[00:09.360 --> 00:14.940]  in Libya but his hands were tied by the vote of the parliament of my country, an admission
[00:14.940 --> 00:20.200]  that exposed the fragility of the alliance trying to unseat Muammar Gaddafi. NATO is
[00:20.200 --> 00:25.040]  under mounting strain because of the cost of the operation and the failure after more
[00:25.040 --> 00:30.560]  than three months to produce a decisive outcome.
[00:30.560 --> 00:35.000]  Lawyers for the New York Times reporter James Risen argued Thursday the First Amendment
[00:35.000 --> 00:40.440]  should shield him from having to testify at the trial of a former CIA officer accused
[00:40.440 --> 00:46.000]  of leaking classified information. Prosecutors subpoenaed Risen to testify at the trial of
[00:46.000 --> 00:51.440]  Jeffrey Sterling, who they say was a source of Risen's book State of War, which detailed
[00:51.440 --> 00:57.480]  a botched effort to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions.
[00:57.480 --> 01:03.000]  The cost of borrowing for debt-laden Portugal, the Irish Republic and Italy hit new highs
[01:03.000 --> 01:08.180]  Friday. Financial markets were reacting to the European Central Bank's decision to raise
[01:08.180 --> 01:13.620]  interest rates as well as political developments in Italy.
[01:13.620 --> 01:18.120]  The private contracting company Armor Group North America, whose employees were accused
[01:18.120 --> 01:23.360]  of sexual hazing and throwing wild drunken parties in Afghanistan, settled a lawsuit
[01:23.360 --> 01:29.360]  with the U.S. government Thursday agreeing to pay a $7.5 million fine. Armor Group and
[01:29.360 --> 01:34.140]  its affiliates, which were contracted to guard the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, agreed to pay the
[01:34.140 --> 01:39.800]  fine to resolve allegations the company lied in State Department contracts and allowed
[01:39.800 --> 01:44.660]  its employees to frequent prothels in Kabul. The suit was originally brought by former
[01:44.660 --> 01:50.640]  Armor Group Director of Operations James Gordon, who will collect $1.3 million of the settlement
[01:50.640 --> 01:56.560]  under the False Claims Act. In 2009, photos and videos emerged from one of many lewd parties
[01:56.560 --> 02:02.360]  thrown in Kabul. Guards told ABC News drunken parties had been held regularly, where guards
[02:02.360 --> 02:07.560]  were pressured to perform sexual acts in order to gain promotions or assignments to preferable
[02:07.560 --> 02:08.560]  shifts.
[02:08.560 --> 02:15.880]  U.K. police arrested Prime Minister David Cameron's former spokesman Andy Coulson Friday
[02:15.880 --> 02:21.240]  over the scandal at a shutdown Rupert Murdoch's tabloid News of the World, forcing Cameron
[02:21.240 --> 02:26.560]  to defend his judgment while promising sweeping new rules for the British media. As Cameron
[02:26.560 --> 02:32.140]  defended hiring former News of the World editor Coulson in 2007, despite knowing one of his
[02:32.140 --> 02:37.840]  journalists had been jailed for hacking into voicemails, Coulson was being arrested. Cameron
[02:37.840 --> 02:42.600]  said only a new system of media regulation and a public inquiry into what went wrong
[02:42.600 --> 02:48.420]  at News of the World would meet public demand. Cameron also called for former News of the
[02:48.420 --> 02:54.040]  World editor Rebecca Brooks, now a top Murdoch executive, to resign. Murdoch is battling
[02:54.040 --> 02:59.520]  to prevent the scandal from fueling political opposition to his $22 billion takeover bid
[02:59.520 --> 03:05.600]  for BSkyB, a satellite TV company that makes 100 times the profit of the newspaper.
[03:05.600 --> 03:11.480]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[03:11.480 --> 03:18.480]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com. Live free speech
[03:18.480 --> 03:42.480]  and talk radio at its best.
[03:42.480 --> 03:49.480]  Okay, we're back. Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio. We're going
[04:12.480 --> 04:18.960]  we're talking to Anthony in Idaho. And Anthony, we were talking about I'm looking for the
[04:18.960 --> 04:28.040]  most stinking, rotten, low down, bottom feeding loan officer, real estate agent, appraiser,
[04:28.040 --> 04:36.200]  trustee, loan broker that I can find. Because I want to go to them and I want to take them
[04:36.200 --> 04:42.480]  to your loan documents and lay them down in front of them and say, tell me, how would
[04:42.480 --> 04:50.560]  you screw this guy? How would you screw this guy that nobody would know? How can you slip
[04:50.560 --> 04:59.880]  one by him and nobody catch it? And then what questions would we ask for to find it? We
[04:59.880 --> 05:06.800]  asked the client that would point to these kinds of issues. This is the kind of forensic
[05:06.800 --> 05:15.520]  analysis I really want to do. And in our lawsuit that we put together, we have already looked
[05:15.520 --> 05:24.200]  at a lot of these issues. But we want to keep looking for more. We're building a multi-level
[05:24.200 --> 05:33.280]  questionnaire. There's so much here, we can't put it up where somebody can see the whole
[05:33.280 --> 05:39.680]  thing. Because if you bring it up and you see the whole thing, it'll kind of like be
[05:39.680 --> 05:44.840]  kind of like a mechanic going over and opening the hood on the car and looking down in there.
[05:44.840 --> 05:52.360]  Now, I'm a good mechanic. I'm good enough to know better than to ever do that. Because
[05:52.360 --> 06:00.840]  all that will do is confuse me. Before I open the hood, before I touch the car, I'm going
[06:00.840 --> 06:08.920]  to ask a whole bunch of questions. And those questions are designed to isolate specific
[06:08.920 --> 06:14.440]  things to look at. This is what we're doing with the forensic analysis we're trying to
[06:14.440 --> 06:25.720]  put together. We're developing a set of questions that most of them, the person will
[06:25.720 --> 06:33.200]  look at and say, no, no, no, no. And when they say yes, then it goes to another section
[06:33.200 --> 06:39.200]  that develops that issue. And then from that one, it may go to another one and then another
[06:39.200 --> 06:44.400]  one and then come back to where it was. So the person moves through the questionnaire
[06:44.400 --> 06:50.440]  and only sees those parts of the questionnaire that relate to them. So it makes it a lot
[06:50.440 --> 06:59.960]  less daunting. And we can gather information in questions that we couldn't effectively
[06:59.960 --> 07:12.600]  gather if the person was in front of us. Computers tend not to evoke passions, emotion, where
[07:12.600 --> 07:22.080]  humans do. Your client never tells you everything. Not because they don't want to, but because
[07:22.080 --> 07:31.200]  anything that might seem embarrassing, even if it shouldn't be embarrassing, if it seems
[07:31.200 --> 07:36.520]  embarrassing to them, it just won't come to their mind. And then later on, when you come
[07:36.520 --> 07:41.160]  across it, oh my goodness, I forgot to tell you that. In a questionnaire, you don't have
[07:41.160 --> 07:47.560]  that kind of problem so much if you ask the right questions.
[07:47.560 --> 07:52.800]  I get Chris my email and what I can do is talk to, I have a pretty good friend, he's
[07:52.800 --> 07:58.800]  the manager and oversees everybody that does the home loans for Bank of America. And so
[07:58.800 --> 08:02.480]  if you want, I can get with him and see if he's going to be willing to help out a little
[08:02.480 --> 08:08.280]  bit and get some questions answered for you. That would be wonderful. We're looking for
[08:08.280 --> 08:14.320]  it. Not so much for him, he's not going to tell you what Bank of America is doing wrong,
[08:14.320 --> 08:17.960]  but what he may tell you. No, but he can tell you what his friends or what his people underneath
[08:17.960 --> 08:23.000]  him or people that he's fired, he could tell me the little scams that they've done to other
[08:23.000 --> 08:29.520]  people in the past. Yeah, he can tell you what the broker does,
[08:29.520 --> 08:34.160]  what he has to watch for when they bring him a note. And yeah, he could give us some really
[08:34.160 --> 08:36.920]  good information. So great.
[08:36.920 --> 08:43.160]  And then my last question, as far as a qualified written request, for all your listeners out
[08:43.160 --> 08:47.160]  there, can you explain your opinion or what it is and then what is your opinion as far
[08:47.160 --> 08:51.600]  as should you just wait to do your, once you come up with your forensic analysis and then
[08:51.600 --> 08:55.400]  once you have that, then do a qualified written request or what?
[08:55.400 --> 09:01.640]  Oh no, do that early. Okay. If you go online, you'll find a lot of qualified written requests
[09:01.640 --> 09:08.860]  out there. I have yet to see one that really was a qualified written request. All of it
[09:08.860 --> 09:14.480]  is a request for pre-litigation discovery. Yeah. They don't call it that, but that in
[09:14.480 --> 09:22.200]  effect is what it is. A qualified written request is a term of art. It means something
[09:22.200 --> 09:31.120]  very specific in law. A qualified written request is a claim to the lender of an accounting
[09:31.120 --> 09:38.840]  error and demand that they correct the error. That is what makes it a qualified written
[09:38.840 --> 09:48.480]  request. What we do with our qualified written request is we use the fees to make the claim
[09:48.480 --> 09:59.400]  of an accounting error. And from the fees we move to discover, we demand proof of all
[09:59.400 --> 10:08.920]  of the fees. Now we have never, ever had a single defendant prove up a single fee. And
[10:08.920 --> 10:17.960]  we're not going to have because they do not dare. Because in every loan there are false
[10:17.960 --> 10:25.200]  fees. Yeah. And if they prove up the ones that aren't false, because we claim they're
[10:25.200 --> 10:29.480]  all bogus, every one of them, we subtract them all from the head of the note and do
[10:29.480 --> 10:35.640]  this calculation on how much we'd overpay the note over 30 years and then sue them for
[10:35.640 --> 10:43.640]  three times that amount. Now they can prove up half, probably two-thirds of those fees.
[10:43.640 --> 10:51.000]  But if there is one that they can't prove up, that's fraud. And these guys know that
[10:51.000 --> 10:57.320]  every one of these loans have false fees in them. They call them junk fees in the industry.
[10:57.320 --> 11:02.800]  So nobody proves that up. That's how we get in the door with the qualified written request.
[11:02.800 --> 11:11.440]  But at the same time we do some other things. One of the things we hide in there, one thing
[11:11.440 --> 11:23.920]  that I've learned that the legal reform community could learn from, is don't stipulate. Don't
[11:23.920 --> 11:32.240]  stipulate to anything being avoided. And don't give the other side legal advice. We send
[11:32.240 --> 11:37.880]  a qualified written request and we don't quote all the statutes and case law telling them
[11:37.880 --> 11:45.840]  why they have to do what we ask them to do. We have the case law that tells them why they
[11:45.840 --> 11:50.440]  have to do what we want them to do, but we're not going to give that to them. We're going
[11:50.440 --> 11:55.680]  to give that to the court after we sue these guys for not doing what they were supposed
[11:55.680 --> 12:00.640]  to do. They should already know this. They're bound to know it. They have a duty to know.
[12:00.640 --> 12:09.520]  I don't have to tell it to them. So when we make the request for access to the original
[12:09.520 --> 12:20.600]  security instrument, we don't quote UCC 3-501. We just demand that they produce it. And along
[12:20.600 --> 12:28.560]  with all this other stuff we demand that they produce, and they never produce it.
[12:28.560 --> 12:33.200]  I like that. I appreciate your help. And the last question would be if you had any website
[12:33.200 --> 12:36.920]  that you recommend all your listeners check out or go to.
[12:36.920 --> 12:44.760]  Livinglives.com. Oh, after you go to Remedies in Real Estate. Even livinglives.com, that's
[12:44.760 --> 12:53.960]  really the granddaddy. Even they don't tend to address these fees. And from my way of
[12:53.960 --> 12:59.160]  looking at it, that's really an elephant in the corner. There are two primary elephants
[12:59.160 --> 13:08.120]  in this corner. One of them are these false fees, and the other one is the security instrument.
[13:08.120 --> 13:17.680]  We have recently made a change in how we're doing the lawsuits because we have been mistakenly
[13:17.680 --> 13:25.520]  stipulating to the fact of the existence of a note in a lien document.
[13:25.520 --> 13:36.240]  So now our original lawsuit will be about three pages. We accuse the foreclosing agent
[13:36.240 --> 13:51.080]  or the servicer, if the loan is not in foreclosure, of demanding payment from the client, but
[13:51.080 --> 13:56.120]  they don't have a right to payment. They're committing fraud. They're claiming to be a
[13:56.120 --> 14:03.680]  debt collector when they have no standing to collect the debt. We maintain that we have
[14:03.680 --> 14:09.400]  never entered into a contract with this person. We never signed a promissory note over to
[14:09.400 --> 14:15.000]  this person. We never signed a document creating a lien against our property to this person.
[14:15.000 --> 14:22.820]  Now this person has taken action to force me to give up, to forfeit my personal property
[14:22.820 --> 14:33.620]  to his unjust enrichment, and he has no authority to do so. That's the only claim. And we accuse
[14:33.620 --> 14:43.720]  them of mail fraud, Fair Debt Collections Protections Act violations, common law fraud,
[14:43.720 --> 14:53.560]  and either deliberate or negligent inducement of severe emotional distress. And then we
[14:53.560 --> 15:06.280]  stipulate that if the defendant will prove up his standing to collect this debt, we will
[15:06.280 --> 15:14.840]  accept proof of standing prior to an answer and stipulate the standing once proof has
[15:14.840 --> 15:25.520]  been produced, and then reserve a right to file an amended plea. Because first, if you
[15:25.520 --> 15:34.240]  start arguing the note, you've already stipulated to the existence of a note. Yeah. Now we're
[15:34.240 --> 15:44.080]  not saying that a note doesn't exist on this property. We're saying you ain't got it. So
[15:44.080 --> 15:52.640]  that's our first step. It's a nice, it makes for a very simple suit, a very simple argument.
[15:52.640 --> 16:02.440]  Once we're in, good chance most of them are not going to be able to prove this one up.
[16:02.440 --> 16:07.640]  But the courts are corrupt. We know they're corrupt. And we'll do a song and dance, also
[16:07.640 --> 16:12.440]  down your pants, and eventually the court will make a ruling. If the court rules in
[16:12.440 --> 16:21.000]  the defendant's favor, then we petition the court to file an amended plea. If he denies
[16:21.000 --> 16:30.640]  us a right to file an amended plea, then we move to dismiss and refile with a very large
[16:30.640 --> 16:36.360]  claim against the person trying to collect the debt. We still don't go after anybody
[16:36.360 --> 16:43.760]  else yet. And after they adjudicate that one, then we file against everybody. So they have
[16:43.760 --> 16:49.640]  a pretty hefty plan to keep them in court for a very long time. And in the end, that's
[16:49.640 --> 16:54.520]  the whole purpose. This is Randy Kelton, David Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio. We'll
[16:54.520 --> 17:00.680]  be right back on the other side.
[17:00.680 --> 17:05.160]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals, and coin
[17:05.160 --> 17:10.720]  supplies in the Austin metro area. We also ship worldwide. We're a family-owned and operated
[17:10.720 --> 17:15.320]  business that offers competitive prices on your coin and metals purchases. Because of
[17:15.320 --> 17:20.680]  you, Austin, business has been so good that we've had to move to a new and bigger location.
[17:20.680 --> 17:27.520]  We're now located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, 1.2 miles north on Burnett from our previous
[17:27.520 --> 17:31.440]  location. We're on the west side of Burnett Road in the Stanley Insurance building on
[17:31.440 --> 17:36.120]  the ground floor next to the Ichiban Sushi and the Genie Car Wash. We're open Monday
[17:36.120 --> 17:40.800]  through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 5. You're welcome to stop in during regular
[17:40.800 --> 17:47.860]  business hours or call 512-646-6440. Ask for Chad or Becky and say that you heard about
[17:47.860 --> 17:52.760]  us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio. That's Capital Coin and Bullion at our new
[17:52.760 --> 18:00.440]  location at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, or call 512-646-6440.
[18:00.440 --> 18:05.760]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.760 --> 18:10.160]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Meris Proven Method. Michael Meris has won
[18:10.160 --> 18:15.760]  six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win, too. You'll get step-by-step
[18:15.760 --> 18:21.040]  instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes,
[18:21.040 --> 18:25.760]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer letters and
[18:25.760 --> 18:30.240]  phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the financial
[18:30.240 --> 18:34.000]  tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.000 --> 18:39.120]  The Michael Meris Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors. Personal
[18:39.120 --> 18:44.520]  consultation is available as well. For more information, please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com
[18:44.520 --> 18:49.800]  and click on the blue Michael Meris banner or email MichaelMeris at Yahoo.com. That's
[18:49.800 --> 18:59.320]  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 collectors
[18:59.320 --> 19:00.320]  now.
[19:00.320 --> 19:07.880]  Well, don't let nothing get to you. Only the father can deliver you. So don't let bad
[19:07.880 --> 19:30.680]  mind people hurt you. And trust it and get behind you. Know what I mean? My friend, knowledge
[19:30.680 --> 19:39.680]  in God, me friend, telling me a problem, babe. I'll only sleep once again. Here we go. You
[19:39.680 --> 19:46.400]  know you were a big deal. He a me king, man. He is everything. He's everything to me. That's
[19:46.400 --> 19:52.840]  what me call him. On top me knee, I may pray to him because he's the only one could answer
[19:52.840 --> 19:59.160]  him. Been a business what me kid man say him. Mankind, you know, is less leading me. Tell
[19:59.160 --> 20:07.920]  me, trust in God, me friend, telling me a problem, babe. I'll only sleep once again.
[20:07.920 --> 20:15.120]  Here we go. You know you were a big deal. Trust in God, me friend, telling me a problem,
[20:15.120 --> 20:16.120]  babe.
[20:16.120 --> 20:22.160]  Okay, we're back. Brenda Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig with Law Radio. And Anthony, get
[20:22.160 --> 20:29.840]  a hold of us on a website and we'll talk about what we're doing to move this forward. We
[20:29.840 --> 20:40.000]  have three lawsuits put together to step one behind the other. And primarily what we can
[20:40.000 --> 20:46.480]  do is keep people in court for a very long time and keep them in their property. We can't
[20:46.480 --> 20:52.320]  guarantee any wins as the courts are corrupt, but we can guarantee a pretty well guaranteed
[20:52.320 --> 20:57.480]  time. Actually, we can't guarantee anything because the courts are so corrupt. Okay, give
[20:57.480 --> 21:03.360]  us a call. We'll contact you if we've got your email and we'll probably talk tomorrow.
[21:03.360 --> 21:10.680]  Okay, sounds good. Okay, thank you. Thanks, Randy. Bye. Now we're going to go to George
[21:10.680 --> 21:26.200]  in California. Hello George. George, are you there? Must have put George to sleep. Okay,
[21:26.200 --> 21:38.480]  now we're going to go to Norm in Texas. Norm, what can we do for you? Norm, you seem to
[21:38.480 --> 21:46.000]  be having a technical problem. Are you on a cell phone or a, I mean you on a wireless
[21:46.000 --> 21:56.560]  or a... Hello George. Hello Norm, are you receiving us? Okay, must have put George to
[21:56.560 --> 22:01.920]  sleep. Okay, I guess Norm is having a problem. He had a problem earlier and he must not have
[22:01.920 --> 22:09.280]  it taken care of. Okay, now we're going to Jeff in New York. Jeff, what do you have for
[22:09.280 --> 22:21.520]  us? Hello? Hello Jeff. Hi, I wanted to address a couple of recent traffic cases that I've
[22:21.520 --> 22:32.600]  been involved in. The first involved the police officer acting as the prosecutor. So, I want
[22:32.600 --> 22:39.480]  to get your thoughts on that, what I should have done and I'll let you address that and
[22:39.480 --> 22:49.920]  then I also have a second one to bring up. Okay, what is your first issue? The first
[22:49.920 --> 23:00.520]  issue is a police officer acted as the prosecutor in the case during the trial and this was
[23:00.520 --> 23:10.000]  for a speeding violation. Does New York law allow the cop to act like an attorney? I'm
[23:10.000 --> 23:15.920]  not aware of that. We need to be looking and get aware. You don't know if you're making
[23:15.920 --> 23:23.280]  a good argument or a bad argument unless you do that. Okay, were you in a municipality?
[23:23.280 --> 23:30.840]  It was a town court, yes, municipal court. If it's a municipal court, as I understand
[23:30.840 --> 23:39.280]  it, unless there's some statutory exemption, in court a municipality is a corporation is
[23:39.280 --> 23:47.640]  a fictitious entity and must be represented by counsel. So, you need to check that. Well,
[23:47.640 --> 23:51.040]  but in the same case, if they're charging him with something that goes in the name of
[23:51.040 --> 23:59.560]  the state, same thing applies. The state's a fictitious entity. Yeah, and if it's in
[23:59.560 --> 24:06.280]  the name of the state, a police officer cannot represent the state as a rule. I mean, here
[24:06.280 --> 24:12.640]  in Texas it's absolutely clear that a prosecutor has to do it. And as I understand, all of
[24:12.640 --> 24:22.280]  the states have given exclusive prosecutorial authority to prosecuting attorneys. So, here
[24:22.280 --> 24:31.400]  we have a police officer exercising prosecutorial authority. Did you check your law? But I'm
[24:31.400 --> 24:39.720]  almost certain you're going to find that he's impersonating a judicial officer. Not a judicial
[24:39.720 --> 24:49.800]  officer, he's a paratree, practicing without a license. Yeah, I mean, that is exactly what
[24:49.800 --> 24:57.720]  I thought. Now, when you say check the law, where should I look in the New York code?
[24:57.720 --> 25:03.720]  The code of criminal procedure, it'll state who can prosecute cases in a particular court,
[25:03.720 --> 25:07.640]  whatever constitutes your code of criminal procedure. Yeah, that's probably going to
[25:07.640 --> 25:16.000]  be right at the front. It shouldn't be too hard to find. Okay. Read the code. I suggest
[25:16.000 --> 25:21.560]  you take, get out the criminal procedure code for New York. Okay. And just read through
[25:21.560 --> 25:26.960]  it. Okay. Don't try to understand it, don't try to remember all of it, just cruise through
[25:26.960 --> 25:32.280]  it. So, you get a good general idea of everything that's in there, and then go back and go through
[25:32.280 --> 25:38.920]  it again. Okay. The second time, you will lock it in your mind and you'll have it. Because
[25:38.920 --> 25:47.320]  of the way the code is written, it's not written in order. They come out of the public laws.
[25:47.320 --> 25:53.880]  They took the public laws and tried to organize them together into categories. So, you read
[25:53.880 --> 25:59.760]  something in the front that doesn't make sense to you the first time you read it. But once
[25:59.760 --> 26:08.760]  you've read the whole thing, and you've got to the back, then you go back and read it
[26:08.760 --> 26:20.800]  again and all of a sudden it makes sense. And then most recently, this was another infraction,
[26:20.800 --> 26:30.480]  and this was for failure to stop at a stop sign. I took it to trial, and on my assigned
[26:30.480 --> 26:39.600]  trial date, the judge was not there. I spoke to the prosecutor. I filed a motion, or I
[26:39.600 --> 26:47.360]  verbally gave a motion to dismiss based on failure to administer justice on the date
[26:47.360 --> 26:53.880]  that was assigned. Well, according to Chris, who is also in New York up there where you
[26:53.880 --> 26:59.920]  are, and they are delving into these same issues regarding traffic and such up there,
[26:59.920 --> 27:05.760]  that the specificity within the code is that the case must be prosecuted by the corporation
[27:05.760 --> 27:17.200]  counsel. That is not the cop. Okay. Nice hefty baratory charge against him. That should be
[27:17.200 --> 27:24.560]  a felony. It generally is in most states. Then you get to claim a common law tort against
[27:24.560 --> 27:34.560]  you. You get to sue the officer for committing the common law tort against you. Wow. That
[27:34.560 --> 27:47.440]  ought to get their attention. He can't claim immunity because his actions were beyond scope.
[27:47.440 --> 27:55.880]  In the second case here, what do you think? Should I file anything in addition? I mean,
[27:55.880 --> 28:03.200]  she objected to my motion to dismiss based on the judge's failure to be there, and
[28:03.200 --> 28:12.040]  they simply rescheduled it for another date. Wait a minute. She may be right in that instance.
[28:12.040 --> 28:17.780]  It's not the judge who's commanded to be ready for trial. It is the prosecutor who's commanded
[28:17.780 --> 28:27.920]  to be ready. When the judge doesn't show up, that is a different issue. You can't complain
[28:27.920 --> 28:37.520]  that the prosecutor set the court date and then failed to show up. The judge can sua
[28:37.520 --> 28:45.440]  sponte continue a case. It may be that the judge got held up or something, and there's
[28:45.440 --> 28:54.080]  going to be provision in the law. You may not have that claim. She had also made mention
[28:54.080 --> 29:04.760]  to the fact that she could have or we could have had I consented to have adjudicated it
[29:04.760 --> 29:12.000]  right there without the judge. Whoa. Hold on. Laughs. Yeah. Hold on. You need to find
[29:12.000 --> 29:21.880]  out if this is a regular practice. Has this happened before? Yeah. You might go down to
[29:21.880 --> 29:29.400]  the court and watch some of these court cases and see if they're calling people into trial
[29:29.400 --> 29:37.840]  just so they can talk to the prosecutor. That's an abusive process. Well, it is in Texas.
[29:37.840 --> 29:43.440]  It's going to be anywhere. You have to look it up in your code, but I'm sure it's going
[29:43.440 --> 29:47.760]  to be the same thing everywhere. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig with
[29:47.760 --> 30:01.800]  the radio. We'll be right back on the other side. I lost my son. My nephew. My uncle.
[30:01.800 --> 30:07.760]  My son. On September 11th, 2001. Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September
[30:07.760 --> 30:13.200]  11th. World Trade Center 7, a 47 story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane. Although the official
[30:13.200 --> 30:19.000]  explanation is that fire brought down building 7. Over 1,200 architects and engineers has
[30:19.000 --> 30:22.940]  looked into the evidence and believe there is more to the story. Bring justice to my
[30:22.940 --> 30:29.380]  son. My uncle. My nephew. My son. Go to buildingwhat.org. Why it fell, why it matters, and what you
[30:29.380 --> 30:37.400]  can do. Smile. Big Brother wants a photo to remember you by. Why bother with iris scanning
[30:37.400 --> 30:42.440]  and other biometrics that take time, coercion, or cooperation when a Kodak moment could do
[30:42.440 --> 30:47.520]  the trick. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll tell you more in just a moment. Privacy
[30:47.520 --> 30:52.700]  is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:52.700 --> 30:57.480]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish, too. So
[30:57.480 --> 31:03.640]  protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself. Privacy.
[31:03.640 --> 31:08.680]  It's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[31:08.680 --> 31:16.600]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[31:16.600 --> 31:20.580]  Citizens are not only getting tired of invasive government ID and tracking systems, they're
[31:20.580 --> 31:25.880]  saying hell no to them. But the Photon X camera ID system could be difficult to dodge. One
[31:25.880 --> 31:30.400]  click of the Air Force's proposed Photon X camera is all you need to create someone's
[31:30.400 --> 31:35.880]  three-dimensional biosignature. This biosignature is a headshot that can be used to track the
[31:35.880 --> 31:40.880]  person pretty much anywhere. That's troubling, but it gets worse. The picture can be snapped
[31:40.880 --> 31:45.520]  from so far away you might never know what happened. This is our country. We have a right
[31:45.520 --> 31:50.960]  to say no to these technologies. Join me in calling on lawmakers to outlaw the identification
[31:50.960 --> 31:56.280]  and tracking of law-abiding citizens. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information
[31:56.280 --> 32:08.760]  at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[32:08.760 --> 32:38.280]  Yeah, I won't. I won't. I won't let you pull the wool over my eyes.
[32:38.280 --> 32:52.080]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. Call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[32:52.080 --> 32:58.720]  This is our four-hour marathon. It is 1030. We have about an hour and a half left in the
[32:58.720 --> 33:03.680]  show, so if you have issues, folks, please give us a call. Tonight would be the best
[33:03.680 --> 33:09.160]  night to get them aired out. Okay, now we're going to go to, uh, did we finish up with
[33:09.160 --> 33:11.160]  Jeff in New York, Randy?
[33:11.160 --> 33:14.280]  Yeah, Jeff, I think we're done with New York.
[33:14.280 --> 33:17.480]  Jeff, did you, was that your only issue or did you have another?
[33:17.480 --> 33:24.760]  No, it was those two and, um, you know, it was funny because at the arraignment, uh,
[33:24.760 --> 33:31.520]  the prosecutor told me that she was responsible for answering all the motions and then once
[33:31.520 --> 33:36.520]  at the trial date, when the judge wasn't there, she told me another story that I had to file
[33:36.520 --> 33:40.560]  it with the clerk. Um, so, you know,
[33:40.560 --> 33:45.520]  You always have to file motions with the court and then you prepare copies for the other
[33:45.520 --> 33:50.760]  party, but you always file your motions with the court.
[33:50.760 --> 33:56.300]  That means the clerk. So she was telling you, right. She has to answer them, but she doesn't
[33:56.300 --> 34:03.280]  get them until they're filed with the clerk. So they're not before the court until they're
[34:03.280 --> 34:05.800]  filed with the clerk. So she was right in that respect.
[34:05.800 --> 34:12.800]  All right. Thank you. Okay. Bye. All right. Now we're going to go to Julius
[34:12.800 --> 34:15.480]  in Texas. Julius, what can we do for you?
[34:15.480 --> 34:24.480]  Hi, Eddie, uh, and, and Randy and company. Um, well, I'm, I'm in litigation with a mortgage,
[34:24.480 --> 34:31.840]  um, foreclosure debacle and, uh, pretty much, I just wanted to get to a point that happened
[34:31.840 --> 34:37.440]  here that I had discovered. And, uh, I would also like to email you the information, but
[34:37.440 --> 34:47.640]  what I believe I found was embezzlement by a substitute trustee, uh, because insured
[34:47.640 --> 34:54.060]  more than a year after this foreclosure had happened, uh, I still got a full loan balance
[34:54.060 --> 35:03.480]  due to bank of America while at the same time, I owe this full loan balance to Freddie Mac
[35:03.480 --> 35:09.400]  and Freddie Mac went and reported to the IRS that I had a debt outstanding of this full
[35:09.400 --> 35:15.320]  loan balance. And, uh, uh, you know, claiming that I still owe this amount to them and that
[35:15.320 --> 35:22.160]  they're my lender. So now you have two completely different lenders claiming that I owe them
[35:22.160 --> 35:29.400]  full loan balances at the very same time when I don't even have a property. And this is,
[35:29.400 --> 35:35.800]  uh, this is an interesting scenario because originally I was promised a loan reinstatement
[35:35.800 --> 35:43.360]  agreement which was violated and they came and, uh, stole my property, uh, behind my
[35:43.360 --> 35:49.880]  back without my knowledge. And then all of a sudden, uh, I'm trying to figure everything
[35:49.880 --> 35:55.480]  out and talk to bank of America and say, what happened? I'm in the middle of this loan workout
[35:55.480 --> 36:01.640]  program. I had a valid loan reinstatement agreement and you foreclosed on me and this
[36:01.640 --> 36:07.560]  was not supposed to happen. And I never got any notice you were going to do this. Of course
[36:07.560 --> 36:13.400]  I did get the notice that they could have foreclosed if I had not gone through this
[36:13.400 --> 36:18.260]  loan workout program. And, but I dotted my eyes, crossed my teeth, did exactly what they
[36:18.260 --> 36:25.160]  asked with me. And, uh, you know, I had an agreement which they never, uh, they never
[36:25.160 --> 36:30.320]  sent to me in writing. They always promised me, uh, blah, blah, blah. And then you foreclosed
[36:30.320 --> 36:38.280]  on the property. Then I went back to the bank. I found out that, uh, I went to a north branch
[36:38.280 --> 36:41.760]  instead of the south branch. I was always dealing with us. Let me see if something's
[36:41.760 --> 36:45.320]  different over there. So would you call loan? Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute. You're
[36:45.320 --> 36:53.640]  telling me very familiar story. There is a gospel song that goes, I walk through the
[36:53.640 --> 37:03.720]  garden alone. Well, they walked you through the garden right down the garden path. But
[37:03.720 --> 37:08.800]  you know something, Randy, I'm telling you something. I got wise to him. I said, this
[37:08.800 --> 37:13.680]  time I'm going in, I'm going to sit down to that banker because they're all telling me
[37:13.680 --> 37:17.800]  you never had a loan reinstatement agreement. I said, what are you talking about? I was
[37:17.800 --> 37:21.920]  right here in the office. We were talking about it. Oh no, I never got it. So what I
[37:21.920 --> 37:25.720]  did was I said, I'm not going to that south branch. I'm going to the north branch. They
[37:25.720 --> 37:30.120]  don't even know me from Adam. I said, would you mind calling up the department and see
[37:30.120 --> 37:35.680]  where my loan reinstatement is at? Sure sir, what's your loan number? Is it blah, blah,
[37:35.680 --> 37:41.640]  blah. And I have her in the office and I know the rules about FCC too because I know these
[37:41.640 --> 37:46.800]  snakes always call from out of state and you can't record it, whatever. So I said, I'm
[37:46.800 --> 37:53.680]  going to turn her into my witnesses. She calls the loan department and she verifies, yes
[37:53.680 --> 38:00.280]  Mr. Manor, you've got your loan reinstatement agreement. It's 3387 due by November the 9th.
[38:00.280 --> 38:07.080]  Here it was October the 6th, 2009 and they had already foreclosed on the property. And
[38:07.080 --> 38:13.240]  I said, would you mind telling me what your name is? Sure, here's my name. Can I get your
[38:13.240 --> 38:18.120]  business card? Would you mind putting that out for me? Oh sure, no problem. Could you
[38:18.120 --> 38:26.080]  sign that? And also, I just want to ask you a few questions why sure, no problem. Did
[38:26.080 --> 38:30.280]  you hear that woman on the phone, because now see, the way they do it is they call these
[38:30.280 --> 38:35.880]  800 numbers. They give you the phone and you talk to this person, right? They give you
[38:35.880 --> 38:41.720]  the information but they never give you anything in writing. So I said, when she got this person
[38:41.720 --> 38:46.920]  on the phone who verified my loan reinstatement agreement, I had the phone back to her and
[38:46.920 --> 38:51.480]  I said, would you mind listening to this person on the phone that's telling me I got loan
[38:51.480 --> 38:56.680]  reinstatement agreement and listen to what she says? Then after she hung up the phone,
[38:56.680 --> 39:01.960]  I had my recorder on and I'm recording her. And I said, is it true that she said I had
[39:01.960 --> 39:08.760]  a loan reinstatement agreement? Yes. And it was 33-87-82 by November the 9th? Yes. And
[39:08.760 --> 39:13.800]  that, if I pay that money on it before November the 9th, that I'd be back on my bird as if
[39:13.800 --> 39:19.880]  nothing ever happened and I'm, you know, like business as usual? Yes, absolutely yes. She
[39:19.880 --> 39:27.480]  said yes to everything and I'm recording it. Okay, where are you at now in the litigation?
[39:27.480 --> 39:38.280]  Did I take it you sued them? I sued them. I have words. What were your causes of action?
[39:38.280 --> 39:47.480]  Causes of action. That was too long a delay. What was your reason for suing them? Okay.
[39:47.480 --> 40:05.800]  It was breach of contract. It was promissory estoppel. It was negligent misrepresentation.
[40:05.800 --> 40:14.160]  And it was deceptive trade practices. And they have, I think what they've done, Bank
[40:14.160 --> 40:20.120]  of America has gone ahead and tried to file a dismissal of the deceptive trade practice
[40:20.120 --> 40:26.840]  act because they're claiming that I'm not a consumer as defined by the act. Oh, was
[40:26.840 --> 40:34.040]  this a commercial property? It was a rental property at the time that they foreclosed
[40:34.040 --> 40:41.840]  on it. Okay. When you purchased the property, did you purchase it for investment or to consume
[40:41.840 --> 40:50.560]  by living in it? I believe I purchased it as investment. The intention was eventually
[40:50.560 --> 40:57.040]  I would live in it and that was an intention, but I was going to be renting it for a few
[40:57.040 --> 41:04.040]  years. Okay. Then the note would have been a commercial note and they are right. The
[41:04.040 --> 41:10.840]  deceptive trade practices act does not apply. Okay. All right. All right. That's fine. Any
[41:10.840 --> 41:18.160]  of the consumer protection laws won't apply to you if you are a purchasing as an investor
[41:18.160 --> 41:26.160]  because in this case they consider you in a sophisticated buyer. Okay. All right. Now
[41:26.160 --> 41:36.200]  you might be magnimonious and stipulate. That'll make you look like a good guy. What does that
[41:36.200 --> 41:43.440]  all mean? What does that mean, Randy? Well, you stipulate to the deceptive trade
[41:43.440 --> 41:48.160]  practices act, you know, when they, they'll file a motion to dismiss or have they filed
[41:48.160 --> 41:52.920]  the motion to dismiss that part? They'll file the motion and I don't know what the response
[41:52.920 --> 41:57.200]  is back yet because I haven't gotten anything back from my attorneys, you know, to see.
[41:57.200 --> 42:02.840]  Oh, okay. So you have counsel handling this? Yes. This is really, that's really, really
[42:02.840 --> 42:11.800]  a bad sign. If an attorney filed a suit and he made a claim under deceptive trade practices
[42:11.800 --> 42:18.920]  act, and this is a commercial note, your attorneys and moron doesn't know what he's doing.
[42:18.920 --> 42:26.440]  Well, I kind of kind of pressed the issue. I said, can we file for this? Can we do this?
[42:26.440 --> 42:33.840]  And then they put it on there. Oh, okay. You know, so I kind of push for it. Now I'm really
[42:33.840 --> 42:38.560]  the moron, Randy, because I don't know what I'm doing in law, but I know what the difference
[42:38.560 --> 42:43.720]  with right and wrong is. And what I wanted to do, really what I wanted to do was focus
[42:43.720 --> 42:50.040]  on something other than this part to get you to understand something else about this case
[42:50.040 --> 42:59.760]  that's really disturbing that I've uncovered. I've done some extensive research to find
[42:59.760 --> 43:07.200]  that the substitute trustee who conducted this for a closure sale has two different
[43:07.200 --> 43:14.480]  signatures, completely different signatures filed with county clerk's offices all around
[43:14.480 --> 43:23.360]  Texas, completely different. And I'm sure signed by completely different people, completely
[43:23.360 --> 43:31.240]  different signatures. And some of them are rubber stamp, robo signed, and also embedded
[43:31.240 --> 43:37.280]  into the document itself so that it appears like it's part of the document template and
[43:37.280 --> 43:43.600]  the signature prints out as part of the document. Okay, hold on. We're about to go to break.
[43:43.600 --> 43:48.120]  This is Randy Kelton, Debbie Stevens, Eddie Craig, Real Law Radio. Our call-in number
[43:48.120 --> 43:55.880]  is 512-646-1984. The board's fairly empty, so you've got time to get in. Give us a call.
[43:55.880 --> 44:04.680]  We'll be right back. Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without
[44:04.680 --> 44:10.840]  an attorney with Juris Dictionary, the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will
[44:10.840 --> 44:17.760]  show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should
[44:17.760 --> 44:23.080]  be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands
[44:23.080 --> 44:29.040]  have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too. Juris Dictionary was created
[44:29.040 --> 44:36.080]  by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit,
[44:36.080 --> 44:41.280]  you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control
[44:41.280 --> 44:47.720]  our American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms
[44:47.720 --> 44:54.800]  for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and
[44:54.800 --> 45:03.120]  click on the banner, or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EASY. Hey, did you hear? Ron Paul has announced
[45:03.120 --> 45:07.400]  he's running for president in 2012. Who's Ron Paul? Really? Okay, put down the cell
[45:07.400 --> 45:10.800]  phone for one minute. Your friends really don't care about your Twitter updates on what
[45:10.800 --> 45:14.160]  you had for breakfast. Oh, but I love to make those little smiley faces with punctuation
[45:14.160 --> 45:18.320]  marks. Of course you do. Now listen closely. You need to go down to Brave New Books and
[45:18.320 --> 45:22.040]  learn as much as you can about Ron Paul and his message before it's too late. They have
[45:22.040 --> 45:26.000]  all of his books and many of the books he talks about. They also have t-shirts, bumper
[45:26.000 --> 45:29.400]  stickers, and yard signs so that you can show your support for him during the campaign.
[45:29.400 --> 45:34.040]  Brave New Books? Do they have Harry Potter and Twilight? No, but they do carry a large
[45:34.040 --> 45:37.840]  selection of survival and preparedness books to protect your family in time of emergency.
[45:37.840 --> 45:42.440]  Ugh, that sounds like that show on the Discovery Channel. Yeah, there's even a wilderness survival
[45:42.440 --> 45:46.600]  expert that teaches classes called Earth Skills School that you can sign up for on the website
[45:46.600 --> 45:50.560]  BraveNewBookstore.com. What are you doing? I'm tweeting all my friends that they should
[45:50.560 --> 45:55.840]  go to BraveNewBookstore.com or down to the bookstore in person. Where's it located? 1904
[45:55.840 --> 46:02.840]  Guadalupe Street. There, it said. I even made a smiley face. Great.
[46:25.840 --> 46:32.840]  Alright folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. Our call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[46:32.840 --> 46:39.840]  We've got a little over an hour left in the show, so if you have any issues, now's the
[46:39.840 --> 46:46.840]  time to come on board, folks, so give us a call. 512-646-1984. Alright, Randy, would
[46:46.840 --> 46:53.840]  you like to pick back up with the caller? Okay, you were saying that there was a problem
[46:53.840 --> 47:00.840]  with an embedded signature? Explain that. Okay, I'll explain it. This substitute, Trustee,
[47:00.840 --> 47:29.080]  and it's not even the substitute trustee, what the lawyers are doing, I believe, is that
[47:29.080 --> 47:36.080]  they are using a document template of a Notice of Substitute Trustee sale, and what they're
[47:37.080 --> 47:44.080]  doing is they are superimposing a photocopy of some signature into the document where
[47:46.920 --> 47:53.200]  they can change addresses and other quote information, but the document will remain
[47:53.200 --> 48:00.200]  the same and print out, robo-print it, okay, with signatures in the documents, and these
[48:00.760 --> 48:06.800]  are being filed with county clerk offices, and I was under the impression that all Notice
[48:06.800 --> 48:13.800]  of Substitute Trustee sales must be signed, and it must be a document that is created
[48:14.440 --> 48:18.880]  just like the original is created. Now wait a minute, is this required to be verified?
[48:18.880 --> 48:25.880]  Excuse me? Are they required to have this notarized? I don't know if they are or not,
[48:26.880 --> 48:33.880]  but I do know that I read some document online that says that these Notice of Substitute
[48:34.880 --> 48:41.880]  Trustee sales must be signed, but no, I have not seen them notarized in the county clerk's
[48:41.880 --> 48:48.880]  office. Okay, this raises the question, if it was produced electronically and not signed
[48:50.880 --> 48:57.880]  by a living human, okay, how does it create a harm? What must the signer do to give reason
[48:57.880 --> 49:04.880]  for the signer to have to sign this document manually rather than put an electronic signature
[49:04.880 --> 49:09.880]  on it? Is there something they have to look at and check and it sure is correct? Well,
[49:09.880 --> 49:15.880]  I'm just assuming that people should be reading these documents and at least acknowledging
[49:15.880 --> 49:22.880]  them, let alone not reading them and just having them auto-pilot. Okay, I'm assuming
[49:22.880 --> 49:29.880]  that maybe we can't raise that as an issue though. Okay. There may be a reason. That's
[49:32.880 --> 49:39.880]  not the important thing though, Randy. What I really want to focus on is the fact that
[49:40.880 --> 49:47.880]  in looking at my documentation there was filed a substitute trustees deed and in the substitute
[49:47.880 --> 49:54.880]  trustees deed, this Bank of America was the original mortgagee, they were the current
[49:55.880 --> 50:02.880]  mortgagee and mortgagee servicer, so they were the everything on the loan. They sold
[50:03.880 --> 50:10.880]  the property, the physical property, to Freddie Mac for an amount of money and I'll just
[50:10.880 --> 50:17.880]  give you a number, $97,000. Okay, is the property empty at this point or has it been sold to
[50:21.880 --> 50:28.880]  someone in it? Did we lose Julius? No, he appears to still be on the board. I don't
[50:28.880 --> 50:35.880]  know, I just lost him. Okay, maybe he'll call back. Okay, we lost Julius, so we're going
[50:37.880 --> 50:44.880]  to go to George in California. George, are you there this time? This time? Yeah, we tried
[50:45.880 --> 50:52.880]  to get you before and got no answer. Oh, I went out to work. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't
[50:52.880 --> 50:58.880]  hear you this time. Yeah, we tried to get you before and got no answer. Oh, I went out
[50:59.880 --> 51:06.880]  to water my plants outside, they're getting dehydrated. Okay. Sorry about that. Okay,
[51:07.880 --> 51:14.880]  this was an issue of spousal support. Yes. Okay, go ahead. Well, if you want a recap
[51:14.880 --> 51:23.880]  and then go ahead and recap. No, no, you bring us up to speed. I'll screw it up. I got that.
[51:24.880 --> 51:30.880]  I realized after the fact, yes, last night, that I'm focusing on the grievance with the
[51:31.880 --> 51:37.880]  California Bar when there's a much bigger issue at hand. The reason why I want to file
[51:37.880 --> 51:44.880]  the grievance is because, as I wrote you in the email, the attorney pretty much forced
[51:45.880 --> 51:52.880]  me down the road to settlement when I had made it perfectly clear to him from the get-go
[51:53.880 --> 52:00.880]  that I wanted this case to go to the court itself with the judgment and determination.
[52:00.880 --> 52:09.880]  There's lots of things, lots of details in the history between the other person that's
[52:10.880 --> 52:20.880]  in this, you know, that I'm the respondent in this lawsuit that, in my mind, could have
[52:21.880 --> 52:27.880]  an impact on... Hold just a second, George. Can you move the mic just below your mouth
[52:27.880 --> 52:34.880]  a little bit because your breathing is coming in pretty strong? Okay. Let me chill out over
[52:35.880 --> 52:42.880]  here. Okay. This is better? Yeah, that's better. Go ahead. Okay. Sorry about that.
[52:43.880 --> 52:48.880]  Certain things happened within the course of events that me and this other person were
[52:48.880 --> 52:57.880]  together that I feel could have a potential impact on the rest of the nation. We live
[52:58.880 --> 53:03.880]  in three different states as non-registered domestic partners, so I'm going to disclose
[53:04.880 --> 53:11.880]  a little bit about this. And all three of the states that we lived in have ultimately
[53:11.880 --> 53:24.880]  gone down the road of recognizing a different kind of marriage. And because it wasn't until
[53:25.880 --> 53:32.880]  we hit California that we registered, and looking back, it occurred to me that certain
[53:32.880 --> 53:40.880]  things happened that could possibly qualify as having been domestic partners in the other
[53:41.880 --> 53:49.880]  two states. And I bring this up because it then lengthens, it increases the length of
[53:50.880 --> 53:57.880]  time that the courts would be looking at our time together in determining support. From
[53:57.880 --> 54:06.880]  my reading of the law of California and everybody else, every other state in the country, everybody
[54:07.880 --> 54:14.880]  has a right to their day in court. Not only was I deprived of my day in court, but I feel
[54:15.880 --> 54:21.880]  that, but I've also read that mediation is not intended for every lawsuit.
[54:21.880 --> 54:26.880]  Okay. At mediation, did you agree to anything?
[54:27.880 --> 54:33.880]  I certainly did. Under a lot of duress, I was hammered all day long by my attorney
[54:34.880 --> 54:36.880]  and by the mediator to sign the agreement.
[54:37.880 --> 54:42.880]  Then you need to file a motion to rescind your signature.
[54:42.880 --> 54:50.880]  Well, is that, is that, that sounds easier than what it, it sounds like that could be,
[54:51.880 --> 54:53.880]  I don't want to say that. Is that as easy as it sounds?
[54:54.880 --> 55:00.880]  Yeah. You just file a motion. A motion is really nothing more than a letter to the judge.
[55:01.880 --> 55:02.880]  A request?
[55:03.880 --> 55:06.880]  Yeah. It has a different heading. It's kind of like a business letter, except it has a
[55:06.880 --> 55:14.880]  different heading. First thing you do is tell the court what you want, and then you tell
[55:15.880 --> 55:22.880]  the court what the law is that allows the court to give you what you want, and then
[55:23.880 --> 55:25.880]  ask the court for what you want. It's just not difficult at all.
[55:25.880 --> 55:35.880]  You claim that you were coerced into mediation, that your attorney acted
[55:36.880 --> 55:45.880]  unscrupulously and applied undue pressure to coerce you into an agreement
[55:46.880 --> 55:52.880]  that was not in your best interest or not something that you preferred to do,
[55:52.880 --> 55:59.880]  and ask the court to rescind your signature and remand this case for trial.
[56:00.880 --> 56:08.880]  And it's as easy as that. I mean, not to sound like a smart ass or not to sound
[56:09.880 --> 56:12.880]  like you don't know what you're talking about, but I mean, across the country,
[56:13.880 --> 56:17.880]  every day of the year, settlements are reached between opposing parties,
[56:17.880 --> 56:22.880]  and the next day, one of the parties realized that they got screwed.
[56:23.880 --> 56:26.880]  They can't just try to enter the court and say, Judge, I want to rescind your signature.
[56:27.880 --> 56:31.880]  Yes, they can. Yes, they can. As a matter of fact, absolutely they can.
[56:32.880 --> 56:36.880]  If you go buy a car, you've got three days to come back and change your mind
[56:37.880 --> 56:42.880]  without any question. If you buy a house and sign the contract, you have three days to rescind.
[56:43.880 --> 56:44.880]  Absolutely.
[56:44.880 --> 56:51.880]  Because with pen in hand, the mediator and my attorney were alone in the room with me,
[56:52.880 --> 56:55.880]  and they're giving me that look, you know, go ahead, sign it, sign it.
[56:56.880 --> 57:01.880]  I hadn't signed it yet. And jokingly, I looked at him, my attorney,
[57:02.880 --> 57:06.880]  I was actually talking to both of them, but I was looking at him and said,
[57:07.880 --> 57:10.880]  Do I have like 24 hours to change my mind?
[57:10.880 --> 57:13.880]  You know, what if I'm buying an insurance policy or a car?
[57:14.880 --> 57:20.880]  And this was on a Thursday. He said, Well, actually, you could probably have through the weekend.
[57:21.880 --> 57:27.880]  The mediator glared at him and said, But keep in mind,
[57:28.880 --> 57:32.880]  as long as the, you know, whatever time you want to think about this,
[57:33.880 --> 57:36.880]  the other person has the same amount of time to back out of the deal.
[57:36.880 --> 57:43.880]  And then they both told me, You're never going to get a better deal than here.
[57:44.880 --> 57:46.880]  You'll never get a deal like this.
[57:47.880 --> 57:50.880]  Okay, so far, none of that sounds like undue influence.
[57:51.880 --> 57:55.880]  Okay, but here's the kicker.
[57:56.880 --> 58:01.880]  The attorney that was representing me has a fiduciary relationship with the mediator.
[58:01.880 --> 58:06.880]  That's interesting. Okay, what is the nature of the fiduciary relationship?
[58:07.880 --> 58:10.880]  Aside from his law practice, he's got a mediation practice,
[58:11.880 --> 58:15.880]  and she is one of the people that he will call in to mediate.
[58:16.880 --> 58:18.880]  And she's a former judge.
[58:19.880 --> 58:21.880]  That won't give him a fiduciary relationship.
[58:22.880 --> 58:23.880]  Why wouldn't it?
[58:24.880 --> 58:26.880]  Okay, we'll talk about that on the other side. We're about to go to break.
[58:26.880 --> 58:33.880]  Our call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[58:34.880 --> 58:37.880]  Give us a call. We have another hour.
[58:38.880 --> 58:40.880]  This is going to be our top-of-the-hour break.
[58:41.880 --> 58:43.880]  So hang on till we get back on the other side,
[58:44.880 --> 58:47.880]  and I'll explain why that's not a fiduciary relationship.
[58:48.880 --> 58:49.880]  Okay.
[58:50.880 --> 58:52.880]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rudolf La Radio.
[58:52.880 --> 58:55.880]  We'll be right back.
[59:22.880 --> 59:26.880]  But the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:27.880 --> 59:30.880]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way,
[59:31.880 --> 59:33.880]  providing an entrance into the riches of the Word
[59:34.880 --> 59:36.880]  beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:37.880 --> 59:40.880]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version
[59:41.880 --> 59:42.880]  simply for the asking.
[59:43.880 --> 59:47.880]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free
[59:47.880 --> 59:56.880]  at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:57.880 --> 59:58.880]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:59.880 --> 01:00:03.880]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:00:04.880 --> 01:00:08.880]  The U.S. House of Representatives voted 225 to 201 Thursday
[01:00:09.880 --> 01:00:13.880]  to prevent the Pentagon from supplying weapons, training, or advice to Libyan rebels.
[01:00:13.880 --> 01:00:16.880]  The House voted to deny funding for direct help to the rebels,
[01:00:17.880 --> 01:00:21.880]  although a proposal to stop U.S. participation in NATO airstrikes was defeated.
[01:00:22.880 --> 01:00:26.880]  The measure needs Senate approval and is to be signed by Obama before becoming law.
[01:00:28.880 --> 01:00:33.880]  The U.S. ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, visited the city of Hama Thursday
[01:00:34.880 --> 01:00:39.880]  demonstrating support for protesters under siege by President Bashar al-Assad's forces.
[01:00:39.880 --> 01:00:43.880]  The State Department said the embassy informed the Syrian government ahead of time.
[01:00:44.880 --> 01:00:50.880]  Hama has been the most recent site of the violent crackdown by the al-Assad regime against demonstrators.
[01:00:51.880 --> 01:00:55.880]  More than two dozen protesters have been killed and security forces have encircled the city,
[01:00:56.880 --> 01:00:58.880]  prompting concerns of a wider crackdown.
[01:01:00.880 --> 01:01:06.880]  Pakistani police have issued shoot-to-kill orders and staged mass arrests to stem violence in Karachi.
[01:01:06.880 --> 01:01:09.880]  At least 80 people have been killed in the last four days.
[01:01:10.880 --> 01:01:12.880]  National Interior Minister Raymond Malik said,
[01:01:13.880 --> 01:01:16.880]  Whoever is doing this has a program to destabilize Pakistan,
[01:01:17.880 --> 01:01:21.880]  adding they always target Karachi because this is the hub of economic activity.
[01:01:22.880 --> 01:01:26.880]  The federal appeals court Thursday upheld decades-old media ownership rules
[01:01:27.880 --> 01:01:32.880]  that prevent a single owner from controlling a newspaper and broadcast station in the same city.
[01:01:32.880 --> 01:01:36.880]  The Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled the Federal Communications Commission
[01:01:37.880 --> 01:01:41.880]  didn't give the public enough notice to weigh in on its 2007 decision
[01:01:42.880 --> 01:01:45.880]  to relax cross-ownership rules under former chairman Kevin Martin.
[01:01:46.880 --> 01:01:49.880]  The court sent the rules back to the FCC to be rewritten.
[01:01:50.880 --> 01:01:55.880]  Since the 1970s, when the FCC decided a single owner should not have broadcast and print media holdings
[01:01:56.880 --> 01:01:59.880]  in the same local market, the media industry has undergone massive change.
[01:01:59.880 --> 01:02:03.880]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:02:04.880 --> 01:02:09.880]  Hundreds of pro-Palestinian activists Friday were trying to breach blockaded Gaza by air
[01:02:10.880 --> 01:02:14.880]  after several ships among an aid flotilla were forced to dock in Greece.
[01:02:15.880 --> 01:02:21.880]  Hundreds of police awaited arriving activists and dozens were being interrogated at Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion airport.
[01:02:22.880 --> 01:02:27.880]  Israel's foreign ministry said an unspecified number of activists have been allowed through the terminal without incident.
[01:02:27.880 --> 01:02:30.880]  A handful of local protesters held up signs saying,
[01:02:31.880 --> 01:02:36.880]  Welcome to Gaza and Free Palestine, while Israeli passengers shouted, Traitors, go to Syria.
[01:02:37.880 --> 01:02:41.880]  Some 600 activists were expected to arrive Friday by 15 different planes
[01:02:42.880 --> 01:02:44.880]  to show their support for the Palestinian people.
[01:02:45.880 --> 01:02:48.880]  500 police and security officers were on standby at the airport.
[01:02:49.880 --> 01:02:53.880]  An Israeli immigration spokesperson said a list of 350 unwanted people
[01:02:53.880 --> 01:02:59.880]  had been sent to airlines abroad, warning them they would be turned back at airlines' expense.
[01:03:00.880 --> 01:03:05.880]  For more details on these stories, visit INNWorldReport.net
[01:03:10.880 --> 01:03:15.880]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com
[01:03:15.880 --> 01:03:22.880]  Live, free speech, talk radio at its best.
[01:03:22.880 --> 01:03:46.880]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio.
[01:03:47.880 --> 01:03:49.880]  We've got just about an hour left in the show, folks.
[01:03:49.880 --> 01:03:54.880]  So if you have anything to talk about, 512-646-1984 is the call-in number.
[01:03:55.880 --> 01:03:59.880]  Randy, you need to finish up with George, I presume, and then we'll move on.
[01:03:59.880 --> 01:04:18.880]  Fiduciary responsibility. If you hire me to act in your interest, I have a fiduciary responsibility to refrain from self-dealing
[01:04:19.880 --> 01:04:26.880]  and to act with the utmost integrity in your interest to the exclusion of my own interest.
[01:04:26.880 --> 01:04:32.880]  But only if I'm hired by you to act in your best interest.
[01:04:33.880 --> 01:04:44.880]  If this attorney uses this judge as a mediator, I don't see there's no fiduciary relationship there.
[01:04:44.880 --> 01:04:56.880]  If the attorney hires the judge as the mediator, then even in that case, the judge is not hired in a fiduciary capacity.
[01:04:57.880 --> 01:05:08.880]  He's hired in a professional capacity, not to act in either one party or the other party's best interest.
[01:05:08.880 --> 01:05:18.880]  As an arbitrator, he has special rules and guidelines on how he's to act. You can't be called a fiduciary for either one.
[01:05:18.880 --> 01:05:43.880]  If the judge is a, let's say, just for the sake of, what do I want to say, the label, there's a label, if the judge is a quote-unquote staff mediator within the attorney's side business...
[01:05:43.880 --> 01:05:54.880]  Oh, then there's a conflict of interest here. So it doesn't go to fiduciary, it goes to conflict of interest.
[01:05:55.880 --> 01:06:02.880]  Well, I was reading up on the codes as far as what the, I forget what the exact term is, but the code in which judges are held up against.
[01:06:03.880 --> 01:06:08.880]  The canons of judicial ethics is generally what they're called.
[01:06:08.880 --> 01:06:22.880]  Yes, yes, yes. Not only was the mediator a former commissioner or judge, whatever you want to refer to that person as, but my attorney has acted as a temporary judge at times.
[01:06:23.880 --> 01:06:24.880]  Okay, that doesn't count.
[01:06:25.880 --> 01:06:35.880]  Well, not in this situation, but as a judge, he should know better than to do things, he should know better than to have done the things that he did or didn't do that worked against me.
[01:06:35.880 --> 01:06:43.880]  Okay, that will give you good grounds for a motion to rescind your signature from the document.
[01:06:44.880 --> 01:07:01.880]  Claim that the mediator failed to act as a neutral arbitrator and that the mediator and the attorney had a relationship that would have disqualified the mediator.
[01:07:01.880 --> 01:07:10.880]  Because every issue that I brought up, which I feel are major issues, they were all shot down. Everything, every single one of them was shot down.
[01:07:11.880 --> 01:07:22.880]  Well, of course they are. The courts are corrupt. You say everything you're doing in the trial is about setting the record for appeal.
[01:07:22.880 --> 01:07:31.880]  You might look on our website, ruleoflawradio.com, there's a link there to jurisdictionary.
[01:07:32.880 --> 01:07:43.880]  Everyone should go through jurisdictionary. It's a basic primer on legal system and how to defend yourself before the legal system.
[01:07:43.880 --> 01:07:54.880]  And the primary thing Dr. Graves says is everything you're doing in the trial court is about setting the record for appeal.
[01:07:55.880 --> 01:08:02.880]  Did you have an attorney in this proceedings? Oh, you're just talking about your attorney.
[01:08:03.880 --> 01:08:03.880]  Right.
[01:08:04.880 --> 01:08:11.880]  Okay, you need to absolutely bar groove your attorney. You may want to look at a malpractice suit against your attorney.
[01:08:11.880 --> 01:08:20.880]  Well, I went to another attorney after I fired the first one, which was about three weeks after the mediation.
[01:08:21.880 --> 01:08:31.880]  I was so fed up. And that was when, if you recall yesterday, I asked for a refund of my attorney's fees and his jaw dropped to the floor when I asked him that question.
[01:08:32.880 --> 01:08:36.880]  Asking me if I felt I was entitled to a refund and I said, are you entitled to a double dip?
[01:08:36.880 --> 01:08:52.880]  I went to another attorney. I'm in horrible financial shape. I had to file Chapter 7, which was approved last year, because of all the stuff that I have had to go through over the past three years.
[01:08:53.880 --> 01:09:04.880]  That was abandoned, basically. And that's not a poor me abandonment. This is a legitimate, by definition, case of abandonment.
[01:09:04.880 --> 01:09:16.880]  And so I went to another attorney. He was going to pick up the case, but had several other issues that prevented him.
[01:09:17.880 --> 01:09:25.880]  I was only able to pay him a third of what he wanted for the fees. Of course, he closed out my file. Of course, he kept what I had given him.
[01:09:26.880 --> 01:09:28.880]  Wait a minute. We're going to run out of time.
[01:09:29.880 --> 01:09:30.880]  Can I ask one question?
[01:09:31.880 --> 01:09:32.880]  Yeah, let's get to a question.
[01:09:32.880 --> 01:09:56.880]  Okay. Is there a law that kind of protects a person who has a professional license? Is a professional license something that has a value, an intrinsic value, that if you are put into a position where you are prevented from using your license, it grounds for a tort action?
[01:09:56.880 --> 01:10:15.880]  Yes. Now, the license itself, you can't claim an intrinsic value of the license itself. But if someone does something that prevents you from being able to function, that depends on the nature.
[01:10:15.880 --> 01:10:32.880]  If they've done something that's improper, if they've acted totally within their rights and within the law, no, there's nothing you can do. But if they acted outside of their rights and interfered, directly interfered with your rights, absolutely you can take action.
[01:10:32.880 --> 01:10:44.880]  Okay, so remember the family law. So what happens if Person A promises Person B, and I'm Person B, that we're both going to live happily ever after.
[01:10:45.880 --> 01:10:50.880]  And Person B has every right to have faith in Person A based on the length of history they've been together.
[01:10:50.880 --> 01:11:01.880]  And Person A insists on moving to a place where Person B can't use his license because it's California, plain and simple.
[01:11:02.880 --> 01:11:09.880]  He puts Person B in a position where Person B is not able to earn the income he's been earning for over 22 years.
[01:11:09.880 --> 01:11:22.880]  No, no, no. You're not going to have a claim. Because you're put in a position of choosing between the lesser of two evils.
[01:11:22.880 --> 01:11:43.880]  Okay. Either I move to California and I can't use my license or I stay where I'm at and suffer this evil. No, you can't do that. And suffer what? And suffer what? And suffer the separation or whatever the issue is. No, you can't do that.
[01:11:43.880 --> 01:11:58.880]  This is another person making a decision with their life and you're making a decision with your life while the decisions you have to make may be difficult and they may cause you emotional stress.
[01:11:58.880 --> 01:12:16.880]  I was just reading on severe emotional stress today and the court said that a vast majority of the severe emotional stress people suffer is not actionable. And this one is not actionable.
[01:12:16.880 --> 01:12:32.880]  Bankruptcy is not actionable? No, no, no. No? No. Actionable. You're saying that somebody else forced you into bankruptcy. Did the other person force you to go to California?
[01:12:32.880 --> 01:13:01.880]  Okay, so I understand what you're getting with that. So let me fast forward a little bit then. If you have a married couple in any state, a heterosexual married couple, and the person with the higher earning capacity walks out on the other person who has little or no earning capacity without support, and that goes on for several years, forcing that person to have to file bankruptcy.
[01:13:02.880 --> 01:13:18.880]  Okay, wait a minute. If you were a married couple, were you married under law? No, but in the state of California... Did the state recognize common law marriage? No, no, no. There's no common law in California.
[01:13:18.880 --> 01:13:36.880]  You don't have a claim? We were registered domestic partners. AB 205 in California gave same sex domestic partners, registered domestic partners in California the same obligations, benefits and privileges and protections as married people.
[01:13:36.880 --> 01:13:55.880]  Okay. And did he move to California or from California? We were living here. We had to move to the east. I gave up my pursuit of my license out here for the betterment of his career. No, no, no. You can't claim that.
[01:13:55.880 --> 01:14:18.880]  But I'm just giving you the history and then we came back. Okay, you had the option of making a decision. You could decide to do one thing or another. You chose between what you felt were the lesser of two evils. It's not actionable.
[01:14:18.880 --> 01:14:38.880]  So having a history of one person instilling faith in the other person... You can't sue someone because they do something you don't like. You can only sue someone if they violated right or they injure you directly.
[01:14:38.880 --> 01:14:58.880]  So what is the basis of palimony? Pardon me? What is the basis of palimony? I don't know. Family law is not my area. Palimony is based on a breach of an oral contract. Two people live together.
[01:14:58.880 --> 01:15:14.880]  Wait a minute. You're switching issues. We weren't talking about palimony. We were talking about your being able to practice your profession. That's not palimony. This is a different issue.
[01:15:14.880 --> 01:15:29.880]  Right, but you're telling me that I don't have a basis of a claim for a lawsuit because it was my choice to move back here with him. Exactly. Okay. Was there not a breach of contract there somewhere?
[01:15:29.880 --> 01:15:45.880]  I don't know. If I'm putting my faith in another person... Then you can't have an implied contract. Okay, so this is what just took me to the palimony issue. Palimony, palimony...
[01:15:45.880 --> 01:16:06.880]  I have no idea how you're getting there. This is deteriorating into a debate and I'm not familiar with palimony. If you have a marital dispute or a family law dispute, that's different than a tort claim.
[01:16:07.880 --> 01:16:08.880]  I know that.
[01:16:08.880 --> 01:16:18.880]  Then I don't know where you're going and we're using up way too much time. Go to an issue. Give me something I can address.
[01:16:19.880 --> 01:16:31.880]  I asked my attorney to file a Barvin action. Well, he was still my attorney and there was a statute of limitations running up for the time period and he knew that. I explained it to him and he refused to do it.
[01:16:32.880 --> 01:16:35.880]  You can sue the attorney for malpractice for that one.
[01:16:35.880 --> 01:16:39.880]  Again? Absolutely. Okay.
[01:16:40.880 --> 01:16:49.880]  That's limitations. That's one of the things you can absolutely sue him for. Okay, when we come back, we're going to need to move along. We're going to go to Norman in Texas.
[01:16:50.880 --> 01:16:55.880]  Thank you, George. This is Randy Kelton, Deputy Students, Eddie Craig. We'll be right back.
[01:16:55.880 --> 01:17:04.880]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals, and coin supplies in the Austin metro area. We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:05.880 --> 01:17:15.880]  We're a family owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin and metals purchases. Because of you, Austin, business has been so good that we've had to move to a new and bigger location.
[01:17:15.880 --> 01:17:30.880]  We're now located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, 1.2 miles north on Burnett from our previous location. We're on the west side of Burnett Road in the Stanley Insurance building on the ground floor next to the Ichiban Sushi and the Genie Car Wash.
[01:17:31.880 --> 01:17:40.880]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays 10 to 5. You're welcome to stop in during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:40.880 --> 01:17:58.880]  Ask for Chad or Becky and say that you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio. That's Capital Coin and Bullion at our new location at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, or call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:58.880 --> 01:18:14.880]  My name is Randall Kelton and I co-host on Rule of Law Radio. We specialize in showing people how to strike back against corrupt public officials. With the mortgage crisis worsening, we set our sights on finding a remedy for people who have been cheated by their lenders.
[01:18:14.880 --> 01:18:35.880]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of thousands, but there is a remedy. Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call me at 512-430-4140 and find out how to use the consumer protection laws to recover what the lenders have stolen through fraud and deception.
[01:18:35.880 --> 01:18:46.880]  We will prepare for you a qualified written request that will expose the fraud and put the lenders on the dime. Lender fraud is bankrupting this country and it's time to fight back.
[01:18:46.880 --> 01:19:15.880]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call 512-430-4140 and get the information you need to stop the money changers in their tracks.
[01:19:16.880 --> 01:19:28.880]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of thousands, but there is a remedy for people who have been cheated out of thousands.
[01:19:28.880 --> 01:19:54.880]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of thousands.
[01:19:54.880 --> 01:20:10.880]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of thousands, but there is a remedy for people who have been cheated out of thousands, but there is a remedy for people who have been cheated out of thousands.
[01:20:10.880 --> 01:20:25.880]  Hello Norm, what have you got for us?
[01:20:25.880 --> 01:20:42.880]  I have an automatic red light camera in Conroe, Texas. I believe it's a scam, but I just wanted to find out if you all knew anything about these supposed violations.
[01:20:43.880 --> 01:20:44.880]  Eddie, you want to take this one?
[01:20:45.880 --> 01:20:48.880]  I know all kinds of things about it. The question is, what do you want to do with it?
[01:20:48.880 --> 01:21:04.880]  I don't want to pay them their fine, it isn't that much, but it's just the fact of the matter that they're really milking the public for a lot of money with those red lights.
[01:21:04.880 --> 01:21:23.880]  Well, they're doing more than that. There's two ways you can go with it. You can send them back a written notice stating that, hey, I don't believe this is incorrect, I don't believe you have any witness to the events that you're alleging, and so on and so forth.
[01:21:23.880 --> 01:21:34.880]  And if you do, make sure they're ready to appear in court, and send back a copy of the citation with it, and then wait and see what happens.
[01:21:34.880 --> 01:22:01.880]  Yeah, I went down to the police department there, and they brought it up on the computer and said, see there, you didn't stop. Well, I turned right on red with caution, and that's what I've been doing for all these years, but now if you don't stop dead, they'll send you one of these tickets.
[01:22:01.880 --> 01:22:10.880]  Well, if you're going to fight it, be prepared to fight it, but right now, find out where the red light can't, where does it tell you to send the money?
[01:22:11.880 --> 01:22:19.880]  Well, the return address on the top of the notice is Tempe, Arizona.
[01:22:20.880 --> 01:22:25.880]  Not what I asked you. Where does the citation tell you to send the money?
[01:22:26.880 --> 01:22:28.880]  It's in Cincinnati, Ohio.
[01:22:28.880 --> 01:22:38.880]  Okay, that's a problem. They're the ones certifying that this is true and correct or whatever, let them send somebody down here that was a witness to it.
[01:22:39.880 --> 01:22:50.880]  So send them back a letter with a copy of your ticket stating the day you produce a competent fact witness in court will talk.
[01:22:50.880 --> 01:23:05.880]  Yeah. The girl that I talked to at the municipal court pulled it up on the computer for me, and you can see that I just...
[01:23:06.880 --> 01:23:07.880]  They don't care.
[01:23:08.880 --> 01:23:13.880]  And it's on the, they have a little movie of it.
[01:23:13.880 --> 01:23:19.880]  Okay, wait a minute. Can you clearly see your face in the movie?
[01:23:20.880 --> 01:23:25.880]  No, I can't see my face, but they've got my license number.
[01:23:26.880 --> 01:23:27.880]  So what?
[01:23:28.880 --> 01:23:29.880]  Wait a minute.
[01:23:30.880 --> 01:23:35.880]  Wait, hold on. Is the license number tattooed on your backside?
[01:23:36.880 --> 01:23:39.880]  No, it's hung on my bumper.
[01:23:39.880 --> 01:23:42.880]  So who was driving the car?
[01:23:43.880 --> 01:23:45.880]  I was.
[01:23:46.880 --> 01:23:48.880]  No! Wrong answer!
[01:23:49.880 --> 01:23:53.880]  They have to prove who was in the car. They can't do it.
[01:23:54.880 --> 01:23:57.880]  Stipulate to nothing, admit nothing.
[01:23:58.880 --> 01:24:02.880]  That's the problem. No competent first-hand fact witness.
[01:24:03.880 --> 01:24:04.880]  Yeah.
[01:24:04.880 --> 01:24:08.880]  They're trying to make a crime by ownership.
[01:24:09.880 --> 01:24:16.880]  Okay, this is how it works. In criminal, you have the Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate yourself.
[01:24:17.880 --> 01:24:21.880]  Well, this is civil, Randy. Don't forget that. These red light camera tickets are civil, not criminal.
[01:24:22.880 --> 01:24:23.880]  It can't be civil.
[01:24:24.880 --> 01:24:27.880]  They are. They're written directly in the statute that way.
[01:24:27.880 --> 01:24:38.880]  Ah, that sucks anyway. Okay, so that may change everything.
[01:24:39.880 --> 01:24:45.880]  Is it in the statute that you have a duty to ensure that your property doesn't run a red light?
[01:24:46.880 --> 01:24:51.880]  No. Nothing like that at all is in the statute. It's written completely to steal money and for no other reason.
[01:24:52.880 --> 01:24:55.880]  No, no, no. Listen, listen. What does the statute say?
[01:24:55.880 --> 01:24:59.880]  Which part do you want to know about? It's pretty extensive.
[01:25:00.880 --> 01:25:10.880]  Well, the part about crime by ownership or liability by ownership. That's where this is going to go to.
[01:25:11.880 --> 01:25:23.880]  The statute basically reads that it is an offense to fail to obey a traffic control device.
[01:25:23.880 --> 01:25:24.880]  Okay.
[01:25:25.880 --> 01:25:35.880]  Now, in order for that to apply in this case, he would have had to go through the intersection, not make a turn, unless the intersection is specifically marked, no right on red.
[01:25:36.880 --> 01:25:42.880]  But the issue on the ticket cannot possibly be no right on red.
[01:25:42.880 --> 01:25:54.880]  No, wait. That's not where I'm going. They have to prove that he turned right on red without stopping. Not that his car did.
[01:25:55.880 --> 01:25:57.880]  I understand that.
[01:25:58.880 --> 01:26:04.880]  That's the issue. It's still the same as if in criminal. They still have to put him in the car.
[01:26:04.880 --> 01:26:11.880]  But there's no requirement that he stops to make a right on red if he can do so safely either.
[01:26:12.880 --> 01:26:15.880]  Okay. That's another argument.
[01:26:18.880 --> 01:26:19.880]  Okay.
[01:26:20.880 --> 01:26:22.880]  Okay. Turn right on red doesn't require a stop?
[01:26:23.880 --> 01:26:25.880]  Not if it can be done safely.
[01:26:26.880 --> 01:26:27.880]  Okay.
[01:26:27.880 --> 01:26:34.880]  Not unless the intersection itself is clearly marked with a stop sign, in which case there wouldn't be no need for the light.
[01:26:35.880 --> 01:26:36.880]  Yeah.
[01:26:39.880 --> 01:26:43.880]  That'll work. Then demand a jury trial.
[01:26:44.880 --> 01:26:52.880]  He can't get a jury trial. Remember, this is civil. This is done in front of the Administrative Municipal Court setting.
[01:26:53.880 --> 01:26:55.880]  Whoa, whoa, whoa. Is it civil or administrative?
[01:26:55.880 --> 01:27:03.880]  Well, it's civil according to the statute. It's administrative in the procedure.
[01:27:04.880 --> 01:27:05.880]  Yeah.
[01:27:06.880 --> 01:27:13.880]  Again, it's another one of those catch-22 statutes that the only intent that it could possibly have is to take money from the unwary.
[01:27:13.880 --> 01:27:24.880]  Because there is absolutely no due process in it whatsoever.
[01:27:25.880 --> 01:27:32.880]  Not only do you go before the municipal court, they're also your court of appeal. Remember?
[01:27:32.880 --> 01:27:42.880]  You can't go above them. There's no one to appeal to.
[01:27:43.880 --> 01:27:49.880]  So that's exactly what I'm saying about these things being bills of attainder and what they do.
[01:27:49.880 --> 01:28:01.880]  But in any case, send them a certified letter, a certified mail return receipt requested demanding that they produce a competent fact witness.
[01:28:02.880 --> 01:28:10.880]  And then they will try to either send it to a collection agency or they will try to turn it into the court to have a trial scheduled.
[01:28:10.880 --> 01:28:25.880]  The problem is, is on these tickets, it's going to be a real problem for them to send this to the state to have your license suspended or a renewal blocked because of this red light camera ticket.
[01:28:26.880 --> 01:28:35.880]  Because it doesn't belong in the realm of any of the things that the law allows for them to do that with.
[01:28:35.880 --> 01:28:42.880]  That has certainly never stopped them in the past and it's not going to stop them now. This is about collecting money.
[01:28:43.880 --> 01:28:45.880]  The only way you're going to fix this is to cost them more money.
[01:28:46.880 --> 01:28:52.880]  Yeah, that's the only thing they're interested in is collecting money.
[01:28:53.880 --> 01:29:00.880]  So how do we structure this so it costs them more to collect it than they make?
[01:29:00.880 --> 01:29:04.880]  Run them through the ringers. That's the best way to do it.
[01:29:05.880 --> 01:29:09.880]  Mick, in the process you get a good legal education.
[01:29:10.880 --> 01:29:17.880]  You get to get all these guys to teach you stuff and you only pay them sharp change.
[01:29:20.880 --> 01:29:24.880]  Okay, do you have any other questions, Norm?
[01:29:24.880 --> 01:29:29.880]  No, that helps me out. I appreciate it.
[01:29:30.880 --> 01:29:34.880]  Okay, thank you. Looks like we're going to break.
[01:29:35.880 --> 01:29:39.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:29:39.880 --> 01:29:58.880]  We've got two segments left. Give us a call. 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[01:29:59.880 --> 01:30:02.880]  Top ten reasons to question the official story of the Oklahoma City bombing, reason number five.
[01:30:02.880 --> 01:30:08.880]  As witnessed by millions of viewers, the rescue efforts were interrupted several times due to the presence of other explosives.
[01:30:09.880 --> 01:30:17.880]  Government log entries indicate and witnesses report that after the initial devastating blast, a bomb complete with timer was discovered and removed from the wreckage by the bomb squad.
[01:30:18.880 --> 01:30:21.880]  Yet we are told it's all due to baseless bomb scares or other contrivances.
[01:30:22.880 --> 01:30:27.880]  So while officials try to sort out their stories, all we ask is who planted these bombs and why is the government lying about them?
[01:30:28.880 --> 01:30:30.880]  For more information, go to okcbombingtruth.com.
[01:30:30.880 --> 01:30:34.880]  Advertising. We're bombarded by it every day.
[01:30:35.880 --> 01:30:41.880]  It may seem like a harmless annoyance of modern life, but researchers now say all those messages could be affecting your memory.
[01:30:42.880 --> 01:30:45.880]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll tell you more in just a moment.
[01:30:46.880 --> 01:30:50.880]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:51.880 --> 01:30:55.880]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:55.880 --> 01:31:00.880]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:31:01.880 --> 01:31:03.880]  Privacy. It's worth hanging on to.
[01:31:04.880 --> 01:31:10.880]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:31:11.880 --> 01:31:13.880]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:31:14.880 --> 01:31:17.880]  Oh, I wish I were a meow, meow, meow, meow.
[01:31:18.880 --> 01:31:20.880]  You deserve a break today.
[01:31:21.880 --> 01:31:23.880]  Well, a break from advertising, that's for sure.
[01:31:23.880 --> 01:31:27.880]  According to a new study, all those marketing messages may be messing with our minds.
[01:31:28.880 --> 01:31:33.880]  Researchers had subjects read vivid ads about popcorn, and they let some of them taste it.
[01:31:34.880 --> 01:31:37.880]  A week later, when they asked who had actually eaten the popcorn, they got a weird result.
[01:31:38.880 --> 01:31:45.880]  Those people who had only read the ad were just as likely to falsely remember eating the popcorn as those who actually had eaten some.
[01:31:46.880 --> 01:31:48.880]  There's a kernel of wisdom for us in there somewhere.
[01:31:48.880 --> 01:31:53.880]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:53.880 --> 01:32:21.880]  All right, folks, we are back. This is Rule of Law Radio. Call-in number is 512-646-1984.
[01:32:21.880 --> 01:32:23.880]  We've got about a half an hour left in the show.
[01:32:24.880 --> 01:32:26.880]  We have a couple of callers on the board.
[01:32:27.880 --> 01:32:31.880]  Julius, you dropped off a little while ago. We're going to go ahead and bring you back and try to finish up with you.
[01:32:32.880 --> 01:32:33.880]  Yeah, hi, Eddie.
[01:32:34.880 --> 01:32:34.880]  Hi.
[01:32:35.880 --> 01:32:36.880]  I'm sorry, Sarge.
[01:32:37.880 --> 01:32:45.880]  I wanted to try and simplify my idea because it's really two parts, but the one part I want to focus on, which is very interesting for your show,
[01:32:45.880 --> 01:32:53.880]  was the fact that after the foreclosure that I had, I was left with two full loan balances.
[01:32:54.880 --> 01:32:56.880]  Wait, Julius, are you on your speaker phone?
[01:32:57.880 --> 01:32:58.880]  No, I'm on my cell phone.
[01:32:59.880 --> 01:33:05.880]  You're not on your headset because you've got a real bad reverberation on in here. You're hard to understand.
[01:33:06.880 --> 01:33:12.880]  Oh, my God. Let me see. Maybe I should try and call back then?
[01:33:12.880 --> 01:33:14.880]  That'd be fine.
[01:33:15.880 --> 01:33:20.880]  Let me try to call back. I mean, if you get somebody else, that's fine. You know, we can leave it for another day or something.
[01:33:21.880 --> 01:33:22.880]  But let me call back because...
[01:33:23.880 --> 01:33:25.880]  Okay. We'll go ahead and take Doug while you're calling back in.
[01:33:26.880 --> 01:33:27.880]  All right. I'll try to call back in.
[01:33:28.880 --> 01:33:28.880]  Okay. Thanks, Julius.
[01:33:29.880 --> 01:33:30.880]  Thank you. Bye.
[01:33:31.880 --> 01:33:34.880]  Okay. We're going to go to Doug in Texas. Evening, Doug. How you doing?
[01:33:34.880 --> 01:33:42.880]  Doing fine, Eddie. I want to talk about how ridiculous the DWI laws are.
[01:33:43.880 --> 01:33:51.880]  You know, when they pull a person over and, you know, the strong smell of alcohol and this and that and the other.
[01:33:52.880 --> 01:33:57.880]  And they say you were impaired. Impaired compared to what?
[01:33:57.880 --> 01:34:10.880]  I mean, you've got an idiot out here that maybe has, you know, 200 miles driving experience and this and that and the other.
[01:34:11.880 --> 01:34:23.880]  But you're, according to them, you're impaired. And so what if you are impaired? You might still be 300% better than they are.
[01:34:23.880 --> 01:34:26.880]  Understand that, Eddie?
[01:34:27.880 --> 01:34:30.880]  Yeah, I understand it. It's conditional tolerance.
[01:34:31.880 --> 01:34:40.880]  Well, I'm saying that Tiger Woods could drink all night right before he passed out.
[01:34:40.880 --> 01:34:52.880]  He could beat me in a game of golf and Michael Gordon could beat me in a game of basketball right before he passed out.
[01:34:53.880 --> 01:34:59.880]  But he might still be a little bit better at what he was doing than I was.
[01:35:00.880 --> 01:35:02.880]  Okay, Doug, I have a question.
[01:35:03.880 --> 01:35:04.880]  All right.
[01:35:04.880 --> 01:35:14.880]  How do we determine who can drive when they're drunk and who can't? How do we make these determinations?
[01:35:15.880 --> 01:35:26.880]  You know, these DWI laws only came into effect because so many of our wives and children are getting slaughtered on the highways from people who think they're not impaired.
[01:35:26.880 --> 01:35:37.880]  And then, oh, surprise, surprise, maybe I was. How do we determine who can drive with a certain amount of alcohol and who can't?
[01:35:38.880 --> 01:35:50.880]  Well, Randy, what I would suggest is they give them the same, they could use a machine, you know, like they do for pilots and whatever.
[01:35:50.880 --> 01:35:58.880]  Or give them the same test that they took to get their driver's license and if they can pass it.
[01:35:59.880 --> 01:36:07.880]  You know, when you stop somebody because they have a tail light out and they say, oh, I smelled it. I detected strong odor of alcohol.
[01:36:08.880 --> 01:36:12.880]  And the only reason I stopped you was because your tail light was out.
[01:36:13.880 --> 01:36:16.880]  Well, they didn't stop them because they were driving recklessly.
[01:36:16.880 --> 01:36:26.880]  Treat everybody the same. If you're driving, DWI should be driving like an idiot, which I see every day.
[01:36:27.880 --> 01:36:38.880]  You know, and it doesn't matter why you're driving like an idiot. If you are, you should be, you know, punished for that.
[01:36:38.880 --> 01:36:52.880]  Okay, we have laws against those things. Speeding or driving like an idiot, that'll go to reckless driving. So we have other laws for those.
[01:36:52.880 --> 01:37:14.880]  But, Doug, in this particular instance, it's one thing to miscalculate when your judgment about the calculation itself is bad. It's another thing to rely on that calculation when your ability to make it is seriously impaired by some other influence.
[01:37:14.880 --> 01:37:29.880]  And in order to say that the person that's been drinking is perfectly capable of determining whether or not they've reached their motor response limit, that just isn't kosher. That's not going to fly.
[01:37:29.880 --> 01:37:46.880]  Okay, that's the same thing as the addict that is so high he thinks he can fly off the building. At what point does his judgment no longer hold sway over someone else's? Is it when he hits the sidewalk or is it when he climbs up on the ledge?
[01:37:46.880 --> 01:38:01.880]  Eddie, would you rather be killed by somebody that was on their cell phone and texting and doing this and that and the other, or would you rather be killed by somebody that had some little commitment?
[01:38:01.880 --> 01:38:16.880]  Well, that's a pointless question. No one's going to say I would rather be killed by. That's pointless. The issue here becomes what level of danger was the individual presenting?
[01:38:16.880 --> 01:38:35.880]  It doesn't matter whether that level of danger exists because of cell phone use or because of impairment from drugs or drink. Now, like I said, me personally, you drink and you get behind the wheel of a car, you're taking your chances.
[01:38:35.880 --> 01:38:54.880]  The problem is you're making everybody else take those same chances with you. And I, for one, if you cause me to have an accident or almost have an accident and I'm able to catch up with you and find out that you're drinking, you did not survive your accident.
[01:38:54.880 --> 01:39:07.880]  My sentiments exactly, Eddie. I hope people are accountable for what they do, you know, their actions and what they do.
[01:39:07.880 --> 01:39:28.880]  The problem with the DUI issue is so often that once they've done what they do, a lot of other people are dead because of it. Weatherford, Texas, we had a guy, thought he could drive just fine.
[01:39:28.880 --> 01:39:45.880]  Lost control, went across the center median, hit a carload of teenagers head on and walked away from it. He realized that he was a little too drunk to drive, but killed all six of the teenagers.
[01:39:45.880 --> 01:40:08.880]  You see, it would be one thing, Doug, if they actually got punished for those acts, but you and I both know they don't. I mean, hell, we just had Representative Eddie Rodriguez who was caught for the third time, I believe, was the report in a DUI, and they turned around and let him off.
[01:40:08.880 --> 01:40:20.880]  They just dropped the charges, and yet we went and testified before the committee who was sitting there saying, I can't believe this guy's been arrested for this seven times and has never served a day in jail.
[01:40:21.880 --> 01:40:32.880]  And I'm going like, you people that want these sobriety checkpoints in Texas are the biggest offenders, and yet you think the sobriety checkpoints are a good idea?
[01:40:32.880 --> 01:40:39.880]  Well, of course you think so, because you're privileged you'll get the charges dropped. Joe Average won't.
[01:40:40.880 --> 01:40:40.880]  Right.
[01:40:41.880 --> 01:40:52.880]  Okay, but the deal here is still the same whether it's that rep or it's Joe Average. I agree that someone shouldn't be charged with a crime until they've done something to harm someone else.
[01:40:52.880 --> 01:41:02.880]  But when you did that something intentionally to cause that harm, you should suffer the maximum punishment available for that harm.
[01:41:02.880 --> 01:41:21.880]  Eddie, I'm 100% in agreement with you. 100% in agreement with you. I'm just saying, if you get stopped because your tail lights out, and they didn't stop you because you were driving erratically or senselessly or whatever,
[01:41:21.880 --> 01:41:39.880]  but that, you know, because people drive on, everybody's on prescription drugs. Oh, that's okay, you killed somebody on prescription drugs. You killed somebody because you're just plain dumb.
[01:41:39.880 --> 01:41:55.880]  Oh, it looks like we lost Doug. Well, talking about prescription drugs and driving on prescription drugs, when I was in Australia I was surprised in looking at their DUI laws.
[01:41:55.880 --> 01:42:09.880]  Their DUI laws were a lot more sophisticated than ours in that they have a section on self-induced and non-self-induced intoxication.
[01:42:09.880 --> 01:42:25.880]  On the non-self-induced intoxication, there was a section there that said that if you can commit an act under the influence of non-self-induced intoxication,
[01:42:25.880 --> 01:42:43.880]  that a person intoxicated to the same amount would not commit, then you can be prosecuted for it. It went into really minute detail on all these different issues about DUI.
[01:42:43.880 --> 01:42:57.880]  I guess they have a lot more people to drink there, a lot bigger problem with it, because it was very sophisticated. Ours is just drinking and driving, period. It's like three paragraphs in the statute on DUI.
[01:42:58.880 --> 01:43:08.880]  So one of the things that might help is a little more sophistication in the DUI laws. We kind of lost Doug, but I guess his cell phone battery went dead.
[01:43:08.880 --> 01:43:18.880]  Let's go to Julius in Texas. We're coming up on the break, so Julius, we'll pick you up on the other side of the break.
[01:43:19.880 --> 01:43:28.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio. We're about to go in our last segment.
[01:43:28.880 --> 01:43:39.880]  I get chewed out about that. We're about to go in our last segment. We've got one caller left on the board. If you've got a quick question, give us a call.
[01:43:39.880 --> 01:43:58.880]  646-512-646-1984. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig. We'll be right back.
[01:43:58.880 --> 01:44:08.880]  At HempUSA.org, we offer chemical-free products to people around the world, detoxifying, self-healing, while rebuilding the immune system.
[01:44:09.880 --> 01:44:14.880]  We urge our listeners to please consider our largest selling product, micro plant powder.
[01:44:15.880 --> 01:44:21.880]  Our micro plant powder is rich in silica and probiotics to help rebuild the immune system and to create a healthy stomach flora.
[01:44:21.880 --> 01:44:30.880]  Micro plant powder is excellent for daily intake and is perfect to add to your storage shelter. We urge our listeners to please visit us at HempUSA.org.
[01:44:31.880 --> 01:44:39.880]  And remember, all of our products are chemical-free and healthy to eat. We constantly strive to give you the best service, highest quality, and rapid shipping anywhere.
[01:44:39.880 --> 01:44:52.880]  And we offer free shipping on orders over $95 in the U.S. Please visit us at HempUSA.org or call 908-691-2608. That's 908-691-2608.
[01:44:53.880 --> 01:44:58.880]  See what our powder, seeds, and oil can do for you at HempUSA.org.
[01:44:58.880 --> 01:45:26.880]  Thank you.
[01:45:26.880 --> 01:45:27.880]  You can too.
[01:45:28.880 --> 01:45:33.880]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:34.880 --> 01:45:42.880]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.880 --> 01:45:51.880]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:51.880 --> 01:46:00.880]  Please visit RuleOfLawRadio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EASY.
[01:46:21.880 --> 01:46:50.880]  Okay, we're back. Randy Cowell and Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:46:51.880 --> 01:46:58.880]  We're going to Julius in Texas. Julius, are you back with us?
[01:46:59.880 --> 01:47:01.880]  Yes, Randy. Can you hear me now?
[01:47:02.880 --> 01:47:04.880]  I can't hear a word you're saying.
[01:47:05.880 --> 01:47:07.880]  Okay, you can't hear a word I'm saying.
[01:47:08.880 --> 01:47:10.880]  I lied. You sound a lot better.
[01:47:10.880 --> 01:47:22.880]  Okay, you're fooling with me. All right, what I'm trying to do, what I want to do is simplify this to the substitute trustee in this foreclosure sale.
[01:47:23.880 --> 01:47:36.880]  Just to recap, I had a foreclosure. I was left with two full loan balances with two different lenders at the same time when I lost my property to the foreclosure sale and lost my equity.
[01:47:36.880 --> 01:47:53.880]  So, I went to the county clerk's office, I got the substitute trustee's deed, and on there I could see an amount, and the amount just around figures was $97,000, more than enough to cover the loan balance of $93,000.
[01:47:53.880 --> 01:48:09.880]  Now, in my deed of trust, section 22 states that the substitute trustee must apply the proceeds of the sale to pay the note.
[01:48:10.880 --> 01:48:19.880]  It says it clearly, and this is section 22. In section 23, they release the security instrument once that happens.
[01:48:19.880 --> 01:48:28.880]  Now, without getting into whether notices were done correctly, all this kind of stuff, whether it was legal or illegal foreclosure,
[01:48:29.880 --> 01:48:39.880]  I received a letter because I was in correspondence with the bank and, you know, still trying to get my property back or figure out this whole debacle even a year after this foreclosure.
[01:48:39.880 --> 01:48:51.880]  And I got in writing from a bank person who clearly stated to me, more than a year after this foreclosure, that the foreclosure process had not been completed yet.
[01:48:51.880 --> 01:49:10.880]  Now, mind you, they sold the property from under me, there's a substitute trustee's deed sale, but oddly, when I went to the county clerk's office and looked for the sale, its sale, or any sale, was never registered.
[01:49:10.880 --> 01:49:21.880]  So there was no sale recorded, only the substitute trustee's deed. And I know for a fact that the balance was never paid, the note was never paid,
[01:49:22.880 --> 01:49:35.880]  because I've got about a million pieces of evidence that Bank of America never paid this note and even sent collection agencies after me to try and recover the full balance of the loan after they stole my property.
[01:49:35.880 --> 01:49:54.880]  And then Freddie Mac, this is another funny one, Freddie Mac sends me a 1099, which has to be fraudulent because you only get a 1099A, it's called, from a subsequent lender,
[01:49:54.880 --> 01:50:10.880]  meaning that, okay, Bank of America then, they must have sold the note. And sure enough, I went down to the property itself, I got a piece of paperwork from a tenant there that verified that Freddie Mac bought the loan.
[01:50:10.880 --> 01:50:23.880]  So they bought the loan with a full balance through, some 93,000 and change, at the same time they purchased my property at auction for 97,000.
[01:50:24.880 --> 01:50:32.880]  That's a hell of a deal, to keep me on the hook for a 90 somewhat thousand dollar loan balance when you buy a property for 97,000.
[01:50:32.880 --> 01:50:39.880]  And then I did the research to find out Freddie Mac sold that property for 118,000.
[01:50:40.880 --> 01:50:52.880]  So here it is, Freddie Mac pays 97,000 dollars, they sell the property for 118,000 and they have me on the hook for 93,000 dollars worth of debt.
[01:50:52.880 --> 01:51:01.880]  Well, they go one step further, they switch the 93,000 dollar illegal loan balance, of course, which I don't owe them,
[01:51:02.880 --> 01:51:11.880]  and they claim that I owe 110,000 dollars to Freddie Mac and they file it with the IRS on my 2009 tax year.
[01:51:11.880 --> 01:51:24.880]  So now I have an outstanding balance of 110,000, because that was supposed to be the fair market value, but they switched fair market value and the loan balance on this fraudulent 1099.
[01:51:25.880 --> 01:51:35.880]  I should never have gotten a 1099 because reverse it back to this first foreclosure, the first foreclosure should have, if it was a legal foreclosure,
[01:51:35.880 --> 01:51:46.880]  it should have paid the note to a zero balance. Then, therefore, number 23 in the section, the second 23 in the deed of trust,
[01:51:47.880 --> 01:51:56.880]  I would have been released of the security instrument and the foreclosure sale was going to pay the note and everybody's happy.
[01:51:57.880 --> 01:52:01.880]  Okay, so you should be able to sue the trustee.
[01:52:01.880 --> 01:52:08.880]  That's what I'm asking about. That's what I wanted to do and that's what I wanted my attorneys to do.
[01:52:09.880 --> 01:52:15.880]  I was talking to my attorney and I said, I want to list a substitute trustee. Thank you, Randy.
[01:52:16.880 --> 01:52:26.880]  I want to list a substitute trustee and I did further investigation to find out, but that substitute trustee works for the Bank of America attorneys.
[01:52:26.880 --> 01:52:35.880]  And she never put down any legal address, her address, because as I noticed in the court records, I'm looking through all the court records,
[01:52:36.880 --> 01:52:42.880]  I'm looking at these other substitute notices, substitute trustee sales, and I noticed that there are all these different addresses
[01:52:43.880 --> 01:52:53.880]  and it seems like the actual substitute trustee's address. And then I said, well why is mine only a return to attorneys?
[01:52:53.880 --> 01:52:57.880]  And it has the same attorney address. And I said, that's kind of strange.
[01:52:58.880 --> 01:53:05.880]  But I looked up on the document requirements and it clearly states that a notice of substitute trustee sale,
[01:53:06.880 --> 01:53:13.880]  a substitute or the trustee is supposed to list their address. And so now it's all going back to the attorney.
[01:53:14.880 --> 01:53:17.880]  So I did further investigation. I said, who are these attorneys?
[01:53:17.880 --> 01:53:25.880]  They're the Barrett, Daffin, Frappier, Turner, and Angle, and they foreclose on everybody in Texas.
[01:53:26.880 --> 01:53:36.880]  I mean, there's only about hundreds of thousands of their foreclosures on record in the county clerk's office in any county in Texas, if you go looking.
[01:53:36.880 --> 01:53:47.880]  But I find out this person, Michael Barrett, who owns that company, also created this company, National Default Exchange.
[01:53:48.880 --> 01:53:57.880]  And this company, National Default Exchange, I got another paper trail, they hire or they provide trustee services.
[01:53:57.880 --> 01:54:06.880]  So it's all coming from the attorney. And I'm scratching my head and I'm saying, okay, this is what I want to do.
[01:54:07.880 --> 01:54:16.880]  I want to find out who did what with that $97,000. Because I'm still the owner of record of that property even today.
[01:54:16.880 --> 01:54:27.880]  Because they never completed a foreclosure. They never, by Section 22 of the Deed of Trust, paid the note with the sale proceeds like they were supposed to.
[01:54:28.880 --> 01:54:34.880]  They never did any of that. They just said, is anybody looking? Good, it's going in my pocket.
[01:54:35.880 --> 01:54:43.880]  Or I don't know what they did with it, or what the substitute trustee did with it, but I want her to answer to a court.
[01:54:43.880 --> 01:54:52.880]  And say, okay, you come up here and explain this to a court. What did you do with that $97,000? Did you embezzle it?
[01:54:53.880 --> 01:55:01.880]  I'm going to say, you embezzle it. Prove otherwise. Or put them under fire for it.
[01:55:01.880 --> 01:55:12.880]  You know, and say, tell me what you did with this money. Let's see the paper trail. And show me how I still had a full loan balance on Bank of America's account,
[01:55:13.880 --> 01:55:24.880]  and then Bank of America goes and sells my loan, knowing, knowing mind you, that they sold the property at the same time.
[01:55:24.880 --> 01:55:38.880]  You can't have it both ways. You either have to sell the loan and leave me as owner of the property, or you sell the property and you satisfy the debt.
[01:55:39.880 --> 01:55:48.880]  There's no difference. I'm now reading through all these documents, and it's very clear, and it even states in these documents, plus with the note, as you know,
[01:55:48.880 --> 01:55:58.880]  the note says the note. It doesn't say the notes. And it says the note holder. It doesn't say the note holders.
[01:55:59.880 --> 01:56:04.880]  It's not plural. It's singular. It's one note and one note holder.
[01:56:05.880 --> 01:56:14.880]  So what I also wanted to do was for us, both Bank of America and Freddie Mac, put them in the court and say, okay, fellas, produce the note.
[01:56:14.880 --> 01:56:24.880]  I want to see which one of you has the note. Tell me with my ink signature, because that's the only way we're going to see who has the original note.
[01:56:25.880 --> 01:56:30.880]  So it's singular. Bring them both into court and say, okay, produce the note.
[01:56:31.880 --> 01:56:36.880]  Because you're a fraud. You're instantly a fraud. You can't produce one note.
[01:56:37.880 --> 01:56:41.880]  Okay. I take it your attorneys are not acting on this information?
[01:56:41.880 --> 01:56:50.880]  No, they're not acting at all. What they did, well, what they did was they said, oh, Bank of America called us. They want to know if you want to settle for them.
[01:56:51.880 --> 01:56:55.880]  I said, what are you talking about? I mean, I want to straighten all this stuff out first.
[01:56:56.880 --> 01:57:04.880]  I want to have it on record, and I want to report this as my duty as a citizen.
[01:57:05.880 --> 01:57:09.880]  So I want this to be in the court records, because I want to receive it in the United States.
[01:57:09.880 --> 01:57:19.880]  Wait a minute. Just because you settle with them in a civil action doesn't change the criminal aspect of what they're doing.
[01:57:20.880 --> 01:57:31.880]  That's it, Randy. And that, I was going to ask you. I was looking up, substitute trustee. These are criminal activities when you misapply funds.
[01:57:32.880 --> 01:57:33.880]  Absolutely.
[01:57:33.880 --> 01:57:39.880]  I mean, that's from government, isn't it? I mean, it can be. It's like, oops, it's gone now.
[01:57:40.880 --> 01:57:44.880]  And now I'm left with two full loan balances. Oh, I'm sorry, this doesn't work.
[01:57:45.880 --> 01:57:52.880]  And for a calendar year, Randy, I've been hounding them, pleading with them, please delete this balance, please this, please that.
[01:57:53.880 --> 01:57:56.880]  Sending them to the Legislative Mayor, they'll ignore me, ignore me, ignore me.
[01:57:56.880 --> 01:58:06.880]  And it goes right over me as if I don't exist, as if I don't have any credibility. And I say, man, this is like Twilight Zone. How can they do this?
[01:58:07.880 --> 01:58:13.880]  They gave me this super runaround, super runaround. Go to Freddie Mac, on the Freddie Mac setting. No, go to Bank of America. They'll take care of you.
[01:58:14.880 --> 01:58:23.880]  We, okay, hold on, hold on. We're about to run out of time. Send me an email on this to Randy at Remedies. I want to talk to you about this. Off the air when we're out of time.
[01:58:23.880 --> 01:58:25.880]  Okay, Randy at what? Rule of Law?
[01:58:26.880 --> 01:58:28.880]  A Rule of Law work.
[01:58:29.880 --> 01:58:30.880]  Okay.
[01:58:31.880 --> 01:58:36.880]  RuleofLawRadio.com. Okay, this is Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:58:37.880 --> 01:58:48.880]  This is the end of our four hour info marathon. Eddie and Deborah will be back on Monday with their traffic show and I'll be back Thursday with the gang.
[01:58:48.880 --> 01:58:52.880]  Thank you for listening and good night.
[01:59:18.880 --> 01:59:21.880]  We'll be right back.
[01:59:48.880 --> 01:59:58.880]  888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102. Or visit us online at BFA.org.