]  verify the contents of which the envelope stated that I stated that were in there.
[11:01.640 --> 11:07.120]  But I wrote a little note on there saying he could not verify that they were the contents,
[11:07.120 --> 11:11.200]  but it was criminal complaint, and he signed it, and he gave it.
[11:11.200 --> 11:16.680]  So I mean, he made a copy of the certificate of service, and the envelope was sealed, and
[11:16.680 --> 11:22.720]  I had a statement of facts along with the 14 criminal complaints sealed.
[11:22.720 --> 11:27.440]  And he gave me the copy, I had the copy, I turned around, and I said, thank you very
[11:27.440 --> 11:28.440]  much.
[11:28.440 --> 11:33.080]  And he walked right back in, and he closed the door behind him, and I walked off into
[11:33.080 --> 11:37.240]  the very next day, I had trial.
[11:37.240 --> 11:44.240]  And during trial, I stood up and told the judge that I had standing in this matter,
[11:44.240 --> 11:49.680]  and that there were 14 criminal complaints, and I would advise his court not to move forward
[11:49.680 --> 11:52.200]  until this is investigated immediately.
[11:52.200 --> 11:57.560]  Okay, so wait, back to when you were in the office, and there was the foreman, and these
[11:57.560 --> 12:02.880]  other public servants were bristling, so the bailiff told the foreman, you can do whatever
[12:02.880 --> 12:03.880]  you want.
[12:03.880 --> 12:04.880]  So he kept them?
[12:04.880 --> 12:05.880]  Did you say anything at that point?
[12:05.880 --> 12:08.480]  Did they try to make you leave at that point, or what?
[12:08.480 --> 12:12.440]  No, no, they didn't do anything.
[12:12.440 --> 12:18.760]  The foreman said, thank you very much, shook my hand, and those other three guys, the bailiff
[12:18.760 --> 12:24.360]  sat down, kept his mouth shut, didn't say a word, and the other two guys, they walked
[12:24.360 --> 12:30.880]  off, and the foreman walked back in the chambers and closed the door, and I said, thanks.
[12:30.880 --> 12:37.000]  Now there's something else that could be added in this situation, if any one of our listeners
[12:37.000 --> 12:41.880]  are ever in this situation, because it seemed like the foreman had a question in his mind,
[12:41.880 --> 12:44.960]  and obviously he verbalized it, can I take these?
[12:44.960 --> 12:52.640]  You may want to state the section from the Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that
[12:52.640 --> 12:56.560]  the grand jury may accept criminal complaints from any credible person.
[12:56.560 --> 13:00.040]  Right, and it's their official duty.
[13:00.040 --> 13:01.040]  Right.
[13:01.040 --> 13:04.000]  Randy, what is the statute number I forgot?
[13:04.000 --> 13:07.000]  I think it's 2.04.
[13:07.000 --> 13:10.000]  It's 20.07.
[13:10.000 --> 13:20.120]  Oh, I'm way off, 20.07, and what it says is, the grand jury shall investigate into all
[13:20.120 --> 13:26.240]  criminal accusations that come to their knowledge by way of the prosecuting attorney or any
[13:26.240 --> 13:27.240]  credible person.
[13:27.240 --> 13:31.240]  That's the one, any credible person, and you are a credible person.
[13:31.240 --> 13:36.000]  The definition of a credible person, you have to be over 18 and never have been convicted
[13:36.000 --> 13:37.000]  of a felony.
[13:37.000 --> 13:43.720]  Yeah, or Chapter 311 Government Code specifically said the term shall create a duty from which
[13:43.720 --> 13:45.240]  one may not be shielded.
[13:45.240 --> 13:47.000]  Yeah, that means they have to.
[13:47.000 --> 13:50.400]  It's not a matter of can they, they have to.
[13:50.400 --> 13:53.520]  They have to by the Code of Criminal Procedure.
[13:53.520 --> 13:54.520]  Right.
[13:54.520 --> 13:57.920]  They're bound by law to investigate.
[13:57.920 --> 14:01.360]  By 20.07 and by the Administrative Code.
[14:01.360 --> 14:08.560]  And also, if they do not investigate it, in other words, if they did not issue a true
[14:08.560 --> 14:17.360]  bill or no bill, then they just created a whole new can once, correct?
[14:17.360 --> 14:18.360]  39.03.
[14:18.360 --> 14:19.360]  Penal Code.
[14:19.360 --> 14:20.360]  39.03.
[14:20.360 --> 14:21.360]  Penal Code.
[14:21.360 --> 14:24.080]  If a public official acting under the code of his authority fails to perform a duty he's
[14:24.080 --> 14:29.160]  required to perform and in the process denies a citizen full and free access to an endowment
[14:29.160 --> 14:36.400]  of rights, in this case, the right of the protection of the courts, that's Class A misdemeanor
[14:36.400 --> 14:37.400]  in Texas.
[14:37.400 --> 14:45.000]  And I suggest you also look at 39.02 and attach that with it, abuse of official capacity.
[14:45.000 --> 14:46.000]  39.02.
[14:46.000 --> 14:53.760]  Well, this one, this one doesn't exactly go to 39.02.
[14:53.760 --> 14:58.040]  He simply failed to perform a duty he was required to perform.
[14:58.040 --> 14:59.040]  Okay.
[14:59.040 --> 15:06.760]  What is the, I remember reading something in Chapter 2, breach of duty, I keep on thinking
[15:06.760 --> 15:08.320]  2.04.
[15:08.320 --> 15:09.320]  I'm not sure.
[15:09.320 --> 15:10.320]  I'm not looking at it.
[15:10.320 --> 15:11.320]  Penal Code.
[15:11.320 --> 15:12.320]  I think 2.04.
[15:12.320 --> 15:13.320]  No, under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
[15:13.320 --> 15:14.320]  No.
[15:14.320 --> 15:15.320]  Okay.
[15:15.320 --> 15:20.160]  2.04 tells the prosecuting attorney what he's to do with complaints.
[15:20.160 --> 15:21.160]  Okay.
[15:21.160 --> 15:22.160]  2.04.5.
[15:22.160 --> 15:23.160]  That's that.
[15:23.160 --> 15:24.160]  Okay.
[15:24.160 --> 15:25.160]  Okay.
[15:25.160 --> 15:34.360]  So, if in fact that there's not a true bill or no bill and there's not, I have a really
[15:34.360 --> 15:43.240]  good suspicion there's not going to be, then I incorporate the DA on this.
[15:43.240 --> 15:49.000]  They haven't sold the last day of their term to true bill or no bill.
[15:49.000 --> 15:50.000]  Their term is up.
[15:50.000 --> 15:51.000]  So that was...
[15:51.000 --> 15:52.000]  Oh, okay.
[15:52.000 --> 15:53.000]  Okay.
[15:53.000 --> 15:54.000]  Okay.
[15:54.000 --> 15:55.000]  Good.
[15:55.000 --> 15:56.000]  That would be prima facie...
[15:56.000 --> 15:57.000]  Wait a minute.
[15:57.000 --> 15:58.000]  What was that?
[15:58.000 --> 15:59.000]  This happened when, Justin?
[15:59.000 --> 16:00.000]  Yeah.
[16:00.000 --> 16:01.000]  Okay.
[16:01.000 --> 16:02.000]  I was just, I'm sorry.
[16:02.000 --> 16:08.000]  It's not something that he said, it's prima facie evidence that they did not officially...
[16:08.000 --> 16:13.640]  That they failed to perform a duty they required to perform.
[16:13.640 --> 16:14.640]  Yes.
[16:14.640 --> 16:15.640]  They failed.
[16:15.640 --> 16:16.640]  I can't even talk straight.
[16:16.640 --> 16:17.640]  Sorry.
[16:17.640 --> 16:20.640]  They did not perform their duty.
[16:20.640 --> 16:24.600]  That's prima facie evidence right there that they didn't, if there is in fact not a true
[16:24.600 --> 16:28.200]  bill or a bill, no bill.
[16:28.200 --> 16:33.800]  And you filed these criminal complaints because these officials were acting against you so
[16:33.800 --> 16:36.560]  they denied you the protection of the court.
[16:36.560 --> 16:37.560]  Correct.
[16:37.560 --> 16:38.560]  Okay, Justin, anything else?
[16:38.560 --> 16:39.560]  No, that's pretty much it.
[16:39.560 --> 16:40.560]  All right.
[16:40.560 --> 16:41.560]  Good job.
[16:41.560 --> 16:42.560]  Keep up the faith.
[16:42.560 --> 16:43.560]  Good job, Justin.
[16:43.560 --> 16:44.560]  Can I have a plug in here?
[16:44.560 --> 16:45.560]  Quickly.
[16:45.560 --> 16:46.560]  Hurry.
[16:46.560 --> 16:47.560]  I got a website called dismisstickets.com.
[16:47.560 --> 16:48.560]  I offer free information and...
[16:48.560 --> 16:49.560]  Okay.
[16:49.560 --> 16:50.560] ...dismisstickets.com.
[16:50.560 --> 16:51.560]  All right.
[16:51.560 --> 16:52.560]  We'll be right back, folks.
[16:52.560 --> 16:53.560]  All right.
[16:53.560 --> 17:02.280]  Thank you.
[17:02.280 --> 17:06.720]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals, and coin
[17:06.720 --> 17:09.320]  supplies in the Austin metro area.
[17:09.320 --> 17:11.360]  We also ship worldwide.
[17:11.360 --> 17:15.400]  We are a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin
[17:15.400 --> 17:16.400]  and metals purchases.
[17:16.400 --> 17:22.080]  We buy, sell, trade, and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections, precious
[17:22.080 --> 17:24.000]  metals, and scrap gold.
[17:24.000 --> 17:27.600]  We will purchase and sell gold and jewelry items as well.
[17:27.600 --> 17:30.200]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullion.
[17:30.200 --> 17:36.440]  We're located at 5448 Barnett Road, Suite 3, and we're open Monday through Friday, 10
[17:36.440 --> 17:40.160]  a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
[17:40.160 --> 17:47.560]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440
[17:47.560 --> 17:48.560]  with any questions.
[17:48.560 --> 17:53.320]  Ask for Chad and say you've heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or 90.1 FM.
[17:53.320 --> 18:00.560]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[18:00.560 --> 18:05.880]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.880 --> 18:09.360]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[18:09.360 --> 18:13.640]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[18:13.640 --> 18:14.640]  can win too.
[18:14.640 --> 18:19.480]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.480 --> 18:25.240]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[18:25.240 --> 18:29.880]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[18:29.880 --> 18:34.080]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.080 --> 18:39.200]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.200 --> 18:41.200]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.200 --> 18:46.920]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[18:46.920 --> 18:49.920]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.920 --> 18:58.920]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[18:58.920 --> 18:59.920]  collectors now.
[18:59.920 --> 19:00.920]  Well, don't let nothing get to you.
[19:00.920 --> 19:01.920]  Only the Father can deliver you.
[19:01.920 --> 19:12.920]  And don't let bad-minded people hurt you until they say something, get behind all the bad
[19:12.920 --> 19:13.920]  things.
[19:13.920 --> 19:14.920]  Know what I mean?
[19:14.920 --> 19:15.920]  My friend.
[19:15.920 --> 19:16.920]  Knowledge at your service.
[19:16.920 --> 19:17.920]  All right, folks.
[19:17.920 --> 19:18.920]  We are back.
[19:18.920 --> 19:19.920]  Trust in God, my friend.
[19:19.920 --> 19:20.920]  Boy, that sure was a good example.
[19:20.920 --> 19:36.920]  That Justin gave, even said it must have been God's will.
[19:36.920 --> 19:41.880]  See, folks, see what will happen when you just put a little effort forth.
[19:41.880 --> 19:44.800]  He got to the foreman of the grand jury.
[19:44.800 --> 19:47.960]  And you know that was not just luck either.
[19:47.960 --> 19:49.960]  You know the Lord had a hand in that.
[19:49.960 --> 19:50.960]  What an example.
[19:50.960 --> 19:56.400]  So you know what, if we had more listeners doing this, if we had more people in the public
[19:56.400 --> 19:59.400]  doing this, things really would change, folks.
[19:59.400 --> 20:00.960]  We really can make a difference.
[20:00.960 --> 20:03.960]  Okay, we're going now to Carlos in California.
[20:03.960 --> 20:06.400]  Okay, Carlos, thanks for calling in.
[20:06.400 --> 20:07.400]  What's on your mind?
[20:07.400 --> 20:08.400]  Hi.
[20:08.400 --> 20:09.400]  Good evening.
[20:09.400 --> 20:10.400]  Thank you.
[20:10.400 --> 20:11.400]  Good evening, everybody.
[20:11.400 --> 20:12.400]  It's Randy.
[20:12.400 --> 20:17.520]  I want to touch base a little bit on Randy's special topic, his favorite topic.
[20:17.520 --> 20:25.360]  Okay, I have a friend of mine, about a year ago, he had a DUI, and he hired an attorney.
[20:25.360 --> 20:27.640]  I don't know why, but he did.
[20:27.640 --> 20:34.680]  And he just gave him $2,000 to appear in court, and the attorney never showed up.
[20:34.680 --> 20:41.200]  To make a long story short, I just told my friend, told him, well, you better find yourself
[20:41.200 --> 20:44.040]  an attorney or a real attorney, right?
[20:44.040 --> 20:50.480]  Now my question is this, what can he do regarding the attorneys that never appeared?
[20:50.480 --> 20:56.880]  Because if he did get to him, he called him and called him until finally he got a hold
[20:56.880 --> 20:57.880]  of him.
[20:57.880 --> 21:00.040]  He only gave half of the money back.
[21:00.040 --> 21:01.040]  So, malpractice.
[21:01.040 --> 21:08.560]  So you can sue him for malpractice, and what about your favorite topic?
[21:08.560 --> 21:09.560]  What do you call that?
[21:09.560 --> 21:10.560]  Nothing criminal there.
[21:10.560 --> 21:11.560]  It's a criminal, right?
[21:11.560 --> 21:12.560]  No, there's nothing criminal.
[21:12.560 --> 21:13.560]  Okay.
[21:13.560 --> 21:14.560]  This is strictly civil.
[21:14.560 --> 21:15.560]  Okay, very good.
[21:15.560 --> 21:16.560]  Okay.
[21:16.560 --> 21:17.560]  Let me jump to the other question real quick.
[21:17.560 --> 21:18.560]  On my case...
[21:18.560 --> 21:19.560]  One of the...
[21:19.560 --> 21:20.560]  Make sure he files a bar grievance.
[21:20.560 --> 21:21.560]  Yeah, that's...
[21:21.560 --> 21:22.560]  You pull it out of my mouth.
[21:22.560 --> 21:23.560]  I was trying to say that I...
[21:23.560 --> 21:24.560]  You file a bar grievance, obviously, right?
[21:24.560 --> 21:25.560]  Absolutely.
[21:25.560 --> 21:26.560]  Right, okay.
[21:26.560 --> 21:27.560]  Is that something fairly simple that he can do?
[21:27.560 --> 21:28.560]  Oh, yeah.
[21:28.560 --> 21:29.560]  Piece of cake.
[21:29.560 --> 21:30.560]  Piece of cake?
[21:30.560 --> 21:31.560]  Just look on the...
[21:31.560 --> 21:45.560]  California State Bar website.
[21:45.560 --> 21:48.560]  They will have forms for doing the bar grievance.
[21:48.560 --> 21:49.560]  Okay.
[21:49.560 --> 21:53.560]  Because if he does anything else, they'll just ignore it, right?
[21:53.560 --> 21:56.560]  If he files a complaint on the bar, they'll just ignore it, right?
[21:56.560 --> 21:58.560]  Yeah, they'll ignore the...
[21:58.560 --> 21:59.560]  The bar will ignore...
[21:59.560 --> 22:02.560]  Well, actually, in California now, they publish them.
[22:02.560 --> 22:03.560]  Okay, great.
[22:03.560 --> 22:05.560]  So they became public, so it's getting better.
[22:05.560 --> 22:06.560]  Okay.
[22:06.560 --> 22:11.560]  And the state bar may ignore it, but his insurance company won't.
[22:11.560 --> 22:12.560]  Okay.
[22:12.560 --> 22:13.560]  And that's what he wants.
[22:13.560 --> 22:16.560]  That's where we want to head him in.
[22:16.560 --> 22:19.560]  Okay, Mr. Randy, last question.
[22:19.560 --> 22:23.560]  On my personal case, okay, my home was...
[22:23.560 --> 22:28.560]  He went to a trustee sale even though I offered the bank to pay him cash if they proved to
[22:28.560 --> 22:31.560]  me they were the holders in the course or the creditors.
[22:31.560 --> 22:33.560]  Now, he went to a trust sale.
[22:33.560 --> 22:34.560]  The bank did not buy it.
[22:34.560 --> 22:36.560]  A lawful detainer came up.
[22:36.560 --> 22:39.560]  I have moved my case to federal court.
[22:39.560 --> 22:41.560]  I did it yesterday.
[22:41.560 --> 22:42.560]  What's the next step?
[22:42.560 --> 22:43.560]  And what would you recommend?
[22:43.560 --> 22:47.560]  I have more than one strategy, but I would like to hear your opinion.
[22:47.560 --> 22:48.560]  Okay.
[22:48.560 --> 22:53.560]  Have you claimed truth and lending?
[22:53.560 --> 22:54.560]  Yes.
[22:54.560 --> 23:00.560]  I have documents that I do have proof that the truth and lending was violated.
[23:00.560 --> 23:01.560]  Okay.
[23:01.560 --> 23:03.560]  Here's what you're going to need.
[23:03.560 --> 23:10.560]  You're going to need to claim that you exercised due diligence in attempting to discover fraud
[23:10.560 --> 23:12.560]  in the loan.
[23:12.560 --> 23:18.560]  And the way you exercised due diligence is you only dealt with licensed professionals.
[23:18.560 --> 23:24.560]  And since these were licensed professionals, you had a right to an expectation of good
[23:24.560 --> 23:26.560]  faith and fair dealing.
[23:26.560 --> 23:33.560]  And the fact that you only used licensed professionals was due diligence on your part.
[23:33.560 --> 23:40.560]  And that the lender committed fraudulent concealment.
[23:40.560 --> 23:43.560]  That's right out of the language of the court.
[23:43.560 --> 23:49.560]  That's what the court said you had to demonstrate in order to toll truth and lending.
[23:49.560 --> 23:56.560]  And then in the alternative, even if they don't toll the statute of limitations for
[23:56.560 --> 24:04.560]  the truth and lending act, you maintain you have a, you need to make a claim on some entity
[24:04.560 --> 24:10.560]  that's not registered to do business in California.
[24:10.560 --> 24:14.560]  That'll give you diversity jurisdiction to keep them from kicking it back.
[24:14.560 --> 24:15.560]  Okay.
[24:15.560 --> 24:20.560]  Because if you go into the Fed and they throw out the truth and lending, they refuse to
[24:20.560 --> 24:25.560]  toll it, then you need diversity jurisdiction to keep you in there.
[24:25.560 --> 24:26.560]  Right.
[24:26.560 --> 24:27.560]  Okay.
[24:27.560 --> 24:28.560]  I haven't done it already.
[24:28.560 --> 24:29.560]  Okay.
[24:29.560 --> 24:30.560]  Good.
[24:30.560 --> 24:31.560]  Good.
[24:31.560 --> 24:32.560]  That should keep you in.
[24:32.560 --> 24:37.560]  Then you can still claim common law recoupment and rescission.
[24:37.560 --> 24:38.560]  You can ask for rescission.
[24:38.560 --> 24:44.560]  When you ask for rescission, they're going to come back and complain and say his request
[24:44.560 --> 24:50.560]  for rescission is in genuine because he failed to make tender.
[24:50.560 --> 24:53.560]  I offered to make tender.
[24:53.560 --> 25:03.560]  What you do is tender by offset in recoupment, in common law recoupment.
[25:03.560 --> 25:13.560]  You claim common law fraud and basically you make the monetary claim against the lender
[25:13.560 --> 25:20.560]  under common law fraud and claim tender by set off.
[25:20.560 --> 25:26.560]  You set off the amount you would have to tender against the amount you claim against them.
[25:26.560 --> 25:28.560]  And you can do that in recoupment.
[25:28.560 --> 25:32.560]  So even if they throw out the truth and lending, you still got the common law claims.
[25:32.560 --> 25:33.560]  Okay.
[25:33.560 --> 25:37.560]  Something real quick, real quick, because I know we got more colors.
[25:37.560 --> 25:43.560]  Now I'm going after the notary because she notarized a document and that person already
[25:43.560 --> 25:48.560]  know for sure, have evidence that the person, she said that it was in front of her, was
[25:48.560 --> 25:49.560]  not in front of her.
[25:49.560 --> 25:56.560]  So I'm claiming that due for approximate cost, so for notarizing that approximate cost, I
[25:56.560 --> 25:57.560]  lost my home.
[25:57.560 --> 26:02.560]  Even though I'm not out of my home, but it's been, you know what it is, right?
[26:02.560 --> 26:05.560]  It's been agony and it's all the negative things.
[26:05.560 --> 26:08.560]  I'm filing a lawsuit against her.
[26:08.560 --> 26:13.560]  Now my question is this, do I have to notify her or should I just file?
[26:13.560 --> 26:15.560]  Send her a tort letter.
[26:15.560 --> 26:17.560]  Send her a tort letter, right?
[26:17.560 --> 26:22.560]  Take the complaint you're going to file against her and put a business heading on it, send
[26:22.560 --> 26:28.560]  it to her and instead of a prayer, a demand that you be made whole in this amount, make
[26:28.560 --> 26:31.560]  me whole by this date or be sued.
[26:31.560 --> 26:32.560]  Okay.
[26:32.560 --> 26:34.560]  So it's just like a warning, right?
[26:34.560 --> 26:35.560]  Yes.
[26:35.560 --> 26:40.560]  The courts don't want you to use the court as a remedy of first resort, but rather a
[26:40.560 --> 26:41.560]  remedy of last resort.
[26:41.560 --> 26:48.560]  They want you to exercise administrative remedies and the remedy you have to exercise or a tort
[26:48.560 --> 26:51.560]  letter is sufficient to meet that requirement.
[26:51.560 --> 26:52.560]  Okay.
[26:52.560 --> 26:56.560]  Because the claim that I'm filing against her is intentional tort.
[26:56.560 --> 26:57.560]  Good.
[26:57.560 --> 26:58.560]  Wonderful.
[26:58.560 --> 27:01.560]  You want to go after these people at the bottom.
[27:01.560 --> 27:10.560]  The way I see it, if she hadn't probably signed the document or notarized the document,
[27:10.560 --> 27:13.560]  the prosecution would not have gone further.
[27:13.560 --> 27:14.560]  That's my point.
[27:14.560 --> 27:15.560]  Yes.
[27:15.560 --> 27:16.560]  Okay.
[27:16.560 --> 27:19.560]  There's another thing you might want to ask them for.
[27:19.560 --> 27:27.560]  Ask them for any bank records that you submitted to them that's included in your loan package
[27:27.560 --> 27:33.560]  that was used to determine your income.
[27:33.560 --> 27:34.560]  Great.
[27:34.560 --> 27:39.560]  That will jerk a knot in their shorts and here's the reason why.
[27:39.560 --> 27:46.560]  I was talking to someone just yesterday on this issue and she said, look for those records
[27:46.560 --> 27:53.560]  because they regularly take your bank records and change the amounts to the amounts they
[27:53.560 --> 27:54.560]  need.
[27:54.560 --> 27:59.560]  She was working for WAMU and they used to cut and paste and then some guy come along
[27:59.560 --> 28:05.560]  with a program where they would scan in your bank records, do optical character recognition
[28:05.560 --> 28:10.560]  on it, go in and change the numbers and print it out and it would look just like one that
[28:10.560 --> 28:11.560]  came from the bank.
[28:11.560 --> 28:12.560]  Okay.
[28:12.560 --> 28:18.560]  So you want to get the ones they used, you want to ask them for them and then compare
[28:18.560 --> 28:23.560]  theirs to your actual ones.
[28:23.560 --> 28:28.560]  That's absolute incontrovertible fraud on its face.
[28:28.560 --> 28:29.560]  Right.
[28:29.560 --> 28:30.560]  Right.
[28:30.560 --> 28:36.560]  Now when I file, now that I moved my case to a federal court, I'm going to file, I
[28:36.560 --> 28:38.560]  think I should file, I'm still working on it.
[28:38.560 --> 28:44.560]  I'm going to follow your steps and also under quiet title and I want to do discovery as
[28:44.560 --> 28:49.560]  soon as possible before we go to trial and hopefully we never go there.
[28:49.560 --> 28:50.560]  Yes.
[28:50.560 --> 28:51.560]  That's the whole idea.
[28:51.560 --> 28:52.560]  Okay.
[28:52.560 --> 29:00.560]  What we're looking for now are those things we can ask the lender for that tells the
[29:00.560 --> 29:04.560]  lender, I know the crapola you pulled.
[29:04.560 --> 29:09.560]  I know just the right questions to ask to get just the right piece of information.
[29:09.560 --> 29:19.560]  And one other suggestion is take a criminal complaint against that notary and file it
[29:19.560 --> 29:21.560]  with the grand jury.
[29:21.560 --> 29:25.560]  Interesting thing we found out about California grand juries.
[29:25.560 --> 29:29.560]  You have a criminal grand jury and a civil grand jury.
[29:29.560 --> 29:35.560]  If you have a criminal complaint against a public official, then the notary is, it doesn't
[29:35.560 --> 29:39.560]  go to the criminal, it goes to the civil and they must investigate.
[29:39.560 --> 29:40.560]  All right.
[29:40.560 --> 29:47.560]  That will, then when you start making accusations that point toward criminal issues, now you've
[29:47.560 --> 29:50.560]  got their attention and they've got reason to come to the table.
[29:50.560 --> 29:51.560]  Okay.
[29:51.560 --> 29:53.560]  This is David Kelton, David Stevens.
[29:53.560 --> 29:55.560]  We'll be right back on the other side.
[29:55.560 --> 29:57.560]  Hang on if you want to.
[29:57.560 --> 30:00.560]  We'll be right back.
[30:00.560 --> 30:04.560]  Come down and enjoy Austin's own piece of the Caribbean right on the banks of the Colorado
[30:04.560 --> 30:05.560]  River.
[30:05.560 --> 30:08.560]  One Love Kitchen, jerk chicken and vegetarian food.
[30:08.560 --> 30:10.560]  3109 East Cesar Chavez.
[30:10.560 --> 30:13.560]  That's 3109 East 1st Street right next door to Planet K.
[30:13.560 --> 30:15.560]  Lunch and dinner plate starting at $5.
[30:15.560 --> 30:16.560]  You can't beat that.
[30:16.560 --> 30:20.560]  Serving the real thing, jerk chicken, vegetarian and seafood Saturdays.
[30:20.560 --> 30:25.560]  Monday through Wednesday, Friday and Saturday, late night with Emperor Sound Crew.
[30:25.560 --> 30:28.560]  All right, also link up at onelovekitchen.net.
[30:28.560 --> 30:30.560]  That's onelovekitchen.net.
[30:30.560 --> 30:33.560]  Is your supervisor a snooping scoundrel?
[30:33.560 --> 30:34.560]  It's possible.
[30:34.560 --> 30:39.560]  New technologies and social intelligence specialists keep tabs on workers on and off the clock.
[30:39.560 --> 30:44.560]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back in a moment to share more about digital detectives
[30:44.560 --> 30:45.560]  and workplace woes.
[30:45.560 --> 30:51.560]  Your search engine is watching you, recording all your searches and creating a massive database
[30:51.560 --> 30:53.560]  of your personal information.
[30:53.560 --> 30:54.560]  That's creepy.
[30:54.560 --> 30:56.560]  But it doesn't have to be that way.
[30:56.560 --> 30:59.560]  Startpage.com is the world's most private search engine.
[30:59.560 --> 31:03.560]  Startpage doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches or use tracking
[31:03.560 --> 31:05.560]  cookies and they're third party certified.
[31:05.560 --> 31:10.560]  If you don't like big brother spying on you, start over with Startpage.
[31:10.560 --> 31:12.560]  Great search results and total privacy.
[31:12.560 --> 31:16.560]  Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[31:16.560 --> 31:20.560]  Supervisors with stealthy spy software are snooping on employees.
[31:20.560 --> 31:25.560]  Two thirds of businesses monitor company internet use and nearly half keep tabs on employee emails.
[31:25.560 --> 31:27.560]  And it doesn't stop when you leave the workplace.
[31:27.560 --> 31:32.560]  Firms are hiring social media specialists to scour the internet for incriminating activities.
[31:32.560 --> 31:39.560]  If you don a wet t-shirt on Facebook or turn traitor on Twitter, their investigations could put an end to your career.
[31:39.560 --> 31:41.560]  It's often perfectly legal.
[31:41.560 --> 31:47.560]  Employees generally aren't entitled to privacy when using company equipment and social media sites are a free for all.
[31:47.560 --> 31:52.560]  So if you want to keep your job, clean up your internet act, review your company's technology guidelines
[31:52.560 --> 31:55.560]  and remember that digital digressions could do you in.
[31:55.560 --> 32:20.560]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[32:20.560 --> 32:38.560]  I won't, I won't, I won't let you pull the wool over my eyes.
[32:38.560 --> 32:54.560]  They must refuse your notes all soaked up in lies. It seems you like to spare, but please take some words to the wise.
[32:54.560 --> 33:02.560]  Please stop trying to pull the wool over my eyes.
[33:02.560 --> 33:10.560]  Okay folks, we're back. We're taking your calls. And Randy, when you're mentioning, and this is a statute that I found actually
[33:10.560 --> 33:19.560]  when I was helping Bruno Brewiler of We Are Change Los Angeles concerning the role of civil grand juries in California.
[33:19.560 --> 33:24.560]  They break it down. They've got two grand jury systems, civil and criminal.
[33:24.560 --> 33:30.560]  And of course the criminal grand juries investigate crime. I mean hence the name criminal grand juries.
[33:30.560 --> 33:38.560]  However, if the accusation is against the public servants, the civil grand juries investigate that.
[33:38.560 --> 33:46.560]  Except, and here's the big exception, unless the public servant works for the courts.
[33:46.560 --> 33:55.560]  So in other words, if it's the prosecutor or the judge or the court clerk, if it's an officer of the court or a public servant
[33:55.560 --> 34:00.560]  that works for the courts, then that accusation would have to go to the criminal grand jury.
[34:00.560 --> 34:07.560]  And so that's an unfortunate situation because, you know, of course that's the grand jury that the prosecutor is protecting.
[34:07.560 --> 34:12.560]  However, if you've got a criminal accusation against a police officer or something like that,
[34:12.560 --> 34:18.560]  some other public servant that does not work for the courts, then you direct that to the civil grand jury.
[34:18.560 --> 34:22.560]  And the civil grand jury meets with the public all the time because they oversee public works.
[34:22.560 --> 34:27.560]  So at any rate, I just wanted to make that comment in there.
[34:27.560 --> 34:35.560]  We're still working with Bruno Brewiler on his case and his criminal complaints that he has against these public servants out there in California.
[34:35.560 --> 34:38.560]  All right. We are taking your calls. We've got Michael and Jeff.
[34:38.560 --> 34:44.560]  After that, the lines are open. So folks, if you'd like to call in, 512-646-1984.
[34:44.560 --> 34:47.560]  Michael from Maryland, thanks for calling in. What's on your mind?
[34:47.560 --> 34:54.560]  Hi. Good evening, folks. It is fitting that you all are talking a lot about grand juries.
[34:54.560 --> 34:59.560]  I spent a bit of time this week getting reacquainted with that topic.
[34:59.560 --> 35:09.560]  And in Maryland, it turns out we have a pretty good grand jury system in the sense that it's explicitly stated in our Constitution
[35:09.560 --> 35:15.560]  that we can judge not only the facts but the law. So that's good.
[35:15.560 --> 35:21.560]  Anyway, I did have a question though about whether you all had ever discussed this.
[35:21.560 --> 35:28.560]  As I was researching it, I came across the fact that apparently in 1946, I don't know if this rings a bell already to any of you,
[35:28.560 --> 35:31.560]  but the federal rules of criminal procedure.
[35:31.560 --> 35:32.560]  Yeah, we know all about that.
[35:32.560 --> 35:39.560]  I just don't remember you guys ever speaking about that. I've read very good write-ups on the fact that it didn't outlaw it.
[35:39.560 --> 35:46.560]  It just said it was something like outdated or outmoded or something and it just means it's not in use.
[35:46.560 --> 35:48.560]  It doesn't mean it can't be used.
[35:48.560 --> 35:52.560]  Yeah, but if you're talking about what I think you are,
[35:52.560 --> 36:02.560]  it's a case that specifically said that judges are not required to inform the jurors as to their right to judge the law as well as the facts.
[36:02.560 --> 36:11.560]  No, that's not where I'm headed. There's like a Rule 6 and 7 or something somewhere in there where it states to the fact that,
[36:11.560 --> 36:19.560]  again, this is the 1946 Federal Rules of Criminal Procedures where it makes reference to the fact that
[36:19.560 --> 36:27.560]  presentments are not cited herein as a mode of putting forth an indictment
[36:27.560 --> 36:33.560]  and it makes reference to the fact that it's outmoded or outdated or something like that.
[36:33.560 --> 36:36.560]  Obsolete. I think they use the word obsolete.
[36:36.560 --> 36:44.560]  Anyway, and that's largely been misused by the powers that be since then to, for all practical purposes,
[36:44.560 --> 36:53.560]  take it out of the hands of the grand juries as being largely independent from the prosecutor
[36:53.560 --> 36:59.560]  to them looking as appears to have happened in this other gentleman's case where they are handed something
[36:59.560 --> 37:02.560]  and they're like, can we do this? Can we take this?
[37:02.560 --> 37:06.560]  Well, you can do anything you want with the one guy's statement and that's the truth.
[37:06.560 --> 37:11.560]  I mean, you can. You can make a presentment if you want to make a presentment.
[37:11.560 --> 37:21.560]  Okay, well, one thing we need to make a distinction between is I have no intention of making a presentment to a grand jury.
[37:21.560 --> 37:24.560]  That's what we got prosecutors for.
[37:24.560 --> 37:29.560]  All I want to do is notify the grand jury that I have reasonably of a crime has been committed
[37:29.560 --> 37:38.560]  and ask them to examine into the crime and then have the prosecuting attorney prepare and present a presentment.
[37:38.560 --> 37:45.560]  Yeah, and also I wanted to comment on this case that, Eddie, you were just mentioning just now
[37:45.560 --> 37:51.560]  about how judges are not required to inform the grand jury or, you know, jury members,
[37:51.560 --> 37:57.560]  any jury members that they have the right to judge the law as well as the facts.
[37:57.560 --> 38:05.560]  And the reasoning behind that decision was that it was considered common knowledge at the time that,
[38:05.560 --> 38:07.560]  well, of course, everybody knew.
[38:07.560 --> 38:13.560]  Everyone knows that the, that juries have the right to judge the law as well as the facts and to strike down bad law.
[38:13.560 --> 38:20.560]  It's just like the, it's like the judge doesn't need to inform the grand jury or any jury member that,
[38:20.560 --> 38:26.560]  well, you can go to lunch when the court goes into recess.
[38:26.560 --> 38:31.560]  The judge doesn't need to inform the jury that when the day is over, well, you can go home now.
[38:31.560 --> 38:34.560]  I mean, it's just common knowledge.
[38:34.560 --> 38:36.560]  You know what I'm saying?
[38:36.560 --> 38:39.560]  So that was the reasoning behind that.
[38:39.560 --> 38:44.560]  But the problem with that ruling is that nowadays that's not common knowledge.
[38:44.560 --> 38:51.560]  I should have known this was the case, but I was interested and fascinated to read that the whole concept of the grand juries
[38:51.560 --> 38:58.560]  was present at least or as late as the Magna Carta and that it was carried forward, of course,
[38:58.560 --> 39:05.560]  by the English in the common law when the, in other words, it's a pre-constitutional...
[39:05.560 --> 39:09.560]  Well, actually, grand juries were not pre-Magna Carta.
[39:09.560 --> 39:13.560]  Grand juries, the Magna Carta was the beginning of grand juries.
[39:13.560 --> 39:17.560]  If you go to my website and if you download my PowerPoint presentation,
[39:17.560 --> 39:23.560]  I have a, I do a seminar myself on the history of grand juries and their functioning and over time,
[39:23.560 --> 39:28.560]  over the centuries, and grand juries came into being just after the time of the Magna Carta.
[39:28.560 --> 39:31.560]  The Magna Carta was what actually brought grand juries into being.
[39:31.560 --> 39:33.560]  What is that website again? I'm sorry.
[39:33.560 --> 39:35.560]  Ruleoflawradio.com.
[39:35.560 --> 39:37.560]  Okay, I'm sorry, and then I'll get it from there. Good.
[39:37.560 --> 39:40.560]  Yeah, click on the grand jury button and you'll see Randy has a paper on grand juries
[39:40.560 --> 39:43.560]  and then I've got my PowerPoint presentation on grand juries.
[39:43.560 --> 39:47.560]  Something that you all have said in the past made me want to ask this question.
[39:47.560 --> 39:51.560]  In general, now I realize you all are specialists in Texas and you don't know Maryland, right?
[39:51.560 --> 39:58.560]  But speaking in general, is it generally the case that from state to state that grand juries don't change
[39:58.560 --> 40:04.560]  with the wind that generally speaking there are from time to time or in certain counties,
[40:04.560 --> 40:10.560]  I guess perhaps, a standing grand jury, a set of jurors that tend to sit?
[40:10.560 --> 40:11.560]  Yes.
[40:11.560 --> 40:12.560]  Oh, that's the case?
[40:12.560 --> 40:18.560]  Yes, they tend, grand jurors, unlike petty jurors, a petty jury will only hear one case.
[40:18.560 --> 40:20.560]  A grand jury will sit for a period of time.
[40:20.560 --> 40:22.560]  Like six months or something?
[40:22.560 --> 40:23.560]  Yes.
[40:23.560 --> 40:27.560]  And you said tonight I could maybe look up in Maryland to look for the minutes.
[40:27.560 --> 40:29.560]  I didn't know I could do that, maybe.
[40:29.560 --> 40:38.560]  You need to look at how does the grand jury report the fact of the indictment to the court.
[40:38.560 --> 40:50.560]  In Texas, the grand jury with a quorum of the grand jury present is to read the fact of the indictment
[40:50.560 --> 40:57.560]  to the court and the clerk is to make notes in the minutes of the court.
[40:57.560 --> 41:03.560]  Well, in Terrace County they don't do that and that's one of the issues I haven't went after yet
[41:03.560 --> 41:08.560]  because that was a place I could get in front of a grand jury.
[41:08.560 --> 41:13.560]  I did that in Johnson County when they came, they convened a hearing.
[41:13.560 --> 41:22.560]  The grand jury came in and read the fact of the presentment to the court and whether they true billed or no billed.
[41:22.560 --> 41:25.560]  So here I had them in open court.
[41:25.560 --> 41:29.560]  And when the judge said does the grand jury have any further business to form,
[41:29.560 --> 41:31.560]  I said, no, Your Honor, we do not.
[41:31.560 --> 41:35.560]  I stood up and said, yes, you do.
[41:35.560 --> 41:39.560]  But we have other counties that aren't doing it that way
[41:39.560 --> 41:43.560]  and that's one of the issues that I want to get to challenging.
[41:43.560 --> 41:46.560]  I just got tied up with other things.
[41:46.560 --> 41:51.560]  I also want to say something else about the secrecy issue about grand juries.
[41:51.560 --> 41:54.560]  Grand juries don't necessarily convene in secret.
[41:54.560 --> 41:56.560]  That is a myth.
[41:56.560 --> 41:57.560]  That is a legal myth.
[41:57.560 --> 42:03.560]  The only thing that is secret about grand juries is when they are deliberating.
[42:03.560 --> 42:06.560]  Only their deliberations are secret.
[42:06.560 --> 42:11.560]  Everything else about the grand jury is by necessity public.
[42:11.560 --> 42:15.560]  Their names, when they meet, when they convene.
[42:15.560 --> 42:18.560]  Everything about grand juries is public except for the deliberations.
[42:18.560 --> 42:20.560]  That's the only thing.
[42:20.560 --> 42:26.560]  Is that true, though, with respect to the potential for, what do you call that,
[42:26.560 --> 42:28.560]  where somebody striking back?
[42:28.560 --> 42:29.560]  I forget the term.
[42:29.560 --> 42:31.560]  Retaliation?
[42:31.560 --> 42:32.560]  Whatever.
[42:32.560 --> 42:33.560]  Yeah, yeah, whatever the term is.
[42:33.560 --> 42:34.560]  You get the point.
[42:34.560 --> 42:37.560]  Where, like, if it's a mafioso-style grand jury thing
[42:37.560 --> 42:40.560]  and somebody wants to hit the grand jurors to make a statement,
[42:40.560 --> 42:43.560]  is that still the case, Deborah?
[42:43.560 --> 42:46.560]  The names of the grand jurors have to be public.
[42:46.560 --> 42:49.560]  We cannot have secret government.
[42:49.560 --> 42:52.560]  You have to have an opportunity to challenge the grand jury.
[42:52.560 --> 42:54.560]  The indictment.
[42:54.560 --> 42:57.560]  You have to be able to challenge the panel.
[42:57.560 --> 42:59.560]  I was actually very surprised to hear you say tonight
[42:59.560 --> 43:02.560]  that you could actually indict a foreman of a grand jury.
[43:02.560 --> 43:05.560]  For some reason, I had it in my head that they were almost above the law
[43:05.560 --> 43:07.560]  in the sense that whatever they decided was what they decided.
[43:07.560 --> 43:09.560]  None of them are above the law.
[43:09.560 --> 43:10.560]  No one is above the law.
[43:10.560 --> 43:15.560]  You just may have to have another grand jury indict that, indict the foreman, you know?
[43:15.560 --> 43:19.560]  Well, let me transition to the other question I have, which has to do with,
[43:19.560 --> 43:21.560]  as you may recall, the very first time I called in,
[43:21.560 --> 43:24.560]  I started talking to you all about a red light camera ticket.
[43:24.560 --> 43:27.560]  And since then, we've gotten one of these automated speed tickets.
[43:27.560 --> 43:30.560]  So before I get quite onto that, I want to transition question.
[43:30.560 --> 43:32.560]  Oh, can I ask it on the other side?
[43:32.560 --> 43:34.560]  Yeah, you can ask it on the other side.
[43:34.560 --> 43:35.560]  Thank you.
[43:35.560 --> 43:36.560]  Okay.
[43:36.560 --> 43:39.560]  Michael's going to ask his next question on the other side.
[43:39.560 --> 43:40.560]  We've got Jeff from Florida.
[43:40.560 --> 43:42.560]  After that, we've got open phone lines.
[43:42.560 --> 43:48.560]  So, folks, if you want to call in, 512-646-1984.
[43:48.560 --> 43:51.560]  This is the rule of law, ruleoflawradio.com.
[43:51.560 --> 43:53.560]  Brandi Kelton, Eddie Craig, and Deborah Stevens.
[43:53.560 --> 44:00.560]  We'll be right back after this break.
[44:00.560 --> 44:02.560]  More energy.
[44:02.560 --> 44:04.560]  Stronger immune power.
[44:04.560 --> 44:07.560]  Improved sense of well-being.
[44:07.560 --> 44:11.560]  How many supplements have you heard boast of these benefits?
[44:11.560 --> 44:14.560]  The team behind Shentrition believes that supplements should
[44:14.560 --> 44:16.560]  over-deliver on their promises.
[44:16.560 --> 44:20.560]  And Shentrition does just that.
[44:20.560 --> 44:24.560]  Shentrition utilizes the ancient healing wisdom of Chinese medicine.
[44:24.560 --> 44:27.560]  In conjunction with the science of modern nutrition,
[44:27.560 --> 44:30.560]  adaptogenic herbs serve as the healing component,
[44:30.560 --> 44:37.560]  and organic hemp protein and greens and superfoods act as a balanced nutrient base.
[44:37.560 --> 44:41.560]  Plus, Shentrition tastes great in just water.
[44:41.560 --> 44:47.560]  This powder supplement is everything you'd want in a product, and it's all natural.
[44:47.560 --> 44:55.560]  Visit Shentrition.com to order yours, or call 1-866-497-7436.
[44:55.560 --> 45:00.560]  After you use Shentrition, you'll believe in supplements again.
[45:00.560 --> 45:03.560]  Special Roast Hemp Coffee from HempUSA.org.
[45:03.560 --> 45:07.560]  Our coffee grows in the dense volcanic-rich soil, herbicide and pesticide-free,
[45:07.560 --> 45:09.560]  and in the high altitudes of Guatemala,
[45:09.560 --> 45:13.560]  in conditions that are ideal for natural growth of this high-quality coffee.
[45:13.560 --> 45:18.560]  Try our mellow cup of coffee that is ground and roasted with 25% hemp seed from Canada.
[45:18.560 --> 45:22.560]  With a wonderful nutty flavor that contains 18% protein,
[45:22.560 --> 45:27.560]  our roasters bring a unique flavor that makes this the best cup of coffee you'll ever have.
[45:27.560 --> 45:30.560]  Try our new Special Roast Hemp Coffee from HempUSA.org,
[45:30.560 --> 45:33.560]  and wake up your brain without the jitters.
[45:33.560 --> 45:36.560]  Our customers look forward to their next cup of hemp coffee.
[45:36.560 --> 45:43.560]  Visit us at HempUSA.org, or call 908-691-2608.
[45:43.560 --> 45:50.560]  That's 908-691-2608, and see if you'll change your mind about drinking coffee again.
[45:50.560 --> 45:55.560]  Taste the difference, feel the difference at HempUSA.org today.
[45:55.560 --> 46:08.560]  Okay, folks, we're back. So, Michael, before we go to your next question,
[46:08.560 --> 46:15.560]  I just wanted to address this issue about the secrecy of the grand jury and just what it all means.
[46:15.560 --> 46:21.560]  And as I was saying before, only the deliberations of the grand jury are secret.
[46:21.560 --> 46:25.560]  Not the names, not who they are, not when they meet,
[46:25.560 --> 46:29.560]  not the no bills and the true bills, and all these kinds of things.
[46:29.560 --> 46:34.560]  We cannot have secret government. We have to have transparent government.
[46:34.560 --> 46:37.560]  And, Michael, concerning your concern, like, say, a mafioso guy,
[46:37.560 --> 46:42.560]  and, you know, maybe putting a hit out on the grand jury members and such like that,
[46:42.560 --> 46:46.560]  well, you know, this is the price that people pay for being a public servant.
[46:46.560 --> 46:49.560]  You know, sometimes you're putting your life on the line. All right?
[46:49.560 --> 46:57.560]  But not only that, the accused have to have the opportunity to challenge the panel for one thing.
[46:57.560 --> 47:02.560]  And what I mean by that is challenge who is on the panel, okay?
[47:02.560 --> 47:07.560]  Maybe the panel is stacked against them for some reason,
[47:07.560 --> 47:12.560]  or maybe there's people who are unqualified to be on the panel for some reason or other,
[47:12.560 --> 47:17.560]  because of conflict of interest or because they're convicted felons or something.
[47:17.560 --> 47:22.560]  Something that would disqualify them from being on the panel.
[47:22.560 --> 47:27.560]  If the names were secret, then the accused could never challenge the panel itself,
[47:27.560 --> 47:32.560]  the actual people who are on the panel, whether or not they should be there or qualified to be there,
[47:32.560 --> 47:35.560]  and also they can never challenge the indictment.
[47:35.560 --> 47:38.560]  The accused has to have a chance to challenge the indictment
[47:38.560 --> 47:45.560]  and present exculpatory evidence to overturn the indictment before the prosecution ever comes to place.
[47:45.560 --> 47:51.560]  And so it's actually safer, it's actually much safer for the grand jury for their names to be public,
[47:51.560 --> 47:55.560]  because the accused has the opportunity to challenge their qualifications
[47:55.560 --> 47:59.560]  and has the opportunity to challenge the indictment in public.
[47:59.560 --> 48:03.560]  If their names were secret, then they would actually be in more danger.
[48:03.560 --> 48:08.560]  And so not only is it more dangerous for the grand jury to be secret, their names to be secret,
[48:08.560 --> 48:11.560]  but also we just cannot have transparent government.
[48:11.560 --> 48:16.560]  I mean, it's bad enough as it already is, you've got hundreds, thousands of cases
[48:16.560 --> 48:21.560]  where indictments come down, where the grand jury never even indicted somebody.
[48:21.560 --> 48:26.560]  The prosecutor just made a rubber stamp off of the grand jury foreman's signature
[48:26.560 --> 48:28.560]  without the grand jury foreman even knowing it,
[48:28.560 --> 48:34.560]  and the prosecutor's just stamping all these pages of indictments with the grand jury foreman's signature.
[48:34.560 --> 48:40.560]  Total fraud on its face, and that's even in a situation where we know who the grand jury members are.
[48:40.560 --> 48:44.560]  Can you imagine how bad it would be if the names of the grand jurors were secret?
[48:44.560 --> 48:48.560]  Prosecutor would just be handing the indictments down all over the place.
[48:48.560 --> 48:52.560]  I mean, that's the purpose of the grand jury, is to protect the accused.
[48:52.560 --> 48:54.560]  And that's the shield of the grand jury.
[48:54.560 --> 48:58.560]  The sword of the grand jury is to hand down their own indictments,
[48:58.560 --> 49:02.560]  which are called presentments, where the grand jury does their own investigation
[49:02.560 --> 49:07.560]  and they indict on their own without anybody presenting criminal complaints to them, prosecutor or anyone else.
[49:07.560 --> 49:10.560]  So does that make sense, Michael?
[49:10.560 --> 49:13.560]  Yeah, and that was what I was alluding to earlier, was the presentment.
[49:13.560 --> 49:16.560]  Is there a quick five-second answer? If not, just let's push past it.
[49:16.560 --> 49:22.560]  But why the Oklahoma City bombing grand juror was kicked off? I can't remember what...
[49:22.560 --> 49:29.560]  Because Hoppe Heidelberg, because he was insisting on calling witnesses to the grand jury.
[49:29.560 --> 49:32.560]  He wanted to interview witnesses. He wanted to ask questions.
[49:32.560 --> 49:37.560]  There were many witnesses who saw Timothy McVeigh with another person that day.
[49:37.560 --> 49:39.560]  There were all kinds of things going on.
[49:39.560 --> 49:43.560]  And Hoppe Heidelberg wanted to do a real investigation.
[49:43.560 --> 49:50.560]  And the whole grand jury so-called investigation and that whole thing with Timothy McVeigh and the prosecution and all of that,
[49:50.560 --> 49:52.560]  it was nothing but a big cover-up sham.
[49:52.560 --> 50:00.560]  And the hosts on this network, James Lane, Chris Emery, and Holland Van den Nieuwenhoff, and Kay Beach of Radio Free Oklahoma,
[50:00.560 --> 50:02.560]  now they're on Free Mind Report Radio.
[50:02.560 --> 50:07.560]  And Kay has her own show, Axiom for Liberty, here on Friday evenings at 6, Central Time.
[50:07.560 --> 50:11.560]  They're going to be releasing a documentary that Chris Emery, a very close friend of mine,
[50:11.560 --> 50:16.560]  has been working on for almost 15 years on this documentary,
[50:16.560 --> 50:21.560]  chock full of information and evidence and interviews that it's just going to...
[50:21.560 --> 50:25.560]  It's over the top how much evidence there is that Oklahoma City bombing was an inside job.
[50:25.560 --> 50:29.560]  But that was the reason the federal judge kicked him off the grand jury
[50:29.560 --> 50:32.560]  because he was doing his job basically.
[50:32.560 --> 50:34.560]  Well, here's my transition question that I alluded to.
[50:34.560 --> 50:36.560]  Hopefully we can squeeze this in before the next break.
[50:36.560 --> 50:40.560]  But if not, I trust you'll let me go over one more time because I'll keep it as short as I can.
[50:40.560 --> 50:41.560]  Okay.
[50:41.560 --> 50:44.560]  This is intended mainly for Eddie because I seem to recall him talking about this before.
[50:44.560 --> 50:48.560]  I was shocked when I started the research what I'm going to need to do to fight this ticket
[50:48.560 --> 50:51.560]  in terms of the flurry of motions, what I need to do next.
[50:51.560 --> 50:56.560]  I was shocked to find out that in addition to the county police force, there's the sheriff,
[50:56.560 --> 51:00.560]  but that the sheriff showed up on the website as part of the judiciary.
[51:00.560 --> 51:07.560]  And I seem to recall Eddie saying something about the sheriff in Texas being a part of the judiciary.
[51:07.560 --> 51:08.560]  Am I remembering that wrong?
[51:08.560 --> 51:09.560]  I'm trying to figure out...
[51:09.560 --> 51:10.560]  No, that is correct.
[51:10.560 --> 51:16.560]  Article 5 of the Texas Constitution forms the judicial branch of government in our Constitution.
[51:16.560 --> 51:21.560]  And the sheriff is specifically created under Section 12 of that article,
[51:21.560 --> 51:24.560]  as is the deputy sheriff and the constable.
[51:24.560 --> 51:27.560]  But to me, that's counter-intuitive because I figure anybody who's got a gun
[51:27.560 --> 51:34.560]  and can pull the trigger on behalf of the state should logically seem to fall under the executive branch.
[51:34.560 --> 51:35.560]  Am I just thinking this thing?
[51:35.560 --> 51:36.560]  Well, actually, no.
[51:36.560 --> 51:42.560]  If you think about it from the standpoint of the courts, the judicial branch was meant to be,
[51:42.560 --> 51:44.560]  it's actually very logical.
[51:44.560 --> 51:48.560]  The judicial branch was meant to be the protector of the people
[51:48.560 --> 51:52.560]  standing between the legislative and executive branches of government.
[51:52.560 --> 51:57.560]  The judiciary kept the legislative from passing unconstitutional laws,
[51:57.560 --> 52:02.560]  and they kept the executive from enforcing unconstitutional laws.
[52:02.560 --> 52:06.560]  The sheriff, as the only elected law officer,
[52:06.560 --> 52:14.560]  his duty was to be that wall between us and those other officers in those other branches
[52:14.560 --> 52:18.560]  attempting to do unconstitutional acts.
[52:18.560 --> 52:24.560]  Well, I do know that his scope is limited here in the county in which we're being tried,
[52:24.560 --> 52:29.560]  and that issuing of warrants is one of, if not the key functions.
[52:29.560 --> 52:31.560]  Well, that brings me to the issue.
[52:31.560 --> 52:34.560]  Well, now, the issuance or the serving?
[52:34.560 --> 52:35.560]  I'm sorry.
[52:35.560 --> 52:36.560]  I don't know.
[52:36.560 --> 52:39.560]  That's kind of beyond the scope of what I'm focusing on right now.
[52:39.560 --> 52:40.560]  I don't know the answer.
[52:40.560 --> 52:41.560]  I wish I did, though.
[52:41.560 --> 52:43.560]  I don't know.
[52:43.560 --> 52:45.560]  But I presume it's the serving.
[52:45.560 --> 52:47.560]  I don't know.
[52:47.560 --> 52:51.560]  Anyway, what I'm trying to drive at is, with regards to the flurry of motion,
[52:51.560 --> 52:54.560]  over the course of the year and a half or so I've been listening to you all,
[52:54.560 --> 52:58.560]  I've picked up a lot of great ideas, the enacting clause,
[52:58.560 --> 53:01.560]  you know, challenging jurisdiction straight up front, the very first thing,
[53:01.560 --> 53:04.560]  from what I'm hearing lately from Randy especially.
[53:04.560 --> 53:09.560]  But I guess what I'm wondering is since, well, let me actually back off one second.
[53:09.560 --> 53:15.560]  The page, it's a one page, 8.5 by 11, with no seal, no signature.
[53:15.560 --> 53:19.560]  It's got the name Mary Abrams, administrative clerk on it.
[53:19.560 --> 53:20.560]  But it's got no seal.
[53:20.560 --> 53:22.560]  It doesn't say the word summons.
[53:22.560 --> 53:24.560]  I'm beginning to wonder if I dig in deep enough,
[53:24.560 --> 53:26.560]  and I probably won't have to look that deep,
[53:26.560 --> 53:29.560]  whether this constitutes poor service.
[53:29.560 --> 53:30.560]  Proper service?
[53:30.560 --> 53:31.560]  Yeah.
[53:31.560 --> 53:36.560]  All you need to do is look in the procedures dealing with the clerk of the court
[53:36.560 --> 53:41.560]  and the issuance of summonses, which are normally called capias.
[53:41.560 --> 53:48.560]  You have a capias warrant and then you have the capias summons here in Texas anyway.
[53:48.560 --> 53:54.560]  So you need to look at the code to see what the requisites of that is actually required to be.
[53:54.560 --> 53:59.560]  And that will tell you whether or not what you have is properly done.
[53:59.560 --> 54:03.560]  It's almost certainly going to require the seal of the clerk.
[54:03.560 --> 54:05.560]  I would think so too, right, right?
[54:05.560 --> 54:06.560]  Oh, man.
[54:06.560 --> 54:08.560]  Anyway, I'll dig in on that.
[54:08.560 --> 54:12.560]  When it comes to the flurry of motions, part of the trick in our case is that
[54:12.560 --> 54:16.560]  my wife and I have two cars, and we tend to drive the opposite car,
[54:16.560 --> 54:21.560]  which is that her name shows up first on title on one of our vehicles, which I drive,
[54:21.560 --> 54:24.560]  and my name shows up first on the other, which she tends to drive.
[54:24.560 --> 54:29.560]  So the first one, the red light camera ticket from months and months back,
[54:29.560 --> 54:34.560]  it came to me, but it was actually, you know, we were pretty confident it wasn't me.
[54:34.560 --> 54:35.560]  It was her driving.
[54:35.560 --> 54:38.560]  And the reverse is true of this one, you know, it came to address to her.
[54:38.560 --> 54:42.560]  And I have every confidence that if it was either of us, which of course it probably was,
[54:42.560 --> 54:44.560]  it would have been me.
[54:44.560 --> 54:50.560]  But bottom line is, one of the concerns I have is if and when it comes time for the due date,
[54:50.560 --> 54:54.560]  you know, the court date is scheduled for, and there's the date.
[54:54.560 --> 54:57.560]  When that date comes, even when I've done the flurry of motions,
[54:57.560 --> 55:02.560]  is it expected that somebody, whether it's me with a power of attorney or whether it's her,
[55:02.560 --> 55:07.560]  will need to be in court that day or will the flurry of motions put that off?
[55:07.560 --> 55:11.560]  If you challenge the jurisdiction of the court for particular reasons,
[55:11.560 --> 55:16.560]  then until the court holds a motion hearing or response to that motion,
[55:16.560 --> 55:18.560]  things are more or less at a standstill.
[55:18.560 --> 55:19.560]  I see.
[55:19.560 --> 55:23.560]  So my flurry of motions should specifically demand a motions hearing.
[55:23.560 --> 55:24.560]  That's correct.
[55:24.560 --> 55:28.560]  Any time you file a motion, you set a date and time for a motions hearing.
[55:28.560 --> 55:30.560]  Oh, thank you, sir. Okay.
[55:30.560 --> 55:33.560]  Now listen, Michael, as far as the red light camera stuff goes,
[55:33.560 --> 55:36.560]  that's a little bit different process.
[55:36.560 --> 55:39.560]  There's an administrative hearing that happens first.
[55:39.560 --> 55:43.560]  And if you look back in our archives, we had an attorney on a couple of months ago.
[55:43.560 --> 55:45.560]  I forgot his name.
[55:45.560 --> 55:47.560]  I think his last name was Miller.
[55:47.560 --> 55:48.560]  No, Bill Davis.
[55:48.560 --> 55:50.560]  I believe that was his name, Attorney Bill Davis.
[55:50.560 --> 55:51.560]  Okay.
[55:51.560 --> 55:52.560]  Look back through the archives.
[55:52.560 --> 55:53.560]  Okay.
[55:53.560 --> 55:57.560]  And he is the expert on how to deal with the red light cameras
[55:57.560 --> 56:01.560]  and all of the procedural errors that the clerks make.
[56:01.560 --> 56:03.560]  Yeah, I listened to that one.
[56:03.560 --> 56:04.560]  Yeah, I did listen.
[56:04.560 --> 56:05.560]  I'll have to go back and read it.
[56:05.560 --> 56:09.560]  Yeah, go back and check up on that because there's things that need to be done
[56:09.560 --> 56:12.560]  at the administrative level before it actually goes into the municipal court
[56:12.560 --> 56:13.560]  and stuff like that.
[56:13.560 --> 56:17.560]  Well, the funny thing is it's actually in a district court of Maryland courtroom.
[56:17.560 --> 56:18.560]  Oh, you're in Maryland.
[56:18.560 --> 56:19.560]  I've forgotten, sorry.
[56:19.560 --> 56:21.560]  Yeah, it's actually the district court of Maryland.
[56:21.560 --> 56:28.560]  Okay, but still does the statute in Maryland define it as a civil, criminal, or administrative?
[56:28.560 --> 56:31.560]  Yeah, this question keeps coming up, and I do need to pin that down.
[56:31.560 --> 56:35.560]  But I've presumed, and again, that's a dangerous thing to do in this situation,
[56:35.560 --> 56:38.560]  but I've presumed that since it is being held at district court
[56:38.560 --> 56:42.560]  and since it's under a certain dollar amount, whatever, that it falls under civil.
[56:42.560 --> 56:44.560]  But I've got to really dig in.
[56:44.560 --> 56:46.560]  I'm going to do this in earnest tomorrow.
[56:46.560 --> 56:53.560]  Yeah, not necessarily because in Texas, most traffic tickets are actually criminal,
[56:53.560 --> 56:57.560]  class C misdemeanors, but when it comes to red light cameras, it's civil,
[56:57.560 --> 57:00.560]  so there may be a difference there.
[57:00.560 --> 57:01.560]  You need to check that out.
[57:01.560 --> 57:06.560]  The two things you need to look up on that specifically,
[57:06.560 --> 57:09.560]  what does the charge itself fall under in that regard,
[57:09.560 --> 57:15.560]  and what is the specific jurisdiction of this particular court?
[57:15.560 --> 57:20.560]  Does this court have the authority to hear civil or criminal or both?
[57:20.560 --> 57:25.560]  Is there a set dollar limit and so on and so forth in specifics?
[57:25.560 --> 57:26.560]  Yeah, I pretty much know all that.
[57:26.560 --> 57:30.560]  The district court is civil in nature, and there is a dollar limit like that.
[57:30.560 --> 57:34.560]  And I think the very first thing you rattled off, I believe I know the answer to that too.
[57:34.560 --> 57:37.560]  I don't remember what you just said, but okay.
[57:37.560 --> 57:41.560]  This has all been very helpful, and I will go back and review all the things you said.
[57:41.560 --> 57:44.560]  I'll download this archive as well as go back and review that other archive,
[57:44.560 --> 57:48.560]  although this is a speeding automated enforcement, not red light,
[57:48.560 --> 57:49.560]  but I presume that the same thing applies.
[57:49.560 --> 57:52.560]  Right, but again, it's going to be different because it's a different state.
[57:52.560 --> 57:53.560]  Go ahead, Eddie.
[57:53.560 --> 57:54.560]  I mean, Randy.
[57:54.560 --> 57:55.560]  You've got a great defense.
[57:55.560 --> 58:00.560]  You can absolutely testify that you were not driving.
[58:00.560 --> 58:02.560]  Well, that's the whole problem with the red light cameras
[58:02.560 --> 58:04.560]  and these automated speeding tickets and stuff,
[58:04.560 --> 58:09.560]  because it makes it a crime by ownership, and it's just preposterous on its face.
[58:09.560 --> 58:14.560]  And all of these automated signs are getting struck down all over the country.
[58:14.560 --> 58:19.560]  In fact, in Arizona, they just pulled them out altogether.
[58:19.560 --> 58:22.560]  They pulled out the red light cameras altogether all over the state
[58:22.560 --> 58:25.560]  because of massive civil disobedience.
[58:25.560 --> 58:27.560]  The people just weren't paying them.
[58:27.560 --> 58:32.560]  And so it was a financial hardship on the state to maintain the contract
[58:32.560 --> 58:35.560]  with the red light camera company.
[58:35.560 --> 58:39.560]  Let me hang up, but on the other side, if you could comment on discovery,
[58:39.560 --> 58:45.560]  what I might do towards discovery before my court date.
[58:45.560 --> 58:48.560]  Okay, you would have to sue them if you're going to do that
[58:48.560 --> 58:49.560]  or file a civil counter complaint.
[58:49.560 --> 58:51.560]  So discovery is in civil...
[58:51.560 --> 58:52.560]  Brady motion.
[58:52.560 --> 58:53.560]  Yeah, you would need to do a Brady motion.
[58:53.560 --> 58:55.560]  So discovery is in civil cases.
[58:55.560 --> 58:59.560]  We'll be back on the other side, folks.
[58:59.560 --> 59:03.560]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world,
[59:03.560 --> 59:07.560]  yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[59:07.560 --> 59:11.560]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text,
[59:11.560 --> 59:16.560]  but in the process can compromise the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:16.560 --> 59:18.560]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:18.560 --> 59:22.560]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate,
[59:22.560 --> 59:27.560]  but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:27.560 --> 59:31.560]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way,
[59:31.560 --> 59:34.560]  providing an entrance into the riches of the Word
[59:34.560 --> 59:37.560]  beyond what you've ever experienced before.
[59:37.560 --> 59:41.560]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version
[59:41.560 --> 59:42.560]  simply for the asking.
[59:42.560 --> 59:46.560]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours
[59:46.560 --> 59:53.560]  just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:53.560 --> 59:57.560]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:57.560 --> 59:59.560]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:59.560 --> 01:00:03.560]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:00:03.560 --> 01:00:07.560]  In Iraq Thursday, at least 15 Iraqis were killed
[01:00:07.560 --> 01:00:10.560]  and 39 wounded in a series of bombings and shootings
[01:00:10.560 --> 01:00:15.560]  in Baghdad, Mosul, and Iskandaria.
[01:00:15.560 --> 01:00:20.560]  The Washington Post reports U.S. companies are sitting on record piles of cash.
[01:00:20.560 --> 01:00:22.560]  However, companies are starting to deploy the money
[01:00:22.560 --> 01:00:27.560]  not to hire workers or build factories, but to buy back their own stock.
[01:00:27.560 --> 01:00:31.560]  So far this year, firms, including the Washington Post Company,
[01:00:31.560 --> 01:00:35.560]  have announced they will purchase $273 billion worth of their own shares
[01:00:35.560 --> 01:00:40.560]  five times as much as this time last year.
[01:00:40.560 --> 01:00:46.560]  Jail Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo has been named winner of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize.
[01:00:46.560 --> 01:00:51.560]  The head of the Norwegian Nobel Committee says Liu was the foremost symbol
[01:00:51.560 --> 01:00:53.560]  of the human rights struggle in China.
[01:00:53.560 --> 01:01:00.560]  Several countries, including the U.S., France, and Germany, called for his immediate release.
[01:01:00.560 --> 01:01:04.560]  On the ninth anniversary of the U.S. invasion, a new report Thursday
[01:01:04.560 --> 01:01:09.560]  found Afghans resented the impact and intent of foreign forces.
[01:01:09.560 --> 01:01:13.560]  The report by the Open Society Foundations found Afghans blamed
[01:01:13.560 --> 01:01:17.560]  U.S.-led forces for the country's violence and instability,
[01:01:17.560 --> 01:01:21.560]  even though a U.N. report in August found the Taliban was responsible
[01:01:21.560 --> 01:01:27.560]  for 76% of the 3,000 civilian casualties suffered in the first six months of this year.
[01:01:27.560 --> 01:01:32.560]  The report found the buildup of mistrust and grievances from the past nine years
[01:01:32.560 --> 01:01:38.560]  will make any Western-backed short- or long-term policy initiatives much more difficult.
[01:01:38.560 --> 01:01:42.560]  The report comes amid growing pessimism fed by reports of high-level corruption
[01:01:42.560 --> 01:01:46.560]  in the Karzai government, blatant fraud in recent elections,
[01:01:46.560 --> 01:01:51.560]  and a sharp deterioration in relations between Washington and the Pakistani military
[01:01:51.560 --> 01:01:58.560]  and the Inter-Services spy agency, which the U.S. believes is aiding and abetting the Taliban.
[01:01:58.560 --> 01:02:05.560]  NATO supply convoys traveling through Pakistan to Afghanistan have come under attack in the past,
[01:02:05.560 --> 01:02:10.560]  but following Pakistan's decision to block their route through the Khyber Pass,
[01:02:10.560 --> 01:02:13.560]  they now face an even bigger security threat.
[01:02:13.560 --> 01:02:18.560]  Hundreds of tankers and trucks have been left stranded across Pakistan with little or no security,
[01:02:18.560 --> 01:02:23.560]  but many believe it is not just the Taliban who pose a security threat to the convoys.
[01:02:23.560 --> 01:02:28.560]  The owners of oil tankers being used to supply fuel to NATO in Afghanistan
[01:02:28.560 --> 01:02:32.560]  say some of the attacks on their convoys are suspicious.
[01:02:32.560 --> 01:02:37.560]  Ezra LaShamwari, a spokesman for the All-Pakistan Oil Tankers Association, said,
[01:02:37.560 --> 01:02:44.560]  quote, the Taliban have openly declared they will target the tankers, but we have been provided with no security.
[01:02:44.560 --> 01:02:48.560]  A security analyst said Pakistan's border closing was,
[01:02:48.560 --> 01:02:53.560]  quote, tantamount to encouraging militants to have a real go at the convoys,
[01:02:53.560 --> 01:03:13.560]  while Pakistan's intelligence and security apparatus may be behind some themselves.
[01:03:23.560 --> 01:03:28.560]  All right.
[01:03:28.560 --> 01:03:33.560]  We are not going to give in to the fear.
[01:03:33.560 --> 01:03:34.560]  It's a story.
[01:03:34.560 --> 01:03:36.560]  It's our story.
[01:03:36.560 --> 01:03:37.560]  We are not going to give in to the fear.
[01:03:37.560 --> 01:03:42.560]  We occupy our father's house until he returns.
[01:03:42.560 --> 01:03:45.560]  Jehovah, our savior.
[01:03:45.560 --> 01:03:46.560]  Okay.
[01:03:46.560 --> 01:03:51.560]  I wanted to finish up on this discovery issue because I didn't have time.
[01:03:51.560 --> 01:03:55.560]  We didn't have time to comment on it as we were going into the break.
[01:03:55.560 --> 01:04:00.560]  You can do discovery in criminal, but a lot of times, most of the time,
[01:04:00.560 --> 01:04:04.560]  they will deny it, especially in a Class C misdemeanor case.
[01:04:04.560 --> 01:04:06.560]  And so it can be kind of fruitless.
[01:04:06.560 --> 01:04:10.560]  But Randy wanted to comment on the Brady motion remedy.
[01:04:10.560 --> 01:04:11.560]  Yes.
[01:04:11.560 --> 01:04:18.560]  If you want to find out the format and how to structure discovery in a criminal case,
[01:04:18.560 --> 01:04:26.560]  just go through some cases, especially felony cases, and look for Brady motions.
[01:04:26.560 --> 01:04:36.560]  Brady is a case that specifically defined what you could ask for in criminal cases in terms of discovery.
[01:04:36.560 --> 01:04:38.560]  That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
[01:04:38.560 --> 01:04:39.560]  Yeah.
[01:04:39.560 --> 01:04:44.560]  And if it's a red light cameras issue or some other kind of a civil complaint,
[01:04:44.560 --> 01:04:47.560]  then you can always file a civil counter complaint.
[01:04:47.560 --> 01:04:52.560]  In fact, sometimes you can even file civil counter complaints in a criminal case.
[01:04:52.560 --> 01:04:54.560]  And if you file a civil counter complaint,
[01:04:54.560 --> 01:04:59.560]  then you can ask for discovery in your civil counter complaint as well.
[01:04:59.560 --> 01:05:00.560]  You can.
[01:05:00.560 --> 01:05:03.560]  If you've been charged, you can ask for discovery anyway.
[01:05:03.560 --> 01:05:04.560]  Right.
[01:05:04.560 --> 01:05:07.560]  But a lot of times, they won't let you have it.
[01:05:07.560 --> 01:05:10.560]  So it was something of this nature.
[01:05:10.560 --> 01:05:14.560]  They don't like to give discovery in Class C misdemeanors.
[01:05:14.560 --> 01:05:15.560]  Right.
[01:05:15.560 --> 01:05:21.560]  In your case, it may just be a civil, and they're going to say discovery is too costly.
[01:05:21.560 --> 01:05:22.560]  Right.
[01:05:22.560 --> 01:05:24.560]  Because it's all about how much money they could steal from you.
[01:05:24.560 --> 01:05:25.560]  Exactly.
[01:05:25.560 --> 01:05:26.560]  Okay.
[01:05:26.560 --> 01:05:29.560]  So we're going now to Jeff in Florida.
[01:05:29.560 --> 01:05:31.560]  Jeff, thanks for holding.
[01:05:31.560 --> 01:05:32.560]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:05:32.560 --> 01:05:33.560]  Hey, everybody.
[01:05:33.560 --> 01:05:35.560]  Thanks for taking my call.
[01:05:35.560 --> 01:05:42.560]  At first, I had a little chicken dance story, thanks to Randy's advice.
[01:05:42.560 --> 01:05:50.560]  I had filed a dispute on my appraisal, and under the open records request,
[01:05:50.560 --> 01:05:54.560]  I put in with the county appraiser to get some information
[01:05:54.560 --> 01:05:57.560]  about how they came up with the appraisal amount.
[01:05:57.560 --> 01:06:03.560]  And I was having some trouble getting a response to my request.
[01:06:03.560 --> 01:06:09.560]  So Randy told me to look up at the end of the statute about what was the penalties
[01:06:09.560 --> 01:06:12.560]  if they didn't respond.
[01:06:12.560 --> 01:06:18.560]  And we have some pretty strong laws here in Florida for the open records request.
[01:06:18.560 --> 01:06:21.560]  It's the Sunshine Law.
[01:06:21.560 --> 01:06:27.560]  But anyway, once I went down there, and they sent out a little guy
[01:06:27.560 --> 01:06:31.560]  in a wrinkled-up outfit at first, and he says,
[01:06:31.560 --> 01:06:37.560]  oh, well, your paper is not signed, and we have to date stamp it and all that stuff.
[01:06:37.560 --> 01:06:40.560]  And I said, well, first of all, it doesn't say anywhere
[01:06:40.560 --> 01:06:44.560]  that my open records request even needs to be written.
[01:06:44.560 --> 01:06:46.560]  Second of all, it's my document.
[01:06:46.560 --> 01:06:47.560]  I made it up.
[01:06:47.560 --> 01:06:50.560]  And third of all, I mailed it to you with the registered mail,
[01:06:50.560 --> 01:06:55.560]  and I have the little green stub, so that's going to be my time and date stamp on that.
[01:06:55.560 --> 01:06:58.560]  And I've given you two weeks already.
[01:06:58.560 --> 01:07:00.560]  Oh, well, that's not the way we do it around here.
[01:07:00.560 --> 01:07:06.560]  So I told him, well, really, because since I notified you what the law was,
[01:07:06.560 --> 01:07:11.560]  and you weren't aware what the law was, it would just be a $500 fine.
[01:07:11.560 --> 01:07:15.560]  But since you're aware of what the law is, because I notified you of what the law is,
[01:07:15.560 --> 01:07:21.560]  then it's a third-degree misdemeanor and punishable by a $5,000 fine,
[01:07:21.560 --> 01:07:23.560]  up to six months of prison.
[01:07:23.560 --> 01:07:29.560]  He ran back into the office, and I mean, he just ran.
[01:07:29.560 --> 01:07:34.560]  And out comes a big smiling guy in a fancy suit.
[01:07:34.560 --> 01:07:37.560]  And all of a sudden, I was Mr. Grant.
[01:07:37.560 --> 01:07:42.560]  And he was apologizing all over himself about how they hadn't gotten my information.
[01:07:42.560 --> 01:07:45.560]  And then later on that night, I had calls from the appraiser
[01:07:45.560 --> 01:07:48.560]  wanting me to make an appointment at the office,
[01:07:48.560 --> 01:07:53.560]  and him and his supervisor were going to make sure they gave me all the information I wanted to.
[01:07:53.560 --> 01:07:56.560]  Oh, how that works.
[01:07:56.560 --> 01:08:02.560]  My wife was kind of asking me, because the appraisal didn't come back too bad for me.
[01:08:02.560 --> 01:08:05.560]  But my wife was asking me, you know, what was your purpose in doing this?
[01:08:05.560 --> 01:08:09.560]  And I said, well, I want them every year when they look at my house to say,
[01:08:09.560 --> 01:08:12.560]  oh, hell, that's Mr. Grant's property.
[01:08:12.560 --> 01:08:17.560]  We better be real careful about how we appraise that one.
[01:08:17.560 --> 01:08:22.560]  So I think that went into effect the other day.
[01:08:22.560 --> 01:08:24.560]  So that worked out really well.
[01:08:24.560 --> 01:08:27.560]  When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.
[01:08:27.560 --> 01:08:28.560]  Absolutely.
[01:08:28.560 --> 01:08:31.560]  And then I had a question for Eddie.
[01:08:31.560 --> 01:08:35.560]  I had two questions, actually, if he could address them.
[01:08:35.560 --> 01:08:41.560]  I heard him saying something about the 1931 laws of Florida
[01:08:41.560 --> 01:08:48.560]  probably three or four weeks ago, and I couldn't find it in the archives where I had missed it.
[01:08:48.560 --> 01:08:52.560]  He was discussing that, and I wanted to know what that was about,
[01:08:52.560 --> 01:08:58.560]  because I was trying to look up some of the motor vehicle codes in Florida,
[01:08:58.560 --> 01:09:04.560]  and I went back all the way to 1917, and it's not as obvious as it is in Texas
[01:09:04.560 --> 01:09:09.560]  and California and some other states about how it's all commercial.
[01:09:09.560 --> 01:09:13.560]  Well, if you'll send me an email, I'll be happy to send you the document I've got.
[01:09:13.560 --> 01:09:19.560]  But I've got a document that is chock full of references to the older Florida statutes.
[01:09:19.560 --> 01:09:20.560]  Yeah.
[01:09:20.560 --> 01:09:26.560]  It tells you exactly what sections to go look at and how it reads and everything else.
[01:09:26.560 --> 01:09:29.560]  So I'll be happy to send that to you.
[01:09:29.560 --> 01:09:30.560]  That'd be fantastic.
[01:09:30.560 --> 01:09:32.560]  And that's Eddie at Rule of Law?
[01:09:32.560 --> 01:09:35.560]  Yeah, Eddie at ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:09:35.560 --> 01:09:38.560]  And it'll be three or four days before I get it to you,
[01:09:38.560 --> 01:09:43.560]  because I will not be in Austin until at least Sunday evening,
[01:09:43.560 --> 01:09:47.560]  and I probably won't have my computers up until either Monday afternoon or so.
[01:09:47.560 --> 01:09:50.560]  So it'll be at least that late before I get to you.
[01:09:50.560 --> 01:09:51.560]  Sure.
[01:09:51.560 --> 01:09:52.560]  No hurry.
[01:09:52.560 --> 01:09:56.560]  Also, I wanted, Eddie, if you could...
[01:09:56.560 --> 01:10:00.560]  I understand what you're saying about the enacting clause.
[01:10:00.560 --> 01:10:03.560]  I was just wondering if you could kind of expand on that a little bit
[01:10:03.560 --> 01:10:05.560]  with the city and county ordinances.
[01:10:05.560 --> 01:10:11.560]  I don't quite understand how you would argue that they're not binding on the people.
[01:10:11.560 --> 01:10:13.560]  Is it because...
[01:10:13.560 --> 01:10:14.560]  Okay.
[01:10:14.560 --> 01:10:18.560]  Here in Texas, the enacting clause is very specific.
[01:10:18.560 --> 01:10:22.560]  It says, all laws shall have the following enacting clause,
[01:10:22.560 --> 01:10:27.560]  be it enacted by the legislature of the state of Texas.
[01:10:27.560 --> 01:10:31.560]  City and county ordinances are not enacted by the legislature.
[01:10:31.560 --> 01:10:37.560]  Therefore, according to the enacting clause, they are not law.
[01:10:37.560 --> 01:10:45.560]  If they are not law, they are not binding upon the public, period.
[01:10:45.560 --> 01:10:49.560]  Where does that part come into it, though, just that last sentence,
[01:10:49.560 --> 01:10:53.560]  that they are not law, they are not binding upon the people?
[01:10:53.560 --> 01:10:54.560]  Okay.
[01:10:54.560 --> 01:10:55.560]  All right.
[01:10:55.560 --> 01:11:00.560]  Let's cover this from the corporation side, which is where it falls when it's not a law.
[01:11:00.560 --> 01:11:02.560]  It's rules and regulations, right?
[01:11:02.560 --> 01:11:04.560]  Okay.
[01:11:04.560 --> 01:11:08.560]  Who is subject to the corporation's rules and regulations?
[01:11:08.560 --> 01:11:11.560]  Employees and contractors.
[01:11:11.560 --> 01:11:12.560]  That's correct.
[01:11:12.560 --> 01:11:14.560]  Are you either of those?
[01:11:14.560 --> 01:11:15.560]  No.
[01:11:15.560 --> 01:11:19.560]  Then how can you be subject to a not law?
[01:11:19.560 --> 01:11:20.560]  Gotcha.
[01:11:20.560 --> 01:11:23.560]  Yeah, that's where I thought you were going with that,
[01:11:23.560 --> 01:11:28.560]  but I wasn't real clear on that part of it.
[01:11:28.560 --> 01:11:32.560]  And here in Texas, it's also very clear in the Constitution
[01:11:32.560 --> 01:11:38.560]  and in the case law supporting it that the legislature has no authority
[01:11:38.560 --> 01:11:44.560]  to delegate its law-making power, none, nada, zip.
[01:11:44.560 --> 01:11:51.560]  So they cannot give it to a county, and they cannot give it to a corporation.
[01:11:51.560 --> 01:11:52.560]  Right.
[01:11:52.560 --> 01:11:55.560]  Yeah, I heard you asking somebody the other night.
[01:11:55.560 --> 01:12:00.560]  I think they were in Maryland, if there was an acting clause in Maryland.
[01:12:00.560 --> 01:12:03.560]  I was just in Maryland recently, and I had looked up,
[01:12:03.560 --> 01:12:08.560]  and there is an acting clause, or was it in Florida?
[01:12:08.560 --> 01:12:13.560]  I don't remember, but a lady called in last night, I believe it was,
[01:12:13.560 --> 01:12:17.560]  and she was in Maryland or Florida, but whichever one it was.
[01:12:17.560 --> 01:12:19.560]  Yeah, it was last night,
[01:12:19.560 --> 01:12:21.560]  and there was also the other gentleman tonight from Maryland.
[01:12:21.560 --> 01:12:23.560]  I told him the same thing.
[01:12:23.560 --> 01:12:25.560]  Yeah.
[01:12:25.560 --> 01:12:27.560]  Okay, thank you very much for taking my call.
[01:12:27.560 --> 01:12:28.560]  I appreciate it.
[01:12:28.560 --> 01:12:29.560]  All right.
[01:12:29.560 --> 01:12:30.560]  Thank you.
[01:12:30.560 --> 01:12:31.560]  Thank you, Jeff.
[01:12:31.560 --> 01:12:35.560]  Okay, we're going now to Dave in Florida.
[01:12:35.560 --> 01:12:36.560]  Dave, thanks for calling in.
[01:12:36.560 --> 01:12:41.560]  What's on your mind tonight?
[01:12:41.560 --> 01:12:45.560]  Is Dave there?
[01:12:45.560 --> 01:12:47.560]  Okay, we don't have Dave.
[01:12:47.560 --> 01:12:50.560]  Okay, looks like we have another caller on the line that just called in,
[01:12:50.560 --> 01:12:52.560]  haven't had a chance to screen the call yet.
[01:12:52.560 --> 01:12:54.560]  Caller, thanks for calling in.
[01:12:54.560 --> 01:12:56.560]  What is your name, and what state are you calling from?
[01:12:56.560 --> 01:12:57.560]  Chris from Texas.
[01:12:57.560 --> 01:12:59.560]  Hey, Chris from Texas, thanks for calling in.
[01:12:59.560 --> 01:13:01.560]  What is on your mind tonight?
[01:13:01.560 --> 01:13:03.560]  I got a speeding ticket,
[01:13:03.560 --> 01:13:09.560]  and the city wants to charge me a surety bond that's twice what the fine would be
[01:13:09.560 --> 01:13:13.560]  if convicted for a jury trial.
[01:13:13.560 --> 01:13:15.560]  Right.
[01:13:15.560 --> 01:13:20.560]  How is that possible when don't I have a right to a trial by jury?
[01:13:20.560 --> 01:13:28.560]  You do, but they can, in the case of a civil, they can charge you a jury fee.
[01:13:28.560 --> 01:13:31.560]  In other words, whatever it would cost the court to impanel the jury.
[01:13:31.560 --> 01:13:35.560]  Well, the jury fee is six bucks.
[01:13:35.560 --> 01:13:40.560]  Right, but in a criminal case, they're not allowed to charge you a fee.
[01:13:40.560 --> 01:13:46.560]  Now, the judge can have you post a bond before he releases you,
[01:13:46.560 --> 01:13:50.560]  but he can't charge you double and call it a jury fee.
[01:13:50.560 --> 01:13:56.560]  Well, they want me to give them the money before I can even tell them I want a jury trial.
[01:13:56.560 --> 01:14:01.560]  Wait a minute, are there any other, this is just a traffic issue?
[01:14:01.560 --> 01:14:03.560]  Yes, speeding.
[01:14:03.560 --> 01:14:06.560]  And it's in Texas?
[01:14:06.560 --> 01:14:08.560]  Yes.
[01:14:08.560 --> 01:14:11.560]  Have you already been to court?
[01:14:11.560 --> 01:14:12.560]  No.
[01:14:12.560 --> 01:14:15.560]  There's been no warrant issued or anything?
[01:14:15.560 --> 01:14:18.560]  No, I actually went and I said I can't afford that,
[01:14:18.560 --> 01:14:20.560]  and she said, well, I can put it off for another 30 days,
[01:14:20.560 --> 01:14:23.560]  so I still got a little bit before that.
[01:14:23.560 --> 01:14:24.560]  Where is this?
[01:14:24.560 --> 01:14:30.560]  Northeast of Dallas, Fannin County, Bonham, Paris area.
[01:14:30.560 --> 01:14:34.560]  Okay, you need to file criminal charges against the clerk.
[01:14:34.560 --> 01:14:40.560]  And that's the city, that's when I go to Dallas, I have to pass through that city,
[01:14:40.560 --> 01:14:43.560]  and I even came back and stopped through the city I live in
[01:14:43.560 --> 01:14:47.560]  and asked the court clerk for the city court clerk the same question.
[01:14:47.560 --> 01:14:55.560]  If I got a speeding ticket, do you all charge a fee before you can get a jury,
[01:14:55.560 --> 01:15:00.560]  a court jury, a jury by, sorry, a trial by jury?
[01:15:00.560 --> 01:15:04.560]  And she said, yeah, about $500.
[01:15:04.560 --> 01:15:07.560]  Never heard of that before.
[01:15:07.560 --> 01:15:09.560]  Absolutely not.
[01:15:09.560 --> 01:15:19.560]  That violates the, let's see, what is the rule on excessive bails and fines?
[01:15:19.560 --> 01:15:22.560]  Yeah, that's in the Constitution.
[01:15:22.560 --> 01:15:25.560]  Oh, yeah.
[01:15:25.560 --> 01:15:30.560]  You need to file criminal charges against the clerk.
[01:15:30.560 --> 01:15:36.560]  And if it's a local rule instituted by the magistrate, go after them as well.
[01:15:36.560 --> 01:15:39.560]  I would have to go down there and ask her who actually stepped these rules.
[01:15:39.560 --> 01:15:41.560]  Would it be the mayor, the city, or the local judge?
[01:15:41.560 --> 01:15:42.560]  No, just file against the clerk.
[01:15:42.560 --> 01:15:43.560]  You don't care.
[01:15:43.560 --> 01:15:44.560]  Okay.
[01:15:44.560 --> 01:15:47.560]  She's the sharp end of the spear.
[01:15:47.560 --> 01:15:51.560]  Go after her and let her play crabs in a bucket.
[01:15:51.560 --> 01:15:53.560]  I wanted to do this.
[01:15:53.560 --> 01:15:54.560]  They told me to.
[01:15:54.560 --> 01:15:57.560]  Yeah, what criminal charges?
[01:15:57.560 --> 01:16:05.560]  Official oppression, exercised in authority she does not expressly have.
[01:16:05.560 --> 01:16:06.560]  Nice.
[01:16:06.560 --> 01:16:08.560]  What statute in Texas is that?
[01:16:08.560 --> 01:16:10.560]  38.03.
[01:16:10.560 --> 01:16:13.560]  39.03.
[01:16:13.560 --> 01:16:14.560]  39.03, I'm sorry.
[01:16:14.560 --> 01:16:17.560]  Oh, that would be the government code?
[01:16:17.560 --> 01:16:18.560]  Penal code.
[01:16:18.560 --> 01:16:20.560]  Oh, nice.
[01:16:20.560 --> 01:16:23.560]  Class A misdemeanor.
[01:16:23.560 --> 01:16:25.560]  Okay.
[01:16:25.560 --> 01:16:30.560]  Well, I'll see what that does and then call you all back.
[01:16:30.560 --> 01:16:31.560]  Okay.
[01:16:31.560 --> 01:16:32.560]  All right.
[01:16:32.560 --> 01:16:34.560]  Thanks, Chris.
[01:16:34.560 --> 01:16:37.560]  Okay, folks, we have open phone lines now.
[01:16:37.560 --> 01:16:39.560]  No one's on the board.
[01:16:39.560 --> 01:16:47.560]  We've got 45 minutes left, so call in 512-646-1984.
[01:16:47.560 --> 01:16:50.560]  Got Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, and I'm Deborah Stevens.
[01:16:50.560 --> 01:17:01.560]  We'll be right back, folks.
[01:17:01.560 --> 01:17:05.560]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals,
[01:17:05.560 --> 01:17:08.560]  and coin supplies in the Austin metro area.
[01:17:08.560 --> 01:17:10.560]  We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:10.560 --> 01:17:14.560]  We are a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices
[01:17:14.560 --> 01:17:16.560]  on your coin and metals purchases.
[01:17:16.560 --> 01:17:21.560]  We buy, sell, trade, and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections,
[01:17:21.560 --> 01:17:23.560]  precious metals, and scrap gold.
[01:17:23.560 --> 01:17:26.560]  We will purchase and sell gold and jewelry items as well.
[01:17:26.560 --> 01:17:29.560]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullions.
[01:17:29.560 --> 01:17:33.560]  We're located at 5448 Burnett Road, Suite 3,
[01:17:33.560 --> 01:17:39.560]  and we're open Monday through Friday, 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturdays, 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.
[01:17:39.560 --> 01:17:42.560]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours
[01:17:42.560 --> 01:17:47.560]  or call 512-646-6440 with any questions.
[01:17:47.560 --> 01:17:52.560]  Ask for Chad and say you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or 90.1 FM.
[01:17:52.560 --> 01:18:00.560]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[01:18:00.560 --> 01:18:03.560]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM,
[01:18:03.560 --> 01:18:06.560]  but finding things on the Internet isn't so easy,
[01:18:06.560 --> 01:18:09.560]  and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[01:18:09.560 --> 01:18:11.560]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[01:18:11.560 --> 01:18:13.560]  Brave New Books?
[01:18:13.560 --> 01:18:16.560]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for
[01:18:16.560 --> 01:18:20.560]  by authors like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[01:18:20.560 --> 01:18:24.560]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[01:18:24.560 --> 01:18:26.560]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[01:18:26.560 --> 01:18:28.560]  Go check it out for yourself.
[01:18:28.560 --> 01:18:32.560]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street just south of UT.
[01:18:32.560 --> 01:18:35.560]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[01:18:35.560 --> 01:18:38.560]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking
[01:18:38.560 --> 01:18:43.560]  for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking facility just behind the bookstore.
[01:18:43.560 --> 01:18:47.560]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[01:18:47.560 --> 01:18:51.560]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM, and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[01:18:51.560 --> 01:18:55.560]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503,
[01:18:55.560 --> 01:18:59.560]  or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:18:59.560 --> 01:19:25.560]  Oh, come on
[01:19:25.560 --> 01:19:30.560]  If I can't get everything I want
[01:19:30.560 --> 01:19:36.560]  Maybe I'll get a rancher
[01:19:36.560 --> 01:19:41.560]  If I can't get everything I need
[01:19:41.560 --> 01:19:47.560]  Maybe I'll get a rancher
[01:19:47.560 --> 01:19:51.560]  If the people of the world can't get enough of nothing
[01:19:51.560 --> 01:19:56.560]  Maybe I'll get a rancher
[01:19:56.560 --> 01:20:01.560]  Maybe I'll get a rancher
[01:20:01.560 --> 01:20:04.560]  If the people of the world can't get enough of nothing
[01:20:04.560 --> 01:20:08.560]  Maybe I'll get a rancher
[01:20:08.560 --> 01:20:12.560]  Maybe I'll get a rancher
[01:20:12.560 --> 01:20:16.560]  Maybe I'll get a rancher
[01:20:16.560 --> 01:20:24.800]  thought about the fellow from Maryland. He said the sheriff was handling the case. Well,
[01:20:24.800 --> 01:20:32.840]  that's probably the proper person to handle that case since he is the top law enforcement
[01:20:32.840 --> 01:20:38.800]  officer in the county. People tend to forget that and possibly because of these red light
[01:20:38.800 --> 01:20:46.560]  tickets, the counties have decided to push more business toward the sheriff because if
[01:20:46.560 --> 01:20:52.120]  the sheriff shows up at your door, you're going to, you got a serious problem you think
[01:20:52.120 --> 01:21:01.000]  versus maybe a city policeman. Is that what you would believe? Yeah, except I would change
[01:21:01.000 --> 01:21:08.760]  one thing the way you stated it. The sheriff is the highest law officer. He is not the
[01:21:08.760 --> 01:21:16.960]  law enforcement officer. That would make him an executive individual. As a law officer,
[01:21:16.960 --> 01:21:24.800]  the law he's required to work under first and foremost is the constitution. If he's
[01:21:24.800 --> 01:21:31.560]  a judicial branch officer like he is here. Okay, well let's just look at the whole picture.
[01:21:31.560 --> 01:21:37.880]  The states are having problems enforcing these laws, so they push all the business to the
[01:21:37.880 --> 01:21:43.120]  sheriff. He shows up with the paperwork. Everybody says, oh, I've got to do this. Why don't we
[01:21:43.120 --> 01:21:47.800]  look at it a different way? What if you were versed in the Michael Merris method and you
[01:21:47.800 --> 01:21:54.000]  didn't do anything they said? You just didn't show up and they end up filing all these judgments
[01:21:54.000 --> 01:21:58.720]  and lawsuits against you and then you open up your phones with your recorder and you
[01:21:58.720 --> 01:22:04.880]  go into business like Michael says and lo and behold, pretty soon we don't have these
[01:22:04.880 --> 01:22:15.440]  red light camera companies in business anymore. I'm not sure I got all of that. You're saying
[01:22:15.440 --> 01:22:20.360]  that we use the collection procedures. We're going to go into the court because they call
[01:22:20.360 --> 01:22:24.680]  us on something that they have no authority to do, so we're not going to go. Then they're
[01:22:24.680 --> 01:22:30.480]  going to turn it over to a collection agency. Collection agency is going to start calling
[01:22:30.480 --> 01:22:38.520]  us. We're going to record and do all the letters, the whole one, two, three. If enough of us
[01:22:38.520 --> 01:22:45.760]  do that, let's say a thousand people did what I just outlined. In about three to five years,
[01:22:45.760 --> 01:22:51.960]  the red light camera companies would have so many lawsuits in federal court, they'd
[01:22:51.960 --> 01:23:02.760]  go out of business. I think Mark in Wisconsin would agree with you there. Well, I'm a country
[01:23:02.760 --> 01:23:09.960]  boy and I was taught there's more than one way to skin a cat, but that might... It would
[01:23:09.960 --> 01:23:17.040]  take a while to do and it takes a little perseverance on taking a lot of hassle on the phone, but
[01:23:17.040 --> 01:23:23.960]  it might get the job done. I want to issue a disclaimer at this point. Since my wife
[01:23:23.960 --> 01:23:33.520]  found that cat skin in my shop, I do not skin cats anymore. Hopefully you're kidding. Well,
[01:23:33.520 --> 01:23:40.760]  somebody run over it. I didn't kill it. Okay. All right. Is that all, Dave? It's a David,
[01:23:40.760 --> 01:23:46.960]  Deborah. I'm sorry. It really bothers me when people short my name. Okay. Well, that's what
[01:23:46.960 --> 01:23:52.920]  it says on the call screen. So David is your name? Yes, ma'am. I don't know who put that
[01:23:52.920 --> 01:23:57.200]  on there, but that's not it. Okay. I will change it in the system for you right now.
[01:23:57.200 --> 01:24:04.240]  Is that all for us? That's all for this particular time. All right. Thank you very much. Thank
[01:24:04.240 --> 01:24:09.440]  you so much. There is one comment I'd like to make. We need to double check the statutes
[01:24:09.440 --> 01:24:13.920]  on the red light cameras and see if these courts are authorized to forward that information
[01:24:13.920 --> 01:24:18.680]  to the Department of Public Safety so they can hold up registration or licenses or anything
[01:24:18.680 --> 01:24:23.880]  else for people that are actually trying to get them. If they can, that's going to make
[01:24:23.880 --> 01:24:29.160]  the collection process a tad bit harder and more difficult because you have the state
[01:24:29.160 --> 01:24:38.920]  in saying something that the collection side got nothing to do with. Now, the problem that
[01:24:38.920 --> 01:24:43.880]  means is that you've got one side collecting money and you've got the other side preventing
[01:24:43.880 --> 01:24:49.600]  you from having access to the necessities, but who's actually going to wind up with the
[01:24:49.600 --> 01:24:55.520]  money? Okay. How do you get it off the record after the fact? Let's look at it from another
[01:24:55.520 --> 01:25:00.040]  point. The reason they're pursuing the red light business is because they're going after
[01:25:00.040 --> 01:25:06.480]  the bold-faced cap person who's a raincoat that you're wearing when they stop you. You're
[01:25:06.480 --> 01:25:10.480]  wearing that raincoat that's got a license that's got your name in bold-faced cap. You're
[01:25:10.480 --> 01:25:15.960]  not the collection blood person that's sitting there is not the one they're after. They're
[01:25:15.960 --> 01:25:24.120]  after your raincoat. Most people don't know the difference in the person himself and his
[01:25:24.120 --> 01:25:31.200]  bold-faced cap raincoat. That's why when you go to court, they don't have to have an enacting
[01:25:31.200 --> 01:25:41.880]  clause for the raincoat because they created it. It's a fictitious person. Yes or no?
[01:25:41.880 --> 01:25:52.040]  I hear that. I don't know how to get there. Wait a minute. I've heard the corporate argument,
[01:25:52.040 --> 01:26:03.160]  but my problem with that is corporation is a term of art. If my public side is a corporation,
[01:26:03.160 --> 01:26:09.880]  where are the articles of corporation? Where was it incorporated at? Never can find those.
[01:26:09.880 --> 01:26:14.880]  Well, if something's pressed on you without your knowledge, then you have the right to
[01:26:14.880 --> 01:26:21.880]  refuse it, not accept it. That presupposes I'm a corporation. I have no evidence that
[01:26:21.880 --> 01:26:32.680]  I'm a corporation other than just a bunch of conjecture and people's beliefs. I don't
[01:26:32.680 --> 01:26:40.920]  have any evidence that I'm a corporation. I fully agree with that, but the government
[01:26:40.920 --> 01:26:47.360]  has you listed as a corporation. I've never seen where they had me listed as a corporation.
[01:26:47.360 --> 01:26:51.680]  Here's the deal. As a computer programmer having worked for many different places all
[01:26:51.680 --> 01:26:58.960]  over the country, I can tell you that the software is generally programmed to convert
[01:26:58.960 --> 01:27:05.440]  everything entered to uppercase for legibility reasons. Not to incorporate you, but simply
[01:27:05.440 --> 01:27:11.120]  for the purpose of making the text more readable on documents. That's what they say, but that
[01:27:11.120 --> 01:27:14.040]  ain't the real truth. The real truth is just like...
[01:27:14.040 --> 01:27:20.520]  Wait a minute. Where do we get to the real truth beyond conjecture? That's all anybody's
[01:27:20.520 --> 01:27:25.200]  ever brought me on that was conjecture. All right. Well, look at your United States
[01:27:25.200 --> 01:27:34.520]  of America. Text is as text is, but the raincoat that they put on it is TX. Oklahoma is Oklahoma,
[01:27:34.520 --> 01:27:38.240]  but the raincoat is okay. That's an abbreviation.
[01:27:38.240 --> 01:27:43.200]  It's the same difference with the person. They did it with the states, the federal...
[01:27:43.200 --> 01:27:47.020]  Wait a minute. Wait a minute. That doesn't mean anything. That's just an abbreviated
[01:27:47.020 --> 01:27:50.280]  way of indicating the state. No, sir.
[01:27:50.280 --> 01:27:53.960]  Where do you get that that means something else?
[01:27:53.960 --> 01:28:01.120]  When we go to court, Randy, they have a flag that it represents that raincoat nation.
[01:28:01.120 --> 01:28:10.120]  Now, somebody made that crap up. There's nothing in law that even requires a flag in the court.
[01:28:10.120 --> 01:28:14.720]  There's nothing in law anywhere that addresses the flag in the court.
[01:28:14.720 --> 01:28:20.720]  Do you understand the charges against you? That's what the judge asked you. Do you stand
[01:28:20.720 --> 01:28:25.800]  under? If you stand under... No, that's not what he says. This is all
[01:28:25.800 --> 01:28:30.320]  of Dask's kind of stuff. Take the words and twist them around and try to get them to mean
[01:28:30.320 --> 01:28:36.280]  something else. He said, do you understand, not do you stand under?
[01:28:36.280 --> 01:28:43.160]  I understand that, but what he means is, do you accept the raincoat state?
[01:28:43.160 --> 01:28:47.800]  How do you get there? You're just saying that. How do you get there?
[01:28:47.800 --> 01:28:53.560]  Well, I got there in study and understanding myself. I have to go back and put it down
[01:28:53.560 --> 01:29:00.360]  so I can give it to you. I did a show with... Oh, I'm not supposed
[01:29:00.360 --> 01:29:04.040]  to forget his name. The real guru...
[01:29:04.040 --> 01:29:08.160]  Wynne Rood? No, not Wynne Rood. He won't come on the show
[01:29:08.160 --> 01:29:13.080]  anymore. He kicked off at me, hung up the last time because of the same reason. He's
[01:29:13.080 --> 01:29:23.000]  offering conjecture, and I can't go with conjecture. I need statutory law. I need black letter
[01:29:23.000 --> 01:29:29.880]  law. It was Winston Shroud. I talked to him about it, and he kept telling me how things
[01:29:29.880 --> 01:29:34.400]  were, and I asked him where he'd get it. He'd give me more conjecture. I said, did
[01:29:34.400 --> 01:29:41.000]  you just figure this out? He said, yes. You made it up. To his credit, he thought a minute,
[01:29:41.000 --> 01:29:45.560]  and then he said, yes, I did. Yeah, and ADAS has admitted in his documents
[01:29:45.560 --> 01:29:50.720]  he does the same thing. It's all conjecture. Okay, folks, we're going to break now. When
[01:29:50.720 --> 01:29:55.280]  we get back, we're going to go to Leo in Texas. We've also got Terry and John. We'll be right
[01:29:55.280 --> 01:30:01.760]  back on the other side. Top 10 Reasons to Question the Official Story
[01:30:01.760 --> 01:30:05.920]  of the Oklahoma City Bombing, reason number five. As witnessed by millions of viewers,
[01:30:05.920 --> 01:30:10.200]  the rescue efforts were interrupted several times due to the presence of other explosives.
[01:30:10.200 --> 01:30:14.000]  Government log entries indicate and witnesses report that after the initial devastating
[01:30:14.000 --> 01:30:18.560]  blast, a bomb complete with timer was discovered and removed from wreckage by the bomb squad.
[01:30:18.560 --> 01:30:23.080]  Yet, we are told it's all due to baseless bomb scares or other contrivances. While officials
[01:30:23.080 --> 01:30:27.200]  try to sort out their stories, all we ask is who planted these bombs and why is the
[01:30:27.200 --> 01:30:31.240]  government lying about them? For more information, go to okcbombingtruth.com.
[01:30:31.240 --> 01:30:36.160]  If a special driver's license could be scanned from across the street, would you put one
[01:30:36.160 --> 01:30:41.560]  in your pocket? If your state borders Canada or Mexico, you may already have. I'm Dr.
[01:30:41.560 --> 01:30:47.120]  Catherine Albrecht and I'll explain in a moment. Privacy is under attack. When you give up
[01:30:47.120 --> 01:30:52.000]  data about yourself, you'll never get it back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll
[01:30:52.000 --> 01:30:57.720]  find your freedoms will start to vanish too. So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance
[01:30:57.720 --> 01:31:03.420]  and keep your information to yourself. Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This public service
[01:31:03.420 --> 01:31:08.820]  announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[01:31:08.820 --> 01:31:15.980]  Yahoo and Bing. Start over with Startpage. Thousands of Americans have a dangerous tracking
[01:31:15.980 --> 01:31:21.200]  device in their wallets called an enhanced driver's license. The cards contain RFID,
[01:31:21.200 --> 01:31:25.280]  radio frequency microchips that let border guards scan them from a distance as you cross
[01:31:25.280 --> 01:31:30.400]  into Canada or Mexico. Trouble is, Big Brother government, marketers and stalkers can scan
[01:31:30.400 --> 01:31:35.560]  the unique ID numbers too, right through your pocket or purse. IBM wants person tracking
[01:31:35.560 --> 01:31:40.440]  units to watch you everywhere you go. Even Walmart shelves can read them. Fortunately,
[01:31:40.440 --> 01:31:44.720]  only border states issue enhanced driver's licenses for now and you have to apply and
[01:31:44.720 --> 01:31:50.360]  pay a fee to get one. I strongly suggest you don't. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news
[01:31:50.360 --> 01:31:57.360]  and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32:20.360 --> 01:32:30.320]  Okay, folks, we are back. We're taking your calls. We've got about a half an hour left.
[01:32:30.320 --> 01:32:36.680]  We are going now to John in Texas. Leo, you dropped off the line right after I said we
[01:32:36.680 --> 01:32:39.880]  were going to you next. I don't know if your cell phone battery died or something, but
[01:32:39.880 --> 01:32:44.440]  call back in. John from Texas, thanks for calling in. What is on your mind tonight?
[01:32:44.440 --> 01:32:55.320]  Hi, good evening. I'm in the military and I come to an interesting question, and that
[01:32:55.320 --> 01:33:05.920]  is when an officer is commissioned, he takes an oath. Now, I don't know how familiar you
[01:33:05.920 --> 01:33:10.040]  guys are with that oath. We need to have both taken it.
[01:33:10.040 --> 01:33:15.600]  Well, we've taken the general. They're both ex-military. Is the officer's oath different
[01:33:15.600 --> 01:33:22.000]  than the serviceman's oath? The officer's oath?
[01:33:22.000 --> 01:33:28.400]  Yeah. You swear to protect this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic?
[01:33:28.400 --> 01:33:35.120]  Right. You swear to protect the Constitution. You also swear to obey the order of the commander
[01:33:35.120 --> 01:33:45.160]  in chief and the officers above you? Yeah. It's interesting though. We are in two police
[01:33:45.160 --> 01:33:49.960]  actions, right? Agreed?
[01:33:49.960 --> 01:33:55.960]  Yes. It says clearly in the Constitution only
[01:33:55.960 --> 01:34:05.720]  the Senate can declare war, so only the Congress can declare war. Congress? There's this fine
[01:34:05.720 --> 01:34:16.080]  line skirted that really seems to be just wordplay, and I wonder what your opinion is
[01:34:16.080 --> 01:34:20.160]  on that. Well, this is exactly why you've had several
[01:34:20.160 --> 01:34:28.960]  people in recent years refuse to be deployed. The chaplain here recently is one of those
[01:34:28.960 --> 01:34:35.520]  who has refused to take any orders from Obama because he does not believe him to be a valid
[01:34:35.520 --> 01:34:41.760]  commander in chief, and I agree with him. You had the young serviceman that refused.
[01:34:41.760 --> 01:34:48.840]  They court-martialed him because he refused to wear a UN uniform.
[01:34:48.840 --> 01:34:54.240]  And also, right now, we've got Lieutenant Colonel, he's actually a full Colonel, Colonel
[01:34:54.240 --> 01:34:57.320]  Terry Lakin. Yeah, Lakin, that's him.
[01:34:57.320 --> 01:35:04.200]  Lakin, yeah, L-A-K-I-N. He is refusing to be deployed a second time. He's been deployed
[01:35:04.200 --> 01:35:10.960]  many times, so he's not trying to skirt deployment basically because he challenges whether or
[01:35:10.960 --> 01:35:17.320]  not Obama, which is not even his real name, is qualified to be commander in chief, and
[01:35:17.320 --> 01:35:21.760]  they're about to court-martial him. In fact, they are court-martialing him right now, and
[01:35:21.760 --> 01:35:27.240]  I believe what the prosecution is trying to pull is by saying that the Pentagon is giving
[01:35:27.240 --> 01:35:35.280]  the orders of the deployment, not the president. And so they were looking into whether or not
[01:35:35.280 --> 01:35:40.200]  all orders like this in the Army come down from the commander in chief or not, because
[01:35:40.200 --> 01:35:47.280]  if that's the case, which I believe that's the case, then that's not a very good prosecutorial
[01:35:47.280 --> 01:35:48.960]  move on their part.
[01:35:48.960 --> 01:35:56.000]  But yes, John, you're absolutely correct. It says in the Constitution, number one, there's
[01:35:56.000 --> 01:36:02.680]  not even supposed to be a standing Army unless Congress declares war. And even then, it can
[01:36:02.680 --> 01:36:07.080]  only, the Army can only be in existence for two years, and it must be disbanded because
[01:36:07.080 --> 01:36:12.720]  our founders knew the dangers of a standing Army, how dangerous that was to a republic.
[01:36:12.720 --> 01:36:18.520]  And it's my understanding, and this was discussed on Gary Johnson's show with a gentleman, I
[01:36:18.520 --> 01:36:23.360]  forgot his guest, who was talking about the Lakin case, that the president is only commander
[01:36:23.360 --> 01:36:30.560]  in chief, only in the case when Congress declares war, and then the Army is called into being.
[01:36:30.560 --> 01:36:35.160]  So right now, there shouldn't even be an Army. The Army is illegal right now by very existence
[01:36:35.160 --> 01:36:39.360]  because Congress has not declared war, and there is no commander in chief. So what is
[01:36:39.360 --> 01:36:42.160]  the deal here? Yeah, this is a very messed up situation.
[01:36:42.160 --> 01:36:47.840]  Well, plus, the ignorant part of their argument is that the orders are coming from the Pentagon.
[01:36:47.840 --> 01:36:52.520]  So the Pentagon, of its own accord, declared war in Afghanistan and sent troops?
[01:36:52.520 --> 01:36:57.880]  Yeah, the whole thing is ridiculous. So you may want to look into the Oath Keepers Organization,
[01:36:57.880 --> 01:37:03.480]  John, because it's a group of military and law enforcement who have banded together who
[01:37:03.480 --> 01:37:09.680]  are committed to keeping their oath to the Constitution. And from what I understand,
[01:37:09.680 --> 01:37:15.040]  it is the stance of those people that if their superiors are giving them illegal orders or
[01:37:15.040 --> 01:37:20.240]  if their superiors are not even qualified to be their superiors, then they are keeping
[01:37:20.240 --> 01:37:28.000]  their oath to obey and protect the Constitution. I mean, it's kind of like, say for example,
[01:37:28.000 --> 01:37:34.960]  you know, a guy goes to a costume shop and rents a Halloween costume of a police officer
[01:37:34.960 --> 01:37:41.400]  and paints his car up like a police car and pulls me over. Do I have any duty to obey
[01:37:41.400 --> 01:37:46.560]  that person? No, because he's not a legitimate police officer. So if your superiors, or not
[01:37:46.560 --> 01:37:51.240]  you personally, but if someone's superiors are not legitimate superiors, do you have
[01:37:51.240 --> 01:37:58.320]  a duty under oath to obey that individual? I would say no. And so you may want to look
[01:37:58.320 --> 01:38:02.760]  into the Oath Keepers Organization, because their whole thing is about upholding their
[01:38:02.760 --> 01:38:10.360]  oath. And let's also not ignore the fact that a standing army does not necessarily mean
[01:38:10.360 --> 01:38:18.200]  a military army. I am a firm believer in the fact that the current standing army that makes
[01:38:18.200 --> 01:38:24.000]  the worst threat to the American people's liberty and safety is the municipal police
[01:38:24.000 --> 01:38:32.920]  forces. They are absolutely the worst form of tyranny that exists in this country from
[01:38:32.920 --> 01:38:42.080]  somebody on an armed standpoint and front. I have a question. Have you read the Military
[01:38:42.080 --> 01:38:52.560]  Commissions Act? No, I haven't. You should read that. As a ex-military myself, I read
[01:38:52.560 --> 01:39:02.480]  that and it terrifies me. Military Commissions? Yes, Military Commissions Act. Okay. It essentially
[01:39:02.480 --> 01:39:10.000]  says that at a time of national crisis, the president can disband the Congress, disband
[01:39:10.000 --> 01:39:17.880]  the courts, and essentially declare martial law with no oversight. Make himself king with
[01:39:17.880 --> 01:39:26.240]  a military dictatorship. And if we have ever had one recently that would do it, this is
[01:39:26.240 --> 01:39:38.600]  the guy. True. That terrifies me. That's the one thing that I'm afraid they put it in there
[01:39:38.600 --> 01:39:44.320]  to get things set up so they can get the military to take over the country. But what I'm wondering
[01:39:44.320 --> 01:39:50.080]  about is how well they'll be able to control a military when they try to get it to take
[01:39:50.080 --> 01:39:55.640]  over their own country. Well, the problem with that is that they're sending our troops
[01:39:55.640 --> 01:40:01.360]  overseas. This is standard practice. This is what they did in China. This is what Stalin
[01:40:01.360 --> 01:40:06.440]  did. He rearranged the troops from the north to the south and the south to the north and
[01:40:06.440 --> 01:40:11.080]  the east to the west, etc. He rearranged all the troops in the country where they didn't
[01:40:11.080 --> 01:40:18.120]  have any incentive to want to protect the people, the populace where they were stationed.
[01:40:18.120 --> 01:40:23.080]  And so that's what the international powers that be are doing. They're rearranging the
[01:40:23.080 --> 01:40:31.040]  troops of the world where the US troops are overseas and they're bringing in foreign troops
[01:40:31.040 --> 01:40:38.060]  into our country who have no allegiance to our flag or to our Constitution or to us personally.
[01:40:38.060 --> 01:40:43.960]  And so that is where the danger lies. We don't have to, you know, if our own military was
[01:40:43.960 --> 01:40:49.360]  here, yeah, I think we would have a chance and they would protect us and they would disobey
[01:40:49.360 --> 01:40:53.560]  these orders. But when you got troops from Mexico coming in, they don't care about us.
[01:40:53.560 --> 01:41:01.160]  Yeah, but see, I think that's a flawed strategy. Hopefully so. Because the UN was concerned
[01:41:01.160 --> 01:41:06.520]  about how quickly the American people were arming themselves. You put a foreign army
[01:41:06.520 --> 01:41:12.400]  in here, the American people have no compunction about shooting at them. They might not shoot
[01:41:12.400 --> 01:41:18.080]  at their own kids, but they bring in a foreign army and they'll have themselves a war.
[01:41:18.080 --> 01:41:24.240]  I really don't think that they want to bring in force martial law. They want to coax the
[01:41:24.240 --> 01:41:30.280]  people into their own voluntary slavery. They don't want it to be messy because it's going
[01:41:30.280 --> 01:41:31.280]  to be too much trouble for them.
[01:41:31.280 --> 01:41:32.280]  Yeah, that's what I've been saying.
[01:41:32.280 --> 01:41:37.080]  But I wouldn't put it past them if they can't make that coaxing work to resort to violence
[01:41:37.080 --> 01:41:38.080]  to make it.
[01:41:38.080 --> 01:41:43.920]  I wouldn't either. And the Military Commissions Act is, I think that's the contingency.
[01:41:43.920 --> 01:41:48.640]  Well, John, do you have any further comments here? We're about to go to break.
[01:41:48.640 --> 01:41:53.840]  They've, yes, just to continue with that, they've compartmentalized some well that I
[01:41:53.840 --> 01:42:01.800]  think it's difficult for an individual troop or officer to distinguish between disobeying
[01:42:01.800 --> 01:42:09.760]  an actual order that's immoral as opposed to, oh, I'm just, you know, I need to follow
[01:42:09.760 --> 01:42:14.240]  this guy's in charge. Very fine line there that they've drawn.
[01:42:14.240 --> 01:42:18.040]  I have a little story on that when we come back from the other side.
[01:42:18.040 --> 01:42:20.680]  And Randy, in case you don't know, we have about six callers on the line.
[01:42:20.680 --> 01:42:27.320]  Okay, this is going to go real quick. Oh, we got time. Okay. Russia did a test. Guys
[01:42:27.320 --> 01:42:33.360]  in the missile silos, they started feeding them false information about tensions accelerating
[01:42:33.360 --> 01:42:39.560]  and between the U.S. and Russia and to the point they ordered them to fire the missile.
[01:42:39.560 --> 01:42:53.480]  25% refused. That was incredible. 25% knowing they would be shot for treason, refused to
[01:42:53.480 --> 01:42:54.480]  fire the missiles.
[01:42:54.480 --> 01:42:59.200]  But considering Russia had enough nukes to destroy the world 20 times over, that really
[01:42:59.200 --> 01:43:00.200]  wasn't such a big deal.
[01:43:00.200 --> 01:43:01.200]  It was a big deal.
[01:43:01.200 --> 01:43:07.800]  If you look at that example, that's an extreme. Look at, you know, flu vaccinations, anthrax
[01:43:07.800 --> 01:43:14.560]  shots, all these things that troops are forced to take. And they're approved by the FDA,
[01:43:14.560 --> 01:43:19.480]  so there's no excuse for you not to take it.
[01:43:19.480 --> 01:43:30.560]  No, I refused. I flat refused to take vaccinations from them when they deployed me.
[01:43:30.560 --> 01:43:31.560]  When was that?
[01:43:31.560 --> 01:43:32.560]  1990, desert storm.
[01:43:32.560 --> 01:43:33.560]  Okay, listen, we're going to break.
[01:43:33.560 --> 01:43:34.560]  Thank you.
[01:43:34.560 --> 01:43:35.560]  John, okay, John, why don't you call back in?
[01:43:35.560 --> 01:43:36.560]  Okay.
[01:43:36.560 --> 01:43:37.560]  Yeah, and the boards are filling up.
[01:43:37.560 --> 01:43:38.560]  The board is filling up. We only have one segment left.
[01:43:38.560 --> 01:43:53.560]  So we're going to do everything we can to get to all you callers.
[01:43:53.560 --> 01:44:09.200]  We'll be right back, folks.
[01:44:09.200 --> 01:44:34.920]  We're going to do everything we can to get to all you callers, to get to all you callers,
[01:44:34.920 --> 01:44:54.400]  to get to all you callers, to get to all you callers, to get to all you callers, to get
[01:44:54.400 --> 01:45:13.160]  to all you callers, to get to all you callers, to get to all you callers, to get to all you
[01:45:13.160 --> 01:45:19.200]  step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't
[01:45:19.200 --> 01:45:24.160]  have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step
[01:45:24.160 --> 01:45:31.320]  by step course, and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22
[01:45:31.320 --> 01:45:36.680]  years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what
[01:45:36.680 --> 01:45:42.520]  everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.520 --> 01:45:49.160]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:49.160 --> 01:45:55.880]  pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner
[01:45:55.880 --> 01:46:23.640]  or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ. Okay folks, we're back. We've got the call
[01:46:23.640 --> 01:46:29.280]  board filled up, so we're going to do everything we can to take as many of your calls as possible
[01:46:29.280 --> 01:46:34.000]  this final segment. We've got Leo from Texas called back in. Thanks Leo. What is on your
[01:46:34.000 --> 01:46:45.040]  mind tonight? Leo from Texas, you're up. Okay Leo, you missed the boat. We'll try to get
[01:46:45.040 --> 01:46:49.480]  back to you. We've got Danny from Texas and then Terry. Danny, thanks for calling in.
[01:46:49.480 --> 01:46:55.800]  What's on your mind? Just a bit while ago about the person, the
[01:46:55.800 --> 01:47:02.040]  corporation or not in the criminal actions and some other things that does indicate that
[01:47:02.040 --> 01:47:10.560]  they intended to be a corporation in that the form or the name does not conform to the
[01:47:10.560 --> 01:47:15.480]  rules of grammar for capitalization of proper names in the English language, but it does
[01:47:15.480 --> 01:47:24.400]  conform to the convention for naming corporations and entities as provided by the administrative
[01:47:24.400 --> 01:47:31.200]  code. Also, some things done in the Code of Criminal Procedure indicates as well as adopted
[01:47:31.200 --> 01:47:42.240]  in 1965 and that time had no explicit definition of person, but 1973 added Chapter 17A, Dealing
[01:47:42.240 --> 01:47:49.600]  with Corporations and Associations. In there, you look definition of person and just corporation
[01:47:49.600 --> 01:48:00.560]  and association. Then in 1975, it made a change to Article 3.01 that the definition is talking
[01:48:00.560 --> 01:48:06.720]  about words and phrases. Before the change, it said all words, phrases and terms used
[01:48:06.720 --> 01:48:12.200]  in this code are to be taken and understood in their usual acceptation and common language.
[01:48:12.200 --> 01:48:18.640]  Except we're especially defined and unless especially accepted have the meaning which
[01:48:18.640 --> 01:48:25.720]  is given to them in the penal code. In 1975, that was amended to chop off that part referring
[01:48:25.720 --> 01:48:27.760]  to the penal code. Wait a minute. We're running out of time.
[01:48:27.760 --> 01:48:31.520]  Yeah, we're running out of time. I have a couple of things to say about this quickly
[01:48:31.520 --> 01:48:35.400]  and then we really need to move on because we could spend a whole show on the upper case,
[01:48:35.400 --> 01:48:38.360]  lower case thing. The problem with this is there's a conjecture
[01:48:38.360 --> 01:48:41.560]  on top of conjecture on top of conjecture. It gets buried so easily.
[01:48:41.560 --> 01:48:45.320]  Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute because we really are running out of time and this
[01:48:45.320 --> 01:48:48.520]  really could take a whole show but let me just say this briefly. I've got two things
[01:48:48.520 --> 01:48:53.440]  to say about this. It looks like this. It behaves like this but it's not necessarily
[01:48:53.440 --> 01:48:59.160]  the same thing and yes, there is something in Black's law about names in all case being
[01:48:59.160 --> 01:49:05.800]  related to corporations but we have a few issues here. We can't find anything where
[01:49:05.800 --> 01:49:10.420]  a corporation has been chartered where there is actually an incorporation. That's what
[01:49:10.420 --> 01:49:14.320]  corporation means. It has to be incorporated with a charter. There's nothing filed anywhere
[01:49:14.320 --> 01:49:20.240]  so the courts and the system may be behaving as if it was and they may be trying to fool
[01:49:20.240 --> 01:49:24.840]  us in that manner by behaving as if it was but that doesn't mean it necessarily is.
[01:49:24.840 --> 01:49:30.840]  I do know people who have abated this issue, the all caps issue in civil cases. One of
[01:49:30.840 --> 01:49:35.440]  them was a host here, Michael Bider. He abated all the way up to the Supreme Court. Somebody
[01:49:35.440 --> 01:49:41.520]  was suing him and he said, no, this is not my name. Address me by my name, upper lower
[01:49:41.520 --> 01:49:47.680]  case and he abated all the way up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ordered the plaintiff
[01:49:47.680 --> 01:49:52.040]  to change the filing and the plaintiff refused to do it. They dropped the case instead so
[01:49:52.040 --> 01:49:57.000]  yes, that's more indication but that's still not legitimate proof and I've had e-mails
[01:49:57.000 --> 01:50:00.640]  asking for the case number. I need to get that. I've been extremely busy. Sorry about
[01:50:00.640 --> 01:50:05.960]  folks who have e-mailed me about that. Here's the other comment I want to make about this.
[01:50:05.960 --> 01:50:11.280]  Greg Chapman who is a host on this network has been part of the programming team in the
[01:50:11.280 --> 01:50:17.680]  federal court system regarding the handling of the filings and the electronic system and
[01:50:17.680 --> 01:50:22.400]  he says it's the way that the programming is set up that's just the way it is where
[01:50:22.400 --> 01:50:28.560]  when the clerk or the operator goes to enter the name in the field, it can only do it in
[01:50:28.560 --> 01:50:34.840]  all upper case and the reason for that is to eliminate operator error from having the
[01:50:34.840 --> 01:50:40.240]  name in all lower case or sometimes you'll have names and the last name would be like
[01:50:40.240 --> 01:50:46.360]  McFallon where the M is capitalized and the P is capitalized but the C is not and people
[01:50:46.360 --> 01:50:50.080]  get bent out of shape if you don't capitalize the P or whatever and so they just have it
[01:50:50.080 --> 01:50:55.360]  across the board to be all upper case just for the sake of readability and simplicity
[01:50:55.360 --> 01:51:00.360]  and has nothing to do with any of this conspiracy stuff and he knows because he's been part
[01:51:00.360 --> 01:51:04.680]  of the programming team so just because it kind of looks like that doesn't mean that
[01:51:04.680 --> 01:51:10.120]  it necessarily is but we could spend all night on this and we really need to move on. Okay
[01:51:10.120 --> 01:51:13.680]  so Danny I'm sorry we've got other callers on the board we've only got like six minutes
[01:51:13.680 --> 01:51:17.240]  left. Terry from Texas, what is your question?
[01:51:17.240 --> 01:51:23.120]  Deborah, my question is very short. I'll be off very quickly. Actually I have a question
[01:51:23.120 --> 01:51:27.720]  and now I have a comment after hearing all these people talking. Now I wish I could say
[01:51:27.720 --> 01:51:33.360]  this was my idea but I've heard it on another show and it was quite brilliant and it could
[01:51:33.360 --> 01:51:38.640]  be very easily executed by every one of us so it just throws the whole traffic ticket
[01:51:38.640 --> 01:51:43.600]  stuff right out the window. Everybody takes all their license plates off and all their
[01:51:43.600 --> 01:51:49.600]  cars and drives around. That would really throw everything in a monkey wrench.
[01:51:49.600 --> 01:51:54.680]  Yeah that's what everybody's sending back their licenses all at the same time.
[01:51:54.680 --> 01:51:59.680]  If you could get everybody to do most anything you could pretty well change whatever you
[01:51:59.680 --> 01:52:03.000]  wanted to but the trick is getting them to do that.
[01:52:03.000 --> 01:52:06.720]  Yeah it's brilliant but I have a question actually and it has nothing to do with the
[01:52:06.720 --> 01:52:12.880]  rule of law. I've been trying, Randy I heard you on another program and I heard you were
[01:52:12.880 --> 01:52:19.880]  just keep saying mortgagecrimes.com and I have not been able to pull it up.
[01:52:19.880 --> 01:52:21.880]  It must be your browser. I pulled it up.
[01:52:21.880 --> 01:52:23.880]  Is it mortgage crime or mortgage crimes?
[01:52:23.880 --> 01:52:24.880]  Either one.
[01:52:24.880 --> 01:52:30.280]  I keep getting redirected. It comes up mortgage crimes not crimes and I don't know what's
[01:52:30.280 --> 01:52:33.520]  going on so okay I'll look into it.
[01:52:33.520 --> 01:52:35.520]  Maybe a problem with your browser.
[01:52:35.520 --> 01:52:36.520]  Possibly.
[01:52:36.520 --> 01:52:37.520]  Okay.
[01:52:37.520 --> 01:52:38.520]  Okay that's it.
[01:52:38.520 --> 01:52:46.400]  All right thanks. Okay we're going now to Brendan in Connecticut. Brendan thanks for
[01:52:46.400 --> 01:52:48.800]  calling in. What is on your mind tonight?
[01:52:48.800 --> 01:52:55.000]  Hi thanks guys. Real brief I got a couple of tickets. I got a ticket for using my cell
[01:52:55.000 --> 01:53:00.680]  phone while driving and a seatbelt ticket and I'm wondering I'm going to court and I'm
[01:53:00.680 --> 01:53:05.680]  going to see a hearings officer and I don't know if the officer is going to be there.
[01:53:05.680 --> 01:53:10.160]  I think this is before we go to court so I'm just trying to figure out some quick strategies
[01:53:10.160 --> 01:53:17.320]  if I should use this to prepare for an appeal or if I should try to argue the facts around
[01:53:17.320 --> 01:53:18.320]  the tickets.
[01:53:18.320 --> 01:53:22.880]  Well the first thing you should do is look to the jurisdiction before you do anything.
[01:53:22.880 --> 01:53:27.240]  Don't ever argue any points on merits until every other thing in the procedure has been
[01:53:27.240 --> 01:53:30.240]  done.
[01:53:30.240 --> 01:53:35.320]  Have they served you properly? Is there a proper anything?
[01:53:35.320 --> 01:53:42.120]  Do they have authority to enforce? Do you fall under their code? What state are you
[01:53:42.120 --> 01:53:43.120]  in?
[01:53:43.120 --> 01:53:49.160]  In Connecticut. How much do you know about the actual statutes you're being charged
[01:53:49.160 --> 01:53:54.360]  with? Do they apply to you? Are you contained anywhere in it? Is it an ordinance? Is it
[01:53:54.360 --> 01:53:58.720]  a state law? What are they charging you with? Do you know any of these things?
[01:53:58.720 --> 01:54:04.360]  From what I understand it's a civil, it's civil. The way that the guy pulled me over
[01:54:04.360 --> 01:54:10.960]  he told me he pulled me over because of using my, having a cell phone in my hand and looking
[01:54:10.960 --> 01:54:17.240]  at him. He was kind of upset. And in the statute it said, it defines using a cell phone as
[01:54:17.240 --> 01:54:22.720]  having it in your hand and in close proximity to your ear. So I was wondering if I should
[01:54:22.720 --> 01:54:26.280]  talk to him in court and say well why did you pull me over? Do you remember you pulled
[01:54:26.280 --> 01:54:31.400]  me over for this reason? And then just say well was there any other reason why you pulled
[01:54:31.400 --> 01:54:38.160]  me over? And just say well it wasn't next to my ear. But that's again arguing the facts
[01:54:38.160 --> 01:54:39.160]  of the case.
[01:54:39.160 --> 01:54:42.880]  So in the hearings from what I understand and I talked to you guys before about the
[01:54:42.880 --> 01:54:49.080]  DMV and it's the same thing where everybody's on the same team. Everyone works for the state.
[01:54:49.080 --> 01:54:55.200]  There's no prosecutor. The police officer acts as the witness and the prosecution and
[01:54:55.200 --> 01:55:00.080]  whatever the judge is there. And from what I understand you have to have, if they're
[01:55:00.080 --> 01:55:04.680]  working for the same people, if they're working for the state of Connecticut, both of them,
[01:55:04.680 --> 01:55:11.200]  the judge and the officer, then they have to have a prosecutor. Is that correct? Is
[01:55:11.200 --> 01:55:12.680]  that something I can get them on or?
[01:55:12.680 --> 01:55:20.680]  Well, that's upon what the, but the biggest issue there is that you cannot be charged
[01:55:20.680 --> 01:55:30.280]  convicted by the same person. That's a complete denial of due process.
[01:55:30.280 --> 01:55:37.760]  Now while you guys go, but how would I fight these things with motions while I'm there?
[01:55:37.760 --> 01:55:40.560]  Oral motions or just motions before I get in there?
[01:55:40.560 --> 01:55:45.800]  Without knowing the specifics about the charge and what the elements of the charge are and
[01:55:45.800 --> 01:55:51.360]  the criteria, you're not going to know what you're fighting. But yes, I highly recommend
[01:55:51.360 --> 01:55:58.120]  anything you do in a traffic case or any other case is always done in writing because there's
[01:55:58.120 --> 01:56:00.360]  no guarantee of a record otherwise.
[01:56:00.360 --> 01:56:05.800]  Okay. So head and move as many motions as possible before I even get in there.
[01:56:05.800 --> 01:56:11.640]  Anything except merits, unless the only thing you have to fall back on is merits. Go after
[01:56:11.640 --> 01:56:17.160]  the process, the procedure. Did they do everything the law requires before you ever appeared
[01:56:17.160 --> 01:56:20.680]  in court? If they didn't attack it.
[01:56:20.680 --> 01:56:24.080]  And Brendan, you can call back in on Monday. Monday's traffic night.
[01:56:24.080 --> 01:56:26.440]  I definitely will. Thanks a lot, guys. Appreciate it.
[01:56:26.440 --> 01:56:30.520]  Okay. Thanks, Brendan. Okay. We're going to try to squeeze in one more caller. We've got
[01:56:30.520 --> 01:56:36.080]  John from Texas. John, thanks for calling in. What's on your mind?
[01:56:36.080 --> 01:56:42.440]  Are you there? Yes. Were you the John we just spoke with?
[01:56:42.440 --> 01:56:48.600]  Yeah. I called a few times, but I hung up because I'm a little stressed and I didn't
[01:56:48.600 --> 01:56:51.840]  want to hang on the line. Okay. Well, go ahead. We've got about a minute
[01:56:51.840 --> 01:56:55.320]  and a half. Okay. Well, I didn't want to be the last one,
[01:56:55.320 --> 01:57:01.440]  but here I am. Hi, Randy and Debra and Jerry and everybody.
[01:57:01.440 --> 01:57:10.760]  Okay. Go quickly. This is John that I know y'all. So I'm just going through the foreclosure
[01:57:10.760 --> 01:57:21.160]  process right now. I've got the enforceable detainer and so there's a whole long story.
[01:57:21.160 --> 01:57:24.000]  I should probably just call back, but I'll tell you.
[01:57:24.000 --> 01:57:31.080]  Do you have a question or comment? Well, I'm just, my main thing is I'm trying
[01:57:31.080 --> 01:57:34.920]  to give information out to other people that might be going, that will be going through
[01:57:34.920 --> 01:57:43.600]  the same thing. The first thing is get some Valerian to help you relax because when you're
[01:57:43.600 --> 01:57:51.720]  suing people and it's just kind of a serious thing and my family is separated over this,
[01:57:51.720 --> 01:57:56.560]  so you've got to be prepared for major stuff. If you're going to go on major battle, you
[01:57:56.560 --> 01:58:02.240]  need to be prepared. Precisely. If you're going to start a big fight,
[01:58:02.240 --> 01:58:07.920]  you've got to be ready to fight. You can't sit back and John has really stepped up to
[01:58:07.920 --> 01:58:11.480]  the plate. Thank you. And I will call in and let y'all
[01:58:11.480 --> 01:58:15.720]  know more what's going on. Okay. Sorry. We ran out of time, John.
[01:58:15.720 --> 01:58:20.840]  That's okay. It's the first time I called in. So, you know, I've broken the ice.
[01:58:20.840 --> 01:58:23.840]  Okay. We'll call back, John. All right. Thank you.
[01:58:23.840 --> 01:58:27.800]  Okay. Bye-bye. All right, folks. We are at the end of the show. Sorry we couldn't spend
[01:58:27.800 --> 01:58:31.680]  more time with y'all at the end there. That's why we want folks to call in earlier.
[01:58:31.680 --> 01:58:36.800]  This happens almost every show. So make sure you call in earlier, folks, so we can spend
[01:58:36.800 --> 01:58:41.240]  more time with you. We'll be back Monday night with Traffic Night
[01:58:41.240 --> 01:58:45.480]  with Eddie. This is the rule of law. Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens.
[01:58:45.480 --> 01:58:49.820]  Don't forget the Austin Science and Engineering Festival tomorrow.
[01:58:49.820 --> 01:58:56.120]  Go support Dr. Graby at 10 a.m. at the Austin Convention Center and Brave New Books on Sunday
[01:58:56.120 --> 01:59:25.760]  night. We'll be back Monday. Have a good weekend.
[01:59:26.220 --> 01:59:31.340]  I'm in the business. I like the stepping eraser.
[01:59:31.340 --> 01:59:34.740]  Don't watch my side. I'm dangerous.
[01:59:34.740 --> 01:59:38.940]  I'm dangerous. I like the stepping eraser.
[01:59:38.940 --> 01:59:42.780]  Don't watch my side. I'm dangerous.
[01:59:42.780 --> 01:59:45.780]  Dangerous.
[01:59:47.780 --> 01:59:50.620]  It's a dream, Eddie.
[01:59:50.620 --> 01:59:53.380]  It's a dream, let's move.
[01:59:53.380 --> 01:59:57.380]  You better keep it cool