[00:00.000 --> 00:05.800]  The following newsflash is brought to you by The Low Star Lowdown, providing great daily
[00:05.800 --> 00:13.480]  bulletins for the commodities market, today's history, news updates, and the inside scoop
[00:13.480 --> 00:21.280]  into the tides of the alternative.
[00:21.280 --> 00:29.080]  Markets for Wazeva 6th of February 2019 opened with gold at $1,313.70 an ounce, silver $15.77
[00:29.080 --> 00:36.640]  an ounce, copper $2.83 an ounce, oil Texas Crude $3.66 a barrel, Brent Crude $61.98
[00:36.640 --> 00:43.320]  an ounce, and cryptos in order of market capitalization, Bitcoin $3,401.64, Ripple
[00:43.320 --> 00:52.320]  XRP $0.29, Ethereum $10.10 and Eos is at $2.32 a crypto coin.
[00:52.320 --> 00:59.640]  Today in History, the year 1918, British women over the age of 30 who meet minimum property
[00:59.640 --> 01:04.560]  qualifications get the right to vote when the Representation of the People Act of 1918
[01:04.560 --> 01:09.600]  was passed by Parliament to date in history.
[01:09.600 --> 01:14.240]  In recent news, several Texas-based organizations filed a lawsuit today requesting that a federal
[01:14.240 --> 01:19.000]  court stop the state from flagging about 95,000 people as potentially illegally registered
[01:19.000 --> 01:20.000]  to vote.
[01:20.000 --> 01:24.640]  The lawsuit was compiled after an 11-month-long investigation by the Office of the Texas Secretary
[01:24.640 --> 01:30.000]  of State and the Texas Department of Public Safety which sought to identify non-U.S. citizens
[01:30.000 --> 01:33.400]  who were registered to vote when obtaining age-arguage license.
[01:33.400 --> 01:37.080]  Over half of the 95,000 didn't devote, it seems.
[01:37.080 --> 01:41.120]  However, further controversy was raised when it became clear that some of the names were
[01:41.120 --> 01:45.280]  not in fact belonging to those who were non-citizens and registered.
[01:45.280 --> 01:50.880]  Apparently around 25% of all Latino immigrants become naturalized, gaining the right to vote.
[01:50.880 --> 01:55.240]  Registered voters who receive letters querying their citizenship have 30 days to respond
[01:55.240 --> 01:57.080]  with proof of eligibility.
[01:57.080 --> 02:01.240]  Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and David Whitley, the Texas Secretary of State, have
[02:01.240 --> 02:09.000]  yet to officially comment regarding this list and any updates pertaining to it.
[02:09.000 --> 02:14.400]  A Texas man of only 24 years old, William Brown, died from a severed artery in his neck after
[02:14.400 --> 02:16.960]  a vape pen exploded while he was using it.
[02:16.960 --> 02:20.680]  It apparently happened in the parking lot of the vape shop where he got it.
[02:20.680 --> 02:24.280]  An x-ray revealed that a piece of metal was embedded in his brainstem.
[02:24.280 --> 02:30.480]  The vape store's smoke and vape DZ has refused to comment.
[02:30.480 --> 02:35.240]  First-edition anchorwoman Kristin Diaz interviewed Aislin Campbell, the executive director of
[02:35.240 --> 02:40.200]  Grow Local, South Texas, concerning the upcoming Texas Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association
[02:40.200 --> 02:44.600]  Conference, which will be taking place at the Corpus Christi Omni Hotel from February
[02:44.600 --> 02:47.480]  14th to 16th, 6 to 9 p.m.
[02:47.480 --> 02:51.480]  You can find the interview at kiiitv.com.
[02:51.480 --> 03:19.040]  This was Rick Rody with your lowdown for February 6th, 2019.
[03:19.040 --> 03:24.440]  Okay, we are back, we're at the California Rural Radio, and we're talking to Sirid in
[03:24.440 --> 03:26.440]  California.
[03:26.440 --> 03:35.120]  And if the clerk returned the documents to you, the clerk probably talked to the U.S.
[03:35.120 --> 03:41.560]  Attorney and asked the U.S. Attorney what he should do, he or she should do with these
[03:41.560 --> 03:42.640]  documents.
[03:42.640 --> 03:50.000]  And the prosecutor most likely instructed the clerk to send them back to you.
[03:50.000 --> 03:55.600]  Well, you don't care what the prosecutor said.
[03:55.600 --> 04:00.560]  The federal law says it's the duty of the grand jury to examine into all crimes that
[04:00.560 --> 04:09.400]  come to their knowledge by whatever means, does not say by way of the prosecuting attorney,
[04:09.400 --> 04:21.600]  by whatever means, and you as a citizen, unlike public officials, public officials may only
[04:21.600 --> 04:28.560]  do what the law specifically authorizes them to do.
[04:28.560 --> 04:36.600]  You on the other hand, you can do anything you want to unless you and the rest of your
[04:36.600 --> 04:42.840]  fellow citizens have agreed to limit your behavior by some statute.
[04:42.840 --> 04:50.320]  There is no statute forbidding you to give notice of crime to a grand jury.
[04:50.320 --> 04:53.320]  So you have the right to do that.
[04:53.320 --> 04:59.120]  The clerk has no right to interfere with your access to the grand jury.
[04:59.120 --> 05:04.640]  There's nothing in law that grants her that authority.
[05:04.640 --> 05:08.160]  We don't care what the prosecutor told her.
[05:08.160 --> 05:12.360]  That's between her and the prosecutor.
[05:12.360 --> 05:15.040]  That makes sense to me.
[05:15.040 --> 05:16.040]  Right.
[05:16.040 --> 05:21.760]  So along those lines, actually in San Jose, I went to the U.S. Attorney's office and I
[05:21.760 --> 05:26.240]  said that I want to talk with the former of the grand jury.
[05:26.240 --> 05:34.080]  And they said that, well, you know, the front person made a few phone calls.
[05:34.080 --> 05:42.200]  Actually they said that I'm not able to talk with the former of the grand jury and that
[05:42.200 --> 05:44.600]  it has to go through the U.S. Attorney.
[05:44.600 --> 05:47.240]  So they called the U.S. Attorney...
[05:47.240 --> 05:50.800]  Wait, wait, who told you that?
[05:50.800 --> 05:56.160]  The front person, the front person, and actually the U.S. Attorney also confirmed that.
[05:56.160 --> 05:59.600]  And I said, you know, it's right in the bill of rights.
[05:59.600 --> 06:02.640]  You cannot limit my access to the former of the grand jury.
[06:02.640 --> 06:05.440]  I said, well, that's how we do things here.
[06:05.440 --> 06:06.440]  Okay.
[06:06.440 --> 06:16.680]  Now you file criminal charges against the U.S. Attorney for denying you access to the
[06:16.680 --> 06:17.680]  grand jury.
[06:17.680 --> 06:19.880]  Let's see how he handles that.
[06:19.880 --> 06:20.880]  Right.
[06:20.880 --> 06:24.000]  And he actually refused to give me his name.
[06:24.000 --> 06:26.120]  I said, well, can I have your car?
[06:26.120 --> 06:29.120]  He said, I'm sorry, we don't give cars or names here.
[06:29.120 --> 06:32.720]  I said, well, how do I know who I spoke with?
[06:32.720 --> 06:34.440]  And he said, well, that's his party.
[06:34.440 --> 06:41.960]  Then I went to FBI with a friend of mine and eventually two agents came out and I also
[06:41.960 --> 06:43.320]  asked them for their names.
[06:43.320 --> 06:47.120]  They said, you know, that they're sorry they cannot give names.
[06:47.120 --> 06:50.200]  Yeah, they told me that once.
[06:50.200 --> 06:53.880]  I asked this FBI agent, he had an ugly blue tie on.
[06:53.880 --> 06:55.760]  This was in Philadelphia.
[06:55.760 --> 06:59.640]  I said, you're a secret police now.
[06:59.640 --> 07:01.600]  So what do I call you?
[07:01.600 --> 07:03.840]  Secret agent blue tie.
[07:03.840 --> 07:06.040]  Well, we don't care about that.
[07:06.040 --> 07:09.920]  There is one name you can get.
[07:09.920 --> 07:14.840]  And that's the special agent in charge, the SAC.
[07:14.840 --> 07:18.000]  You can go on the internet and find his name.
[07:18.000 --> 07:25.520]  So you write up your criminal complaints against the U.S. Attorney, unknown U.S. Attorney.
[07:25.520 --> 07:33.360]  Make a statement of what occurred and file it with the SAC by name.
[07:33.360 --> 07:36.760]  I did that to a federal judge in Fort Worth.
[07:36.760 --> 07:37.760]  Okay.
[07:37.760 --> 07:39.200]  And here's the deal.
[07:39.200 --> 07:50.480]  Write down 28 USC 535, interesting statute.
[07:50.480 --> 07:55.040]  It has the appearance of being a whistleblower statute.
[07:55.040 --> 08:03.240]  What it says is, is that if a federal official has knowledge that another federal official
[08:03.240 --> 08:14.880]  has violated a law, then the first official shall give notice to the U.S. Attorney General.
[08:14.880 --> 08:21.200]  So let's say you're working for a federal agency and someone else in the agency commits
[08:21.200 --> 08:26.200]  a crime, you don't have to go to your boss or someone in the agency.
[08:26.200 --> 08:30.840]  You go around all of them and go straight to the U.S. Attorney.
[08:30.840 --> 08:34.520]  That's so you avoid any kind of retaliation.
[08:34.520 --> 08:44.960]  Well, I don't see anything in the code that relieves an FBI agent from that responsibility.
[08:44.960 --> 08:51.080]  So you file with the SAC and nothing's going to happen.
[08:51.080 --> 08:59.160]  So you wait a couple weeks and then you contact the U.S. Attorney, I'm sorry, the U.S. Attorney
[08:59.160 --> 09:09.440]  General and request a copy of the notice that the SAC sent to the Attorney General giving
[09:09.440 --> 09:22.320]  notice that the U.S. Attorney committed the crime of jury tampering that ought to get
[09:22.320 --> 09:23.320]  him hopping.
[09:23.320 --> 09:30.320]  And the U.S. Attorney General is not going to be able to provide that.
[09:30.320 --> 09:38.720]  Then you go back and you file with the U.S. Attorney criminal charges against the SAC
[09:38.720 --> 09:44.800]  for violating 28 U.S. Code 535.
[09:44.800 --> 09:50.560]  Gets you passed everyone to the U.S. Attorney and you get to bring your issue against everyone
[09:50.560 --> 09:52.560]  to the U.S. Attorney.
[09:52.560 --> 09:58.520]  At the end of the day, everything's political.
[09:58.520 --> 10:05.040]  And every U.S. Attorney has had to turn in his resignation to the President.
[10:05.040 --> 10:08.800]  Every time there's a new President, all the U.S. Attorneys have to turn in their resignation.
[10:08.800 --> 10:14.080]  So the President can fire this guy on a whim.
[10:14.080 --> 10:23.560]  So U.S. Attorney's put on a dime and he's put in the spotlight in Washington, D.C.
[10:23.560 --> 10:28.240]  So how about politics?
[10:28.240 --> 10:36.040]  So in the interim, there is a hearing on the 19th, actually there is a trial on the 19th,
[10:36.040 --> 10:38.160]  sorry, on the 29th.
[10:38.160 --> 10:40.720]  And there is a case management on the 24th.
[10:40.720 --> 10:46.920]  My position is that there is a criminal complaint made against the judge that has not been determined
[10:46.920 --> 10:47.920]  yet.
[10:47.920 --> 10:53.240]  And also I send the same thing, the complaint to the presiding judge.
[10:53.240 --> 10:59.400]  The presiding judge sent me a letter a few days ago saying that in her review of the
[10:59.400 --> 11:06.280]  document submitted, my complaint appears to focus on the fact that I believe Judge Soham
[11:06.280 --> 11:12.920]  So is disqualified from acting as a judge and that I alleged his recent order striking
[11:12.920 --> 11:20.320]  my Code of Civil Procedure, Section 170.3c5, disqualification, motion is criminal conduct.
[11:20.320 --> 11:26.640]  She says that she finds no basis for disallegation and has noted above she has no authority
[11:26.640 --> 11:32.240]  to overrule or change a judicial decision made by Judge Soham So.
[11:32.240 --> 11:38.800]  And accordingly she finds no judicial misconduct by Soham So, by Judge Soham So and that she's
[11:38.800 --> 11:42.440]  ordering my complaint to be closed.
[11:42.440 --> 11:44.200]  Who did this?
[11:44.200 --> 11:49.840]  So she's the presiding judge of the Santa Clara County Superior Court.
[11:49.840 --> 12:00.400]  Imagine the Court of Appeals for a writ of mandamus ordering the court to do whatever
[12:00.400 --> 12:01.400]  you want them to do.
[12:01.400 --> 12:07.520]  You bring all these issues to the next higher court and then ask for a stay of your trial
[12:07.520 --> 12:13.120]  until your writ of mandamus can be heard.
[12:13.120 --> 12:19.640]  If the lower court is not following law, you ask the Court of Appeals to order them to.
[12:19.640 --> 12:23.360]  And whether you get that done or not, you get this on the record.
[12:23.360 --> 12:24.360]  Right.
[12:24.360 --> 12:31.880]  So on that, or on those lines, I actually filed for two writ two days ago.
[12:31.880 --> 12:40.160]  One is for basically disqualification of this judge and that he has impersonated a judge
[12:40.160 --> 12:42.760]  without having the jurisdiction.
[12:42.760 --> 12:54.600]  And the other one is for the inferior court judge to limit by wanting to make sure that
[12:54.600 --> 12:58.840]  the attorneys are actually representing somebody.
[12:58.840 --> 13:04.000]  And that I cited the Supreme Court case law, several of them, not one or two, that based
[13:04.000 --> 13:10.040]  on this case law and actually the case law that the judge has cited, it enables me to
[13:10.040 --> 13:16.960]  make sure that the attorneys are actually representing somebody because the plaintiff
[13:16.960 --> 13:22.560]  that they have put on paper is a dead and defund entity and does not exist.
[13:22.560 --> 13:24.600]  And that went out two days ago.
[13:24.600 --> 13:27.960]  Oh, that ought to be good.
[13:27.960 --> 13:28.960]  Okay.
[13:28.960 --> 13:34.840]  Then I guess we need to see how that happens, you know, how that works out.
[13:34.840 --> 13:42.120]  I've had issues where I've claimed that the lawyer had no client.
[13:42.120 --> 13:44.440]  And so that's what you're doing.
[13:44.440 --> 13:51.360]  And that should be interesting because if they, this is the kind of ruling that could
[13:51.360 --> 13:55.640]  disrupt the entire system.
[13:55.640 --> 14:02.720]  If the court rules against you, then essentially any lawyer can pick up any case and not have
[14:02.720 --> 14:08.840]  to have a client and the appeal of the court is not going to let that happen.
[14:08.840 --> 14:11.800]  So this sounds like a really good argument to bring.
[14:11.800 --> 14:19.640]  Yeah, actually I mentioned that and I said this is something that has been, has not been
[14:19.640 --> 14:21.560]  looked at ever.
[14:21.560 --> 14:26.960]  Any attorney comes forward and says that they are representing dead and defunct entities
[14:26.960 --> 14:36.480]  and that then I cited the YouTube blog by Ted Gunderson, the ex-head of FBI who passed
[14:36.480 --> 14:46.760]  away a few years ago that during the wars in Southeast Asia, heroin and other drugs
[14:46.760 --> 14:53.600]  were imported into this country using the body cavities of dead GIs.
[14:53.600 --> 14:58.680]  And I said, do you see the parallel here, these guys are using dead and defunct entities
[14:58.680 --> 15:05.640]  and then during our national security and also mentioned in excess of 800,000 children
[15:05.640 --> 15:13.640]  are being adopted every year according to Ted Gunderson and that according to Ted Gunderson
[15:13.640 --> 15:19.000]  there are satanic acts being committed on those children.
[15:19.000 --> 15:25.400]  And that this is the major national security and somebody has to pick it up and tell us
[15:25.400 --> 15:27.440]  what's going on in this country.
[15:27.440 --> 15:33.280]  Most of those 800,000 children per year are not even being found.
[15:33.280 --> 15:39.800]  Okay, one other thing that I was thinking of while you were talking about this, are
[15:39.800 --> 15:44.560]  you familiar with Judge Shrek in New York?
[15:44.560 --> 15:50.160]  He passed away, I think it's the thing, Judge.
[15:50.160 --> 15:53.240]  The one that called them vampire lenders.
[15:53.240 --> 15:57.200]  Yeah, yeah, that unfortunately passed away a few years ago.
[15:57.200 --> 15:59.440]  That's why I really like that judge.
[15:59.440 --> 16:04.400]  Yes, did you have his case cited?
[16:04.400 --> 16:08.480]  Eh, no, I didn't.
[16:08.480 --> 16:16.320]  Okay, he addressed this exact issue, the lawyers coming in representing a dead guy.
[16:16.320 --> 16:23.720]  You called them vampire lenders, the lawyers came in and resurrected them from the dead.
[16:23.720 --> 16:28.880]  Yeah, yeah, and I bet you through anything they're actually laundering because there's
[16:28.880 --> 16:35.920]  a lot of money that is being laundered through various schemes.
[16:35.920 --> 16:47.360]  Okay, well let us know how these rits turn out, this should be interesting.
[16:47.360 --> 16:50.400]  I will definitely do so.
[16:50.400 --> 16:53.280]  Okay, do you have anything else for us?
[16:53.280 --> 16:56.200]  No, that's it, thank you so much, Randy.
[16:56.200 --> 16:58.200]  Okay, thank you, Sir Ed.
[16:58.200 --> 17:00.200]  Now we're going to...
[17:00.200 --> 17:12.200]  We're going to have a free society, and we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[17:12.200 --> 17:15.240]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act
[17:15.240 --> 17:19.280]  in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[17:19.280 --> 17:23.120]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[17:23.120 --> 17:25.000]  our rights through due process.
[17:25.000 --> 17:28.480]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the
[17:28.480 --> 17:32.240]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[17:32.240 --> 17:34.640]  is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[17:34.640 --> 17:38.640]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[17:38.640 --> 17:40.000]  ordering your copy today.
[17:40.000 --> 17:43.280]  By ordering now you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[17:43.280 --> 17:47.760]  The Law vs. the Lie, video and audio of your original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[17:47.760 --> 17:50.080]  documents and other useful resource material.
[17:50.080 --> 17:54.040]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[17:54.040 --> 18:00.680]  For your copy today and together we can have free society we all want and deserve.
[18:00.680 --> 18:06.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits?
[18:06.000 --> 18:09.440]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mearris Proven Method.
[18:09.440 --> 18:13.800]  Michael Mearris has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you
[18:13.800 --> 18:14.800]  can win two.
[18:14.800 --> 18:19.640]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.640 --> 18:20.640]  civil rights statutes.
[18:20.640 --> 18:24.920]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons?
[18:24.920 --> 18:26.920]  How to answer letters and phone calls?
[18:26.920 --> 18:29.560]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report?
[18:29.560 --> 18:34.200]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away?
[18:34.200 --> 18:39.320]  The Michael Mearris Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.320 --> 18:41.440]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.440 --> 18:47.000]  For more information please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mearris banner
[18:47.000 --> 18:49.960]  or email MichaelMearris at yahoo.com.
[18:49.960 --> 18:57.680]  For more information please visit ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com.
[18:57.680 --> 19:05.680]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now, you're listening to the Logos Radio Network
[19:05.680 --> 19:16.120]  Logos Radio Networks.com Well don't let nothing get to you, only the father can't
[19:16.120 --> 19:17.120]  deliver you.
[19:17.120 --> 19:24.120]  Don't let back my people hurt you, I'm just gonna sit and get behind you.
[19:24.120 --> 19:33.160]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton with our radio, we're back from diving off the cliff
[19:33.160 --> 19:37.960]  again and we're going to John in New York.
[19:37.960 --> 19:38.960]  Hello John.
[19:38.960 --> 19:41.960]  Hello Randy, how are you?
[19:41.960 --> 19:47.960]  I am good, what do you have for us, interesting and intriguing?
[19:47.960 --> 19:57.880]  Oh Randy, tonight I've outdone myself, trust me, unless I'm wrong I think I've got something
[19:57.880 --> 20:01.560]  that, well let me just tell you about it, here we go.
[20:01.560 --> 20:07.400]  I will tell you quickly because there are so many elements to this case that the judge
[20:07.400 --> 20:13.240]  and the cop screwed up on and the cop lied about, I think I can prove that he perjured
[20:13.240 --> 20:17.720]  himself a total of at least three times in the trial.
[20:17.720 --> 20:23.280]  I think I have the proof now and the more the time went on I started looking at this
[20:23.280 --> 20:27.840]  and looking at this and going crazier by the minute because there are so many elements
[20:27.840 --> 20:36.480]  to this, I began to see that this case is a defendant's dream come true.
[20:36.480 --> 20:43.000]  Next question, I think I asked you this once before but tell me again, is a judge during
[20:43.000 --> 20:49.680]  a traffic ticket trial supposed to ask you if you want a trial by jury, is that required,
[20:49.680 --> 20:50.680]  do you know?
[20:50.680 --> 20:56.600]  It depends on the state, yes, if you have a right to a trial by jury, yes.
[20:56.600 --> 21:01.320]  Okay, so he's supposed to say that to you during the trial, right?
[21:01.320 --> 21:02.320]  Yes.
[21:02.320 --> 21:07.240]  Okay, or during the, not so much the trial but the hearing, am I right?
[21:07.240 --> 21:18.200]  I'm saying yes, that's a right and it gets into this category unless there's some specific
[21:18.200 --> 21:27.000]  requirement that you must waive a right to a jury in court.
[21:27.000 --> 21:33.320]  We have, in Texas we have code that says you must waive the right to a jury in court
[21:33.320 --> 21:40.960]  with counsel present after full disclosure free of conversion.
[21:40.960 --> 21:47.560]  It may be that in New York if you want a jury trial you must request a jury trial.
[21:47.560 --> 21:49.920]  That's what I figured, maybe it would be something like that.
[21:49.920 --> 21:52.120]  Okay, now I'll move on to this.
[21:52.120 --> 21:58.840]  I'm going to tell you what it was that they did wrong during the actual trial and please
[21:58.840 --> 22:04.600]  tell me what you call it, what you can charge them with, there's plenty.
[22:04.600 --> 22:10.040]  You're going to love this and the appropriate agency or person to file those charges with.
[22:10.040 --> 22:14.120]  Now to start with, the cop perjured himself three times.
[22:14.120 --> 22:20.960]  I really strongly believe that, and you tell me now, first he starts out with no seat belt
[22:20.960 --> 22:21.960]  on the ticket.
[22:21.960 --> 22:28.400]  It says no seat belt, I'm sick of hearing about this as you are so just bear with me.
[22:28.400 --> 22:33.280]  It said no seat belt on the ticket and then during the trial, five minutes into the trial
[22:33.280 --> 22:40.600]  or last, he states that well the defendant was wearing it but he was wearing it wrong.
[22:40.600 --> 22:46.520]  So now that blows the seat belt ticket charge, no seat belt out of the water, does it not?
[22:46.520 --> 22:49.760]  Because the cop himself said he was wearing a seat belt.
[22:49.760 --> 22:50.760]  Yes.
[22:50.760 --> 22:53.160]  Okay, that's number one.
[22:53.160 --> 23:00.400]  Number two, I believe strongly that it was perjury for several reasons.
[23:00.400 --> 23:05.040]  Now it has to be perjury, can it be argued by the cop that it's not perjury?
[23:05.040 --> 23:08.480]  Is the cop that stupid making it not be perjury?
[23:08.480 --> 23:13.880]  Is he that dumb that he doesn't know wearing the seat belt from not wearing the seat belt?
[23:13.880 --> 23:15.280]  Can you comment on that?
[23:15.280 --> 23:21.000]  Can he claim that it was just ignorance or a mistake?
[23:21.000 --> 23:23.120]  Wait a minute, claim?
[23:23.120 --> 23:25.120]  I know it's confusing.
[23:25.120 --> 23:28.040]  Can he claim that it was ignorance or a mistake?
[23:28.040 --> 23:29.040]  Yes.
[23:29.040 --> 23:30.040]  So there can't be perjury?
[23:30.040 --> 23:31.040]  No.
[23:31.040 --> 23:34.120]  Can he claim it's not perjury?
[23:34.120 --> 23:35.840]  No.
[23:35.840 --> 23:47.160]  He cannot, when he admitted, okay, he has an affirmative defense.
[23:47.160 --> 24:01.520]  He stated once he was challenged on the no seat belt issue, before the fact of his improper
[24:01.520 --> 24:12.840]  testimony was expected or certain to come out, he adjusted his testimony.
[24:12.840 --> 24:18.720]  Then that's an affirmative defense against prosecution for aggravated perjury.
[24:18.720 --> 24:25.880]  If he admitted to the truth after the truth became evident, that's not helpful.
[24:25.880 --> 24:32.960]  But when challenged about the seat belt, he admitted, if he, in five minutes, he readily
[24:32.960 --> 24:37.720]  admitted that, yeah, you're right, he was wearing the seat belt when wearing it right,
[24:37.720 --> 24:40.120]  then that mitigates the aggravated perjury.
[24:40.120 --> 24:42.240]  Okay, you're sure about that?
[24:42.240 --> 24:47.080]  Yes, you can withdraw a false statement.
[24:47.080 --> 24:51.600]  Before, it's clear that the statement is false.
[24:51.600 --> 24:53.100]  Okay.
[24:53.100 --> 24:56.960]  But now, he blew the case out of the water entirely, am I right?
[24:56.960 --> 25:03.120]  Because he wasn't, the defendant wasn't brought to court to answer to the charge of not wearing
[25:03.120 --> 25:04.120]  it properly.
[25:04.120 --> 25:07.320]  The charge on the ticket was not wearing it at all.
[25:07.320 --> 25:08.320]  So now...
[25:08.320 --> 25:09.320]  Exactly.
[25:09.320 --> 25:11.040]  He should have moved for a summary judgment.
[25:11.040 --> 25:12.920]  Move for something.
[25:12.920 --> 25:18.640]  Well, the defendant objected and he said, how can I be not wearing the seat belt and then
[25:18.640 --> 25:19.640]  wearing it all of a sudden?
[25:19.640 --> 25:24.080]  Does it happen by magic, you know, that type of thing?
[25:24.080 --> 25:29.560]  So he did get his licks in, the defendant got his licks in for the appeals court and
[25:29.560 --> 25:33.000]  the appeals court, I believe, I don't see it.
[25:33.000 --> 25:41.120]  I read that transcript several times, not transcript, but I read the ADA's recommendation
[25:41.120 --> 25:49.200]  to the judge, which the judge hasn't ruled on yet, in that the ADA did not touch on that
[25:49.200 --> 25:53.520]  seat belt, no seat belt, wearing it wrong, and therefore it blew it out of the water.
[25:53.520 --> 26:00.200]  He did not address it, so that's probably judicial admission, is it not?
[26:00.200 --> 26:01.200]  Yes.
[26:01.200 --> 26:02.200]  Okay.
[26:02.200 --> 26:13.680]  Live, live, the assertions in the live, pleadings not denied are considered judicial admission.
[26:13.680 --> 26:14.680]  Right.
[26:14.680 --> 26:19.920]  So it's, in effect, affirmed it by not addressing it.
[26:19.920 --> 26:20.920]  Okay.
[26:20.920 --> 26:27.960]  Now, so you can't charge the cop with perjury for that, but I think you can with these other
[26:27.960 --> 26:33.360]  two things, the seat belt, according to the cop, according to the cop, ran down the seat
[26:33.360 --> 26:38.800]  and that particular car model seat won't let the belt do that.
[26:38.800 --> 26:44.000]  The defendant had spoken with another owner of the same car and said the same thing.
[26:44.000 --> 26:46.280]  And the seat belt will not do that.
[26:46.280 --> 26:51.720]  The seat belt can't possibly do what the cop said it could do and how he saw it when the
[26:51.720 --> 26:53.960]  defendant went by in the car.
[26:53.960 --> 26:59.640]  So the cop got caught with his pants down because the cop did not count on that particular
[26:59.640 --> 27:06.240]  model car being different that it could not do what he claims it could do.
[27:06.240 --> 27:09.560]  I think that is perjury and I think you'll agree with that.
[27:09.560 --> 27:11.720]  That is definitely perjury.
[27:11.720 --> 27:12.720]  Okay.
[27:12.720 --> 27:17.120]  Number three, oh, this gets better as it goes along.
[27:17.120 --> 27:20.760]  This is just like the Dukes of Hazard and I've said it before, you're probably sick
[27:20.760 --> 27:26.720]  of hearing it, Boss Hog, Little Bell, and Roscoe P. Coltrane, they make it up as they
[27:26.720 --> 27:27.720]  go along.
[27:27.720 --> 27:33.280]  And I'm going to prove to you and maybe the next court that the cop and the judge were
[27:33.280 --> 27:38.600]  in collusion or in concert or conspiracy, whatever you want to call it.
[27:38.600 --> 27:39.600]  Correct me on that.
[27:39.600 --> 27:40.600]  What do I say?
[27:40.600 --> 27:47.320]  I'm not sure where you're getting to, you're asking me to comment before you tell me how.
[27:47.320 --> 27:48.320]  Okay.
[27:48.320 --> 27:49.320]  All right.
[27:49.320 --> 27:50.320]  Here it comes.
[27:50.320 --> 27:57.280]  On the affidavit of servant, it said, and he was very specific about his wording.
[27:57.280 --> 28:04.640]  I don't have it in front of me, but trust me when I say, the cop comes off saying this,
[28:04.640 --> 28:05.880]  I'll paraphrase it.
[28:05.880 --> 28:11.120]  I mailed the deposition personally.
[28:11.120 --> 28:14.920]  I put it in the post office mailbox.
[28:14.920 --> 28:21.440]  He called it another fancy word, something about a depository and so on and so forth.
[28:21.440 --> 28:24.040]  I mailed it personally.
[28:24.040 --> 28:31.560]  Then later he makes a comment in the trial, well, I obviously don't do the mail.
[28:31.560 --> 28:36.000]  And what he was saying was, I didn't mail it out personally.
[28:36.000 --> 28:41.600]  First he says, he put it in the post office mailbox personally, and then he told the
[28:41.600 --> 28:45.800]  judge he didn't mail it.
[28:45.800 --> 28:55.360]  When you have two statements that are necessarily contradictory, do not have to prove which of
[28:55.360 --> 28:59.280]  the statements were perjurious.
[28:59.280 --> 29:06.520]  If the condition exists such that, if one is true, the other must necessarily not be
[29:06.520 --> 29:10.120]  true, that's sufficient to support a claim of perjury.
[29:10.120 --> 29:11.120]  Okay.
[29:11.120 --> 29:14.120]  Do you think that this third thing is perjury?
[29:14.120 --> 29:16.040]  I don't know yet.
[29:16.040 --> 29:17.040]  Tell me the third thing.
[29:17.040 --> 29:19.040]  Well, that's what it is.
[29:19.040 --> 29:20.040]  Oh, okay.
[29:20.040 --> 29:21.040]  Yeah.
[29:21.040 --> 29:22.040]  That's perjury.
[29:22.040 --> 29:23.040]  Okay.
[29:23.040 --> 29:24.040]  We know, okay.
[29:24.040 --> 29:25.680]  The third thing or the second thing.
[29:25.680 --> 29:34.560]  We don't know which one of those was false, and you don't need to know which one was false.
[29:34.560 --> 29:40.400]  If for one to be true, the other has to be false, then they can't both be true and they
[29:40.400 --> 29:43.280]  can't both be false, it has to be perjury.
[29:43.280 --> 29:45.560]  You don't have to prove which one was false.
[29:45.560 --> 29:46.560]  Got it.
[29:46.560 --> 29:49.800]  Now, you can't tell, now tell me if I'm right or wrong.
[29:49.800 --> 29:50.800]  Well, this gets better.
[29:50.800 --> 29:52.840]  This is just the tip of the iceberg.
[29:52.840 --> 29:58.280]  You can't tell me the judge didn't pick up on all three of these things that I just
[29:58.280 --> 29:59.280]  told you.
[29:59.280 --> 30:00.280]  Let's get physical, physical.
[30:00.280 --> 30:09.480]  Hey, if you exercise even a tent as much as you should, you can extend your life by
[30:09.480 --> 30:10.480]  years.
[30:10.480 --> 30:15.520]  I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht and I'll hike right back with the good news in just a moment.
[30:15.520 --> 30:20.280]  Your search engine is watching you, recording all your searches, and creating a massive
[30:20.280 --> 30:22.960]  database of your personal information.
[30:22.960 --> 30:23.960]  That's creepy.
[30:23.960 --> 30:25.960]  But it doesn't have to be that way.
[30:25.960 --> 30:29.080]  StartPage.com is the world's most private search engine.
[30:29.080 --> 30:33.240]  StartPage doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches who use tracking
[30:33.240 --> 30:35.480]  cookies and their third party certified.
[30:35.480 --> 30:39.960]  If you don't like big brother spying on you, start over with StartPage.
[30:39.960 --> 30:42.600]  Great search results and total privacy.
[30:42.600 --> 30:45.920]  StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[30:45.920 --> 30:46.920]  Exercise.
[30:46.920 --> 30:50.360]  We all know we need it, but we don't always take the time to do it.
[30:50.360 --> 30:55.320]  Now new evidence says just 15 measly minutes of physical activity a day can extend your
[30:55.320 --> 30:57.360]  life a lot.
[30:57.360 --> 31:01.360]  Researchers in Taiwan found that an hour and a half of exercise a week extended people's
[31:01.360 --> 31:03.160]  lives by three whole years.
[31:03.160 --> 31:05.560]  That's just 13 minutes a day.
[31:05.560 --> 31:10.240]  The study found that small amounts of daily exercise made people 10% less likely to die
[31:10.240 --> 31:14.160]  of cancer and 14% less likely to die for any reason.
[31:14.160 --> 31:16.160]  So come on, couch potatoes.
[31:16.160 --> 31:20.680]  Take out those Olivia Newton-John CDs and let me hear your body talk.
[31:20.680 --> 31:22.360]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:22.360 --> 31:30.680]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:30.680 --> 31:31.680]  I lost my son.
[31:31.680 --> 31:32.680]  My nephew.
[31:32.680 --> 31:33.680]  My uncle.
[31:33.680 --> 31:34.680]  My uncle.
[31:34.680 --> 31:35.680]  On September 11, 2004.
[31:35.680 --> 31:38.880]  Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11.
[31:38.880 --> 31:43.040]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[31:43.040 --> 31:48.880]  Although the official explanation is that fire brought down building 7, over 1,200 architects
[31:48.880 --> 31:52.600]  and engineers have looked into the evidence and believed there is more to the story.
[31:52.600 --> 31:54.080]  Bring justice to my son.
[31:54.080 --> 31:55.080]  My uncle.
[31:55.080 --> 31:56.080]  My nephew.
[31:56.080 --> 31:57.080]  My son.
[31:57.080 --> 31:58.080]  Go to building what.org.
[31:58.080 --> 31:59.080]  Why it fell?
[31:59.080 --> 32:00.600]  Why it matters is what you can do.
[32:00.600 --> 32:03.240]  Hey, it's Danny here for Hill Country Home Improvements.
[32:03.240 --> 32:06.200]  Did your home receive hail or wind damage from the recent storms?
[32:06.200 --> 32:09.880]  Come on, we all know the government caused it with their chemtrails, but good luck getting
[32:09.880 --> 32:10.880]  them to pay for it.
[32:10.880 --> 32:14.520]  Okay, I might be kidding about the chemtrails, but I'm serious about your roof.
[32:14.520 --> 32:18.320]  That's why you have insurance and Hill Country Home Improvements can handle the claim for
[32:18.320 --> 32:21.080]  you with little to no out-of-pocket expense.
[32:21.080 --> 32:25.360]  And we accept Bitcoin as a multi-year A-plus member of the Better Business Bureau with
[32:25.360 --> 32:26.680]  zero complaints.
[32:26.680 --> 32:30.960]  You can trust Hill Country Home Improvements to handle your claim and your roof right
[32:30.960 --> 32:31.960]  the first time.
[32:31.960 --> 32:38.640]  Just call 512-992-8745 or go to hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[32:38.640 --> 32:43.120]  Then the crypto show and get $100 off, and we'll donate another $100 to the Logos Radio
[32:43.120 --> 32:45.360]  Network to help continue this programming.
[32:45.360 --> 32:50.480]  So if those out-of-town roofers come knocking, your door should be locked in.
[32:50.480 --> 32:56.560]  That's 512-992-8745 or hillcountryhomeimprovements.com.
[32:56.560 --> 32:58.360]  Discounts are based on full roof replacement.
[32:58.360 --> 33:01.360]  I may not actually be kidding about chemtrails.
[33:01.360 --> 33:26.720]  Live, free speech radio, LogosRadioNetwork.com Okay, we are back.
[33:26.720 --> 33:35.680]  Andy Kelton, rule of law radio on this Friday, the 12th day of April, 2019.
[33:35.680 --> 33:42.120]  And we're talking to John in New York and John, you ought to be ashamed of yourself.
[33:42.120 --> 33:45.640]  You ran right off the cliff.
[33:45.640 --> 33:50.920]  Tell Deborah that I admit it, I got us both off the cliff.
[33:50.920 --> 33:52.920]  She's going to blame me anyway.
[33:52.920 --> 34:00.680]  Tell her that your countdown clock skipped a beat.
[34:00.680 --> 34:04.000]  Yes, you'll buy that story.
[34:04.000 --> 34:07.640]  We were the aggravated perjury.
[34:07.640 --> 34:13.320]  We got perjury on, you don't know which one was alive, but one of them had to be.
[34:13.320 --> 34:15.680]  Okay, next step.
[34:15.680 --> 34:20.720]  These, okay, you can't tell me the judge didn't pick up on at least two of those.
[34:20.720 --> 34:25.400]  He's sitting right there, first the cop says one thing, then he says something else.
[34:25.400 --> 34:27.040]  He lets it pass by.
[34:27.040 --> 34:28.440]  What did the judge do?
[34:28.440 --> 34:30.720]  What law did he violate?
[34:30.720 --> 34:33.400]  He didn't.
[34:33.400 --> 34:37.120]  He let the cop lie when it was obvious?
[34:37.120 --> 34:38.120]  Yeah.
[34:38.120 --> 34:41.400]  It's not the judge's place.
[34:41.400 --> 34:44.800]  His judge is to weigh the evidence.
[34:44.800 --> 34:52.960]  The judge could later file an action file sanctions against the lawyer, but against the cop.
[34:52.960 --> 34:59.480]  The witness, but at the time, it would have been inappropriate for the judge to interrupt
[34:59.480 --> 35:05.800]  the witness and accuse him of perjury, because what that would do was give the witness opportunity
[35:05.800 --> 35:07.800]  to recant.
[35:07.800 --> 35:12.880]  Oh, okay, all right, I'll buy that.
[35:12.880 --> 35:13.880]  That sounds logical.
[35:13.880 --> 35:20.040]  All right, so now, these are the recent developments with the no seatbelt charge that five minutes
[35:20.040 --> 35:24.280]  into the trial, the cop said it was later determined, he may have been wearing a seatbelt
[35:24.280 --> 35:25.280]  wrong.
[35:25.280 --> 35:32.440]  Well, the defendant pointed that out to the judge, and he said that he's changing the
[35:32.440 --> 35:36.480]  material fact without proper notice, violating his right.
[35:36.480 --> 35:37.480]  That's correct, isn't it?
[35:37.480 --> 35:38.480]  That's the Sixth Amendment.
[35:38.480 --> 35:39.480]  That's correct.
[35:39.480 --> 35:43.360]  Okay, the Sixth Amendment he's been violated on.
[35:43.360 --> 35:46.360]  This means the cop is lying.
[35:46.360 --> 35:53.040]  Well, okay, now, we proved that we indicated that's not the case.
[35:53.040 --> 35:54.040]  Okay.
[35:54.040 --> 36:04.080]  The policeman is okay here because he admitted to the truth before the truth was necessarily
[36:04.080 --> 36:05.080]  evident.
[36:05.080 --> 36:06.080]  Okay, got it.
[36:06.080 --> 36:07.080]  Got it.
[36:07.080 --> 36:08.080]  I remember you said that.
[36:08.080 --> 36:15.000]  So, you don't get that one, however, it had to be clear to the judge that at this point,
[36:15.000 --> 36:16.000]  there was no case.
[36:16.000 --> 36:20.440]  So, from this point, the judge is acting out of scope.
[36:20.440 --> 36:32.040]  The judge has no, see, a judge has a duty to properly apply the law to the facts of
[36:32.040 --> 36:34.240]  failure to do so as an abuse of discretion.
[36:34.240 --> 36:38.520]  So, the judge, at this point, abused his discretion by failing to properly apply the
[36:38.520 --> 36:39.520]  law to facts.
[36:39.520 --> 36:40.520]  Walker V. Packer.
[36:40.520 --> 36:41.520]  Stand up.
[36:41.520 --> 36:42.520]  I'm sorry?
[36:42.520 --> 36:43.520]  Say again.
[36:43.520 --> 36:44.520]  Walker V. Packer.
[36:44.520 --> 36:45.520]  Oh, say it again.
[36:45.520 --> 36:46.520]  I know the truth.
[36:46.520 --> 36:47.520]  Walker.
[36:47.520 --> 36:48.520]  Walker.
[36:48.520 --> 36:49.520]  W-A-L-K-E-R.
[36:49.520 --> 36:50.520]  V. Packer.
[36:50.520 --> 36:51.520]  P-A-C-K-E-R.
[36:51.520 --> 36:52.520]  Okay, got it.
[36:52.520 --> 36:53.520]  Walter versus Packer.
[36:53.520 --> 36:54.520]  Okay.
[36:54.520 --> 36:55.520]  No.
[36:55.520 --> 36:56.520]  Walker.
[36:56.520 --> 36:57.520]  W-A-K-E-R.
[36:57.520 --> 37:04.520]  Not Walker, but Walker.
[37:04.520 --> 37:05.520]  W-A-K-E-R.
[37:05.520 --> 37:06.520]  Walker.
[37:06.520 --> 37:07.520]  Yeah.
[37:07.520 --> 37:08.520]  I don't know.
[37:08.520 --> 37:09.520]  Maybe I said it's funny.
[37:09.520 --> 37:10.520]  No.
[37:10.520 --> 37:11.520]  You must say Walker.
[37:11.520 --> 37:12.520]  W-A-L-K.
[37:12.520 --> 37:13.520]  Okay.
[37:13.520 --> 37:14.520]  Walker.
[37:14.520 --> 37:15.520]  Okay.
[37:15.520 --> 37:16.520]  Right now.
[37:16.520 --> 37:17.520]  Chancellor Cuthbert.
[37:17.520 --> 37:18.520]  Two other times.
[37:18.520 --> 37:19.520]  I'm so happy.
[37:19.520 --> 37:20.520]  All right.
[37:20.520 --> 37:34.520]  Now, because that charge of not wearing the seat belt properly was introduced, the defendant
[37:34.520 --> 37:40.080]  had complained that he didn't get a deposition when he requested it.
[37:40.080 --> 37:44.200]  And the cop said, well, I gave you deposition at the traffic scene.
[37:44.200 --> 37:50.360]  But something that we all overlooked, including me and the defendant, there was that second
[37:50.360 --> 37:53.960]  charge that they introduced at the last minute.
[37:53.960 --> 37:58.680]  And that was after about five minutes of the trial, he said, well, you weren't wearing
[37:58.680 --> 38:03.240]  your seat belt properly, which means you're wearing it, which blows the charge out of
[38:03.240 --> 38:05.600]  the water that's on the ticket.
[38:05.600 --> 38:12.360]  And now a second deposition was required by law because there was additional information
[38:12.360 --> 38:17.680]  that they sprung on the witness at the last minute and there was no deposition to cover
[38:17.680 --> 38:18.680]  it.
[38:18.680 --> 38:23.040]  And smart, if they knew that they were going to do that, they should have had a deposition
[38:23.040 --> 38:24.040]  to cover it.
[38:24.040 --> 38:29.760]  So now he's got a real hardcore reason why the deposition, they failed to give it to
[38:29.760 --> 38:34.200]  him because there was a second charge and it wasn't addressed in the deposition.
[38:34.200 --> 38:36.200]  Am I correct?
[38:36.200 --> 38:38.200]  You're correct.
[38:38.200 --> 38:40.400]  This constitutes surprise.
[38:40.400 --> 38:42.400]  Right.
[38:42.400 --> 38:50.920]  And that's called the right to know nature and cause, and it's a matter, am I right?
[38:50.920 --> 38:52.400]  Goes to due process.
[38:52.400 --> 38:53.400]  Yep.
[38:53.400 --> 38:59.000]  And they did not show or the nature and cause in a proper timely fashion, they sprung it
[38:59.000 --> 39:00.000]  on him at the last minute.
[39:00.000 --> 39:01.000]  Did I get that right?
[39:01.000 --> 39:03.000]  You got that right.
[39:03.000 --> 39:04.000]  Okay.
[39:04.000 --> 39:05.000]  Now, let's see.
[39:05.000 --> 39:09.080]  Now, I got my notes because there was a new charge not wearing it properly, no deposition
[39:09.080 --> 39:12.240]  to properly inform the defendant in a timely fashion.
[39:12.240 --> 39:19.160]  Now, can we have, let's see, there's more here, placed in an envelope, maybe a lobbyist
[39:19.160 --> 39:24.760]  say I don't handle the mail, people ran down the side, so this is just, I'm not going to
[39:24.760 --> 39:26.760]  be able to address everything tonight.
[39:26.760 --> 39:31.320]  This is just the tip of the iceberg, I think there's quite a bit more that they screwed
[39:31.320 --> 39:34.720]  up on big time, all right, federal laws.
[39:34.720 --> 39:37.240]  Now can he have the cop charge?
[39:37.240 --> 39:45.520]  Now who do we have charging the cop with crimes or misdemeanors, whatever they are, I realize
[39:45.520 --> 39:53.560]  that misdemeanor is crime, but who do we go to and what do we charge each person with?
[39:53.560 --> 39:56.840]  Because I want to do this baby to the max.
[39:56.840 --> 39:59.000]  I ran to the grand jury.
[39:59.000 --> 40:02.200]  Go to the grand jury.
[40:02.200 --> 40:07.480]  There's the judge with official misconduct for failing to properly apply the law to the
[40:07.480 --> 40:11.320]  facts, charge the officer with aggravated perjury.
[40:11.320 --> 40:18.120]  Now, we're going to do these separately or all together?
[40:18.120 --> 40:23.680]  Separately, always, every complaint, if I have 10 complaints against one person arising
[40:23.680 --> 40:28.440]  out of the same set of circumstances, I will write 10 complaints.
[40:28.440 --> 40:30.600]  Okay, yep, and I know what I'm going to do.
[40:30.600 --> 40:34.560]  We'll not stick them together because if you stick them together, they'll consider one
[40:34.560 --> 40:36.560]  and ignore the rest.
[40:36.560 --> 40:44.440]  Yes, yes, okay, now I maintain that this was a setup.
[40:44.440 --> 40:51.800]  Now don't forget, I'm not infallible, but I was a newsman for 40 years and news people
[40:51.800 --> 40:58.040]  like lawyers and like you have a tendency to be able to put things together very quickly
[40:58.040 --> 41:05.040]  and not just based on conjecture, but based on real, solid indications at all point in
[41:05.040 --> 41:07.040]  the same direction.
[41:07.040 --> 41:08.880]  The two of them were acting in collusion.
[41:08.880 --> 41:09.880]  How do I know that?
[41:09.880 --> 41:10.880]  Or in concert?
[41:10.880 --> 41:12.680]  And it was a conspiracy.
[41:12.680 --> 41:14.280]  Now that's what I was trying to say before.
[41:14.280 --> 41:17.720]  Do you call it a conspiracy in collusion in concert?
[41:17.720 --> 41:18.720]  What do you call that?
[41:18.720 --> 41:27.760]  Well, in this case, there's no evidence of conspiracy.
[41:27.760 --> 41:31.120]  There is evidence of collusion.
[41:31.120 --> 41:37.400]  Conspiracy is where you decide beforehand on an action and you agree between one another
[41:37.400 --> 41:41.480]  to perform the action.
[41:41.480 --> 41:50.840]  Collusion is where in the process, one works with the other and it doesn't require a prior
[41:50.840 --> 41:53.920]  agreement or a prior meeting of the minds.
[41:53.920 --> 41:54.920]  Okay.
[41:54.920 --> 42:03.200]  Well, I think it's conspiracy and the reason for that is my relatives with your help and
[42:03.200 --> 42:10.120]  my coaxing and the help that I gave him of what I know about the law, after all, I did
[42:10.120 --> 42:16.720]  have a judge thrown out of office a few, several years ago and I did get two people, myself
[42:16.720 --> 42:23.440]  and another person to get a dismissed traffic ticket twice, one for each person.
[42:23.440 --> 42:28.800]  So I do know what I'm doing, but not like you and I'm nowhere near you.
[42:28.800 --> 42:36.840]  But anyway, the point is the cop and the judge would have had to discuss this between the
[42:36.840 --> 42:37.840]  two of them.
[42:37.840 --> 42:38.840]  I had a chime.
[42:38.840 --> 42:40.520]  Now here's my proof.
[42:40.520 --> 42:45.920]  You blow holes if it can have holes blown in it.
[42:45.920 --> 42:54.120]  The cop, the three tickets that my relative got, one was unsafe backing, the other was
[42:54.120 --> 42:58.480]  crossing the center line and the cop said there was a yellow line and there was no yellow
[42:58.480 --> 43:06.480]  line just to throw that in and it was another steep belt charge.
[43:06.480 --> 43:11.960]  He got all three of them with your help and my help, he got them all three dismissed.
[43:11.960 --> 43:15.640]  Well, there was a pretty big buzz in that county.
[43:15.640 --> 43:26.240]  I am sure and he had two in one city, one in the next city over, a couple miles away.
[43:26.240 --> 43:33.080]  This fourth ticket is retaliation and I'm going to tell you how they set it up.
[43:33.080 --> 43:39.680]  The cop parked his car for surveillance, whatever you want to call it, he was doing traffic
[43:39.680 --> 43:42.640]  duty, per seat belt that day.
[43:42.640 --> 43:46.640]  My help convenience, he was checking seat belt.
[43:46.640 --> 43:54.680]  He happened, now he just happened to pick the same street my relative lives on and just
[43:54.680 --> 44:01.160]  around the corner by a couple of hundred feet where his other help.
[44:01.160 --> 44:04.720]  At Capital Corn and Bullion, our mission is to be your preferred shopping destination
[44:04.720 --> 44:09.120]  by delivering excellent customer service and outstanding value at an affordable price.
[44:09.120 --> 44:13.040]  We provide a wide assortment of favorite products featuring a great selection of high quality
[44:13.040 --> 44:14.600]  coins and precious metals.
[44:14.600 --> 44:18.400]  We cater to beginners in coin collecting as well as large transactions for investors.
[44:18.400 --> 44:23.200]  We believe in educating our customers with resources from top accredited metal stealers
[44:23.200 --> 44:24.200]  and journalists.
[44:24.200 --> 44:27.200]  If we don't have what you're looking for, we can find it.
[44:27.200 --> 44:31.440]  In addition, we carry popular young jevity products such as Beyond Tangy Tangerine and
[44:31.440 --> 44:32.440]  Pollen Birk.
[44:32.440 --> 44:37.280]  We also offer one-world way, Mountain House storeable foods, Birky Water products, ammunition
[44:37.280 --> 44:39.480]  at 10% above wholesale and more.
[44:39.480 --> 44:43.400]  We broker metals IRA accounts and we also accept big coins as payment.
[44:43.400 --> 44:46.440]  Call us at 512-646-6404.
[44:46.440 --> 44:51.400]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half mile south of Anderson.
[44:51.400 --> 44:54.520]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 2.
[44:54.520 --> 45:01.200]  Visit us at CapitalCoinandBullion.com or call 512-646-6404.
[45:01.200 --> 45:04.400]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:04.400 --> 45:11.160]  In your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course
[45:11.160 --> 45:14.960]  that will show you how, in 24 hours, you step by step.
[45:14.960 --> 45:18.960]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[45:18.960 --> 45:23.040]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[45:23.040 --> 45:28.000]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[45:28.000 --> 45:33.880]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:33.880 --> 45:38.880]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:38.880 --> 45:42.880]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:42.880 --> 45:49.880]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.880 --> 45:51.880]  prosa tactics, and much more.
[45:51.880 --> 46:14.880]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:14.880 --> 46:29.880]  I'm always, I must be careful what I'm wishing for.
[46:29.880 --> 46:34.880]  When I'm hungry, I like to know just what I'm wishing for.
[46:34.880 --> 46:40.880]  I ain't asking for much, I ain't trying to be no glutton.
[46:40.880 --> 46:46.880]  I'm just here making my living, pushing buttons.
[46:46.880 --> 46:52.880]  I give my message out to anyone in a shouting distance.
[46:52.880 --> 46:57.880]  I vote for bravery and against slavery, showing resistance.
[46:57.880 --> 47:02.880]  First I'm crawling, then I'm walking, then I start strutting.
[47:02.880 --> 47:16.880]  I'm just so glad to make my living, pushing buttons.
[47:16.880 --> 47:18.880]  Okay, we are back.
[47:18.880 --> 47:27.880]  Randy Carlson and John, you just ran off the cliff again right in front of Deborah.
[47:27.880 --> 47:29.880]  Now I'm in the doghouse.
[47:29.880 --> 47:31.880]  You ought to be ashamed of yourself.
[47:31.880 --> 47:38.880]  Tell Deborah that I'll do it again.
[47:38.880 --> 47:43.880]  The cop parked just conveniently on the same street he lives.
[47:43.880 --> 47:48.880]  He has two houses and he parked conveniently where they know,
[47:48.880 --> 47:52.880]  I know they know that he travels that all the time.
[47:52.880 --> 47:54.880]  You can't miss it.
[47:54.880 --> 47:59.880]  And he also has a house 250 feet around the corner.
[47:59.880 --> 48:01.880]  They parked at that spot.
[48:01.880 --> 48:03.880]  They're looking for him.
[48:03.880 --> 48:08.880]  Okay, here is the cop's problem.
[48:08.880 --> 48:14.880]  This could have all have been just serendipitous.
[48:14.880 --> 48:19.880]  They just happen to be there, but it doesn't matter.
[48:19.880 --> 48:27.880]  Conspiracy is a charge that does not have to be conclusively proven
[48:27.880 --> 48:31.880]  because conspiracy by its nature is hidden.
[48:31.880 --> 48:39.880]  Conspiracy is about the only charge that can be implied from the facts.
[48:39.880 --> 48:46.880]  So you make the accusation they're going to have to defend it.
[48:46.880 --> 48:50.880]  Oh no, we wouldn't do such a thing.
[48:50.880 --> 48:54.880]  We're the good guys.
[48:54.880 --> 48:59.880]  The same way they put you on the dime, you put them on the dime.
[48:59.880 --> 49:05.880]  I've got so many elements that any reasonable person would have to conclude it was conspiracy.
[49:05.880 --> 49:07.880]  Here we go.
[49:07.880 --> 49:11.880]  So where he parked, right in proximity of both houses.
[49:11.880 --> 49:20.880]  And then the cop automatically in the other three traffic stops,
[49:20.880 --> 49:24.880]  one in the same town, one in the next town over, same county.
[49:24.880 --> 49:31.880]  The first ticket, we got it dismissed because of a lack of a deposition.
[49:31.880 --> 49:35.880]  The second ticket, we got it dismissed because of a lack of a deposition.
[49:35.880 --> 49:41.880]  The third ticket, the cop didn't, in the next town over, the cop didn't even bother showing up.
[49:41.880 --> 49:47.880]  Now I realize the cop could have been busy with a real serious situation.
[49:47.880 --> 49:53.880]  But we think that he didn't show up because the first two were lack of a deposition.
[49:53.880 --> 49:58.880]  And the third one also was going to be for lack of a deposition.
[49:58.880 --> 50:01.880]  So he didn't even bother to show up.
[50:01.880 --> 50:08.880]  This cop, the first thing he did automatically, he didn't ask my relatives.
[50:08.880 --> 50:11.880]  He also didn't, my relative also didn't ask him.
[50:11.880 --> 50:14.880]  He just automatically gave him a deposition.
[50:14.880 --> 50:18.880]  That cop had to have talked to either the judge or the other police.
[50:18.880 --> 50:23.880]  I think he talked to the judge, but that remains to be seen.
[50:23.880 --> 50:27.880]  Now there's more, and I'm going to hurry up now.
[50:27.880 --> 50:32.880]  Oh, by the way, the cop admitted during the trial when he said my relative had black hair,
[50:32.880 --> 50:38.880]  my relative who was sitting six and a half or seven feet away from them, said I've got brown hair.
[50:38.880 --> 50:43.880]  And the cop said, oh, well, I need better eyesight.
[50:43.880 --> 50:49.880]  Okay, I remember that one, but that's not necessarily relevant at this point.
[50:49.880 --> 50:51.880]  But that's cute, isn't it?
[50:51.880 --> 50:53.880]  I mean, you want to talk about stupid?
[50:53.880 --> 50:56.880]  You know, I've said stupid things.
[50:56.880 --> 50:57.880]  I always say stupid things.
[50:57.880 --> 51:00.880]  I'm good at stupid, but not in a courtroom.
[51:00.880 --> 51:06.880]  Anyway, you could see by the cop's demeanor, he was extremely nervous.
[51:06.880 --> 51:08.880]  And I know why he was nervous.
[51:08.880 --> 51:13.880]  Anyway, so let's see.
[51:13.880 --> 51:21.880]  So the cop automatically gave him a deposition because they know that that's how he got out of the first three.
[51:21.880 --> 51:22.880]  Actually, the first two.
[51:22.880 --> 51:25.880]  The third one, the cop didn't even show up.
[51:25.880 --> 51:27.880]  But that could be near here and there.
[51:27.880 --> 51:28.880]  Okay, you're repeating yourself.
[51:28.880 --> 51:30.880]  Let's move on.
[51:30.880 --> 51:32.880]  Okay, nobody has to give him deposition.
[51:32.880 --> 51:33.880]  I'm requested by the cop.
[51:33.880 --> 51:35.880]  The cop admitted during the trial he needs better eyesight.
[51:35.880 --> 51:37.880]  Okay, that's pretty much it for now.
[51:37.880 --> 51:39.880]  I don't want to take up any more time.
[51:39.880 --> 51:41.880]  So go to the grand jury.
[51:41.880 --> 51:44.880]  Is there anybody else we should go to in the meantime?
[51:44.880 --> 51:47.880]  Oh, and what are the charges we filed against the judge?
[51:47.880 --> 51:50.880]  It's the same charge repeatedly with all these different things.
[51:50.880 --> 51:52.880]  He failed to apply the law.
[51:52.880 --> 51:56.880]  Yeah, the abuse of discretion, official misconduct.
[51:56.880 --> 52:03.880]  Okay, and then so everything the cop did and he allowed it, that's as many charges of official misconduct.
[52:03.880 --> 52:05.880]  Let me correct that.
[52:05.880 --> 52:08.880]  Official misconduct by abuse of discretion.
[52:08.880 --> 52:16.880]  The abuse of discretion amounts to official misconduct or official oppression if you have it.
[52:16.880 --> 52:20.880]  Most states, Texas has official oppression.
[52:20.880 --> 52:25.880]  They make distinction between official misconduct and official oppression.
[52:25.880 --> 52:30.880]  Most states call both of them official misconduct.
[52:30.880 --> 52:35.880]  Official misconduct and because he failed to apply the law to the facts of the case.
[52:35.880 --> 52:37.880]  Yes.
[52:37.880 --> 52:43.880]  Okay, and so that charge that many times that the cop did what he did and the judge allowed it.
[52:43.880 --> 52:45.880]  Yes.
[52:45.880 --> 52:51.880]  Okay, is there anything else besides the dirty bow tie that we could add to it because I really want to get these guys.
[52:51.880 --> 53:04.880]  There probably is, but you don't want to stack on a bunch of charges that are too nebulous because they're likely, if he gets to a grand jury, they'll likely throw them all out.
[53:04.880 --> 53:10.880]  If you better to do one or two that you got them really well on.
[53:10.880 --> 53:11.880]  Yeah.
[53:11.880 --> 53:14.880]  Then do a bunch of them that are iffy.
[53:14.880 --> 53:17.880]  Yeah, they're frivolous.
[53:17.880 --> 53:21.880]  Okay, anybody else that would go, Department of Justice, listen to this.
[53:21.880 --> 53:28.880]  This is what I looked up to Department of Justice and this is what they had to say.
[53:28.880 --> 53:36.880]  The vast majority of law enforcement officers perform their very difficult jobs with respect for their communities and in compliance with the law.
[53:36.880 --> 53:41.880]  Even so, there are incidents in which this is not the case.
[53:41.880 --> 54:01.880]  Well, after 40 years of being in news, I would say 50% of the time the cops are dirty, at least this document outlines the laws enforced by the US Department of Justice that address police misconduct and explain how you can file a complaint with the DOJ if you believe your rights have been violated.
[54:01.880 --> 54:03.880]  Should we do that?
[54:03.880 --> 54:05.880]  Absolutely.
[54:05.880 --> 54:09.880]  Okay, so what do we do the same basic thing that we do with grand jury?
[54:09.880 --> 54:12.880]  We write it off the same way for the DOJ?
[54:12.880 --> 54:14.880]  Yeah, get it to the DOJ.
[54:14.880 --> 54:16.880]  That'll sting them.
[54:16.880 --> 54:20.880]  The DOJ is not going to do anything, but it just puts a mark on their chart.
[54:20.880 --> 54:21.880]  Right.
[54:21.880 --> 54:28.880]  I know the DOJ, it's my understanding that the FBI has to do something first and then the DOJ picks up on it.
[54:28.880 --> 54:29.880]  Yes.
[54:29.880 --> 54:36.880]  But you send it to the DOJ, if it looks ugly enough, they'll send it to the FBI.
[54:36.880 --> 54:41.880]  But in either case, it puts a mark on their chart that goes in their history.
[54:41.880 --> 54:54.880]  Now, supposing I mentioned that I had the benefit of news, this county has been in the spotlight several times over the past 40 years, and it was pretty serious.
[54:54.880 --> 54:58.880]  Around 19, I think it was about 1980.
[54:58.880 --> 55:05.880]  I don't have the UPI story or the AP story in front of me, and I don't have the year.
[55:05.880 --> 55:07.880]  Very quickly, we're running out of time.
[55:07.880 --> 55:09.880]  Okay, I can tell you the case.
[55:09.880 --> 55:24.880]  This county was at the top of the list for investigation, a major statewide investigation, and the story was datelined Albany, New York, so this came out of Albany, for collusion between the state police and the judges.
[55:24.880 --> 55:27.880]  And this county was at the top of the list.
[55:27.880 --> 55:38.880]  Should I mention that with the history and then what happened, they stole tires and they made a newspaper, the newspapers, around 82, 85?
[55:38.880 --> 55:43.880]  Mention that as the county is engaged in a culture of corruption.
[55:43.880 --> 55:46.880]  Okay, engaged in a culture of corruption.
[55:46.880 --> 55:47.880]  I'm going to put that in.
[55:47.880 --> 55:50.880]  I'm going to go back and get those news stories.
[55:50.880 --> 55:53.880]  And no better than the newsman to tell you that.
[55:53.880 --> 55:57.880]  So anyway, okay, Randy, I want to thank you very kindly.
[55:57.880 --> 56:12.880]  Oh, there is a judge and they refer to her in a very unnice way in the newspapers, magazines, and she's still a judge.
[56:12.880 --> 56:15.880]  And she violated somebody's rights.
[56:15.880 --> 56:16.880]  Here's what she did.
[56:16.880 --> 56:25.880]  Any paperwork that the homeowner could prove they owned the house free and clear, she would not let them enter that into evidence.
[56:25.880 --> 56:26.880]  That's number one.
[56:26.880 --> 56:33.880]  Number two, and we'll just go with number two, one and two.
[56:33.880 --> 56:45.880]  She denied a jury trial about four or five times during the course of, I guess it was a hearing that they were going, I don't know what you call it, the technical stuff.
[56:45.880 --> 56:46.880]  I'm medical.
[56:46.880 --> 56:48.880]  I'm not legal.
[56:48.880 --> 56:53.880]  The, she, come on, come on, move along.
[56:53.880 --> 56:54.880]  We're running out of time here.
[56:54.880 --> 56:56.880]  Where are you going with this?
[56:56.880 --> 56:57.880]  Okay.
[56:57.880 --> 56:58.880]  She was an Audi judge.
[56:58.880 --> 57:00.880]  She was a bad judge.
[57:00.880 --> 57:07.880]  Who do we complain to because she denied jury trial five or four or five times.
[57:07.880 --> 57:10.880]  And in foreclosure, you have the right to a jury trial.
[57:10.880 --> 57:11.880]  Am I right?
[57:11.880 --> 57:16.880]  File criminal charges. I'm not sure I think so, but you're in New York.
[57:16.880 --> 57:20.880]  It depends on the state file criminally against her with a grand jury.
[57:20.880 --> 57:23.880]  New York, New York have a pretty decent grand jury.
[57:23.880 --> 57:24.880]  Okay.
[57:24.880 --> 57:26.880]  How about Chicago?
[57:26.880 --> 57:27.880]  Chicago.
[57:27.880 --> 57:29.880]  Arm pit of the nation.
[57:29.880 --> 57:30.880]  Huh?
[57:30.880 --> 57:32.880]  Arm pit of the nation.
[57:32.880 --> 57:33.880]  Yes, I know.
[57:33.880 --> 57:35.880]  It's extremely corrupt there.
[57:35.880 --> 57:38.880]  So any suggestions about?
[57:38.880 --> 57:41.880]  Okay, look, what about Chicago?
[57:41.880 --> 57:43.880]  We're running out of time here.
[57:43.880 --> 57:44.880]  Okay.
[57:44.880 --> 57:45.880]  There's the foreclosure.
[57:45.880 --> 57:46.880]  It's unjust.
[57:46.880 --> 57:49.880]  The homeowners can prove they paid for the.
[57:49.880 --> 57:50.880]  Okay.
[57:50.880 --> 57:51.880]  No, no, we can't do this.
[57:51.880 --> 57:53.880]  Let's not go through one case after another after another.
[57:53.880 --> 57:55.880]  You know, I can't do this.
[57:55.880 --> 57:56.880]  It's too long.
[57:56.880 --> 57:57.880]  Well, no, no, no.
[57:57.880 --> 57:58.880]  That's all I need.
[57:58.880 --> 57:59.880]  That's all I need.
[57:59.880 --> 58:00.880]  I'm telling you everything I need.
[58:00.880 --> 58:01.880]  And that's it.
[58:01.880 --> 58:07.880]  Illinois is a, what do you call it, a judicial state.
[58:07.880 --> 58:08.880]  They need to trust.
[58:08.880 --> 58:10.880]  They have to sue to foreclose.
[58:10.880 --> 58:11.880]  Right.
[58:11.880 --> 58:12.880]  Okay.
[58:12.880 --> 58:21.880]  So if the, if the judge denied a jury trial five times and the judge refused to let them.
[58:21.880 --> 58:23.880]  File criminally against the judge.
[58:23.880 --> 58:26.880]  So are those both real charges?
[58:26.880 --> 58:29.880]  Did I, did I say there was real charges there from the sound of it?
[58:29.880 --> 58:34.880]  Yes, the judge, if you had a right to a jury trial and the judge denied it, that's a crime.
[58:34.880 --> 58:35.880]  Okay.
[58:35.880 --> 58:39.880]  And if you had paperwork that proved you own the house and the judge wouldn't let you enter
[58:39.880 --> 58:40.880]  it, it's evident.
[58:40.880 --> 58:41.880]  That's a crime too, isn't it?
[58:41.880 --> 58:43.880]  That's abuse of discretion.
[58:43.880 --> 58:45.880]  That's not a direct crime.
[58:45.880 --> 58:46.880]  Hmm.
[58:46.880 --> 58:47.880]  Okay.
[58:47.880 --> 59:12.880]  Okay.
[59:12.880 --> 59:38.880]  Okay.
[59:38.880 --> 59:45.880]  Okay.
[01:00:08.880 --> 01:00:18.880]  Okay.
[01:00:18.880 --> 01:00:45.880]  Okay.
[01:00:45.880 --> 01:01:07.880]  Okay.
[01:01:07.880 --> 01:01:14.240]  In recent years, several Texas-based organizations filed a lawsuit today, requesting that a federal
[01:01:14.240 --> 01:01:18.960]  court stop the state from flagging about 95,000 people as potentially illegally registered
[01:01:18.960 --> 01:01:19.960]  to vote.
[01:01:19.960 --> 01:01:24.640]  The list was compiled after an 11-month-long investigation by the Office of the Texas Secretary
[01:01:24.640 --> 01:01:29.560]  of State and the Texas Department of Public Safety, which sought to identify non-U.S.
[01:01:29.560 --> 01:01:33.360]  citizens who were registered to vote when obtaining a garbage license.
[01:01:33.360 --> 01:01:37.120]  Over half of the 95,000 did indeed vote, it seems.
[01:01:37.120 --> 01:01:41.080]  However, further controversy was raised when it became clear that some of the names were
[01:01:41.080 --> 01:01:45.240]  not in fact belonging to those who were non-citizens and registered.
[01:01:45.240 --> 01:01:49.440]  Apparently around 25 percent of all Latino immigrants become naturalized, gaining the
[01:01:49.440 --> 01:01:50.840]  right to vote.
[01:01:50.840 --> 01:01:55.240]  Registered voters who receive letters querying their citizenship have 30 days to respond
[01:01:55.240 --> 01:01:57.040]  with proof of eligibility.
[01:01:57.040 --> 01:02:01.240]  Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and David Whitley, the Texas Secretary of State, have
[01:02:01.240 --> 01:02:09.000]  yet to officially comment regarding this list and any updates pertaining to it.
[01:02:09.000 --> 01:02:13.680]  A Texas man of only 24 years old, William Brown, died from a severed artery in his
[01:02:13.680 --> 01:02:16.920]  neck after a vape pen exploded while he was using it.
[01:02:16.920 --> 01:02:20.640]  It apparently happened in the parking lot of the vape shop where he got it.
[01:02:20.640 --> 01:02:24.240]  An X-ray revealed that a piece of metal was embedded in his brainstem.
[01:02:24.240 --> 01:02:30.440]  The vape store's smoke and vape DZ has refused to comment.
[01:02:30.440 --> 01:02:35.200]  Constitution anchorwoman Kristin Diaz interviewed Aislin Campbell, the executive director of
[01:02:35.200 --> 01:02:40.160]  Grow Local, South Texas, concerning the upcoming Texas Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association
[01:02:40.160 --> 01:02:44.680]  conference, which will be taking place at the Corpus Christi Omni Hotel from February
[01:02:44.680 --> 01:02:47.440]  14th to 16th, 6 to 9 p.m.
[01:02:47.440 --> 01:02:50.760]  You can find the interview at kiitv.com.
[01:02:50.760 --> 01:03:00.760]  This was Rick Rody with your lowdown for February 6th, 2019.
[01:03:20.760 --> 01:03:39.280]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton with our radio, and we're going to Tina in California.
[01:03:39.280 --> 01:03:40.280]  Hello, Tina.
[01:03:40.280 --> 01:03:41.280]  Hello, Randy.
[01:03:41.280 --> 01:03:42.280]  How are you?
[01:03:42.280 --> 01:03:43.280]  Good.
[01:03:43.280 --> 01:03:44.280]  What do you have for us today?
[01:03:44.280 --> 01:03:52.200]  Well, I have a couple of questions based on some of your very interesting calls tonight.
[01:03:52.200 --> 01:03:59.280]  I wasn't planning to call in, but you made a couple of interesting comments, and I have
[01:03:59.280 --> 01:04:00.280]  a question on them.
[01:04:00.280 --> 01:04:11.240]  On one of the calls you talked about, the gentleman filing conspiracy charges, and on
[01:04:11.240 --> 01:04:20.520]  the other you talked about retaliation, and I was wondering if I could use either of those
[01:04:20.520 --> 01:04:29.800]  against this nonprofit group that retaliated against me because I had a different opinion
[01:04:29.800 --> 01:04:39.520]  about the sale of a bank than they did, and this CEO of this nonprofit then got a position
[01:04:39.520 --> 01:04:48.960]  on the advisory board of two banks, plus she got a position under the former CEO of that
[01:04:48.960 --> 01:04:55.560]  bank who is now the Treasury Secretary, and she has a four-year well-paid position under
[01:04:55.560 --> 01:05:04.000]  that, and this retaliation happened seven days after I testified at a Federal Reserve
[01:05:04.000 --> 01:05:11.480]  hearing opposite to what she and her group wanted, and prior to that they had engaged
[01:05:11.480 --> 01:05:18.560]  in helping me with getting my loan modified, saying they had a direct line to this bank.
[01:05:18.560 --> 01:05:27.680]  Well, yes, of course they did, but because I testified opposite to what she had, I was
[01:05:27.680 --> 01:05:33.600]  one of the only people that got thrown under the bus and said, no, we can't help you anymore.
[01:05:33.600 --> 01:05:38.200]  While I'm visiting my mom in England, I thought I would try to find someone who could write
[01:05:38.200 --> 01:05:46.000]  a really good complaint about this so I could file it right before I come back and go after
[01:05:46.000 --> 01:05:47.000]  them.
[01:05:47.000 --> 01:05:51.160]  Would conspiracy and retaliation work in this case?
[01:05:51.160 --> 01:05:58.640]  Well, okay, with these individuals that had a duty to perform, you know, you're saying
[01:05:58.640 --> 01:06:06.160]  they decided not to do something, did they have a duty to do that?
[01:06:06.160 --> 01:06:10.020]  You're saying that they decided not to take an action because they didn't like something
[01:06:10.020 --> 01:06:11.520]  that you did.
[01:06:11.520 --> 01:06:12.520]  Well...
[01:06:12.520 --> 01:06:15.320]  They had started to help me.
[01:06:15.320 --> 01:06:17.320]  They had asked me to...
[01:06:17.320 --> 01:06:22.720]  They had stopped the first Christmas Eve sale that was scheduled.
[01:06:22.720 --> 01:06:28.560]  They had invited me to present all my papers and sign documents allowing them to welcome
[01:06:28.560 --> 01:06:29.560]  my case.
[01:06:29.560 --> 01:06:36.960]  They had told me that the CEO had this direct line to Joseph Otting of Warmless Bank.
[01:06:36.960 --> 01:06:45.840]  And when I met them at this hearing, I didn't know that they were going to testify differently
[01:06:45.840 --> 01:06:46.840]  to what I was.
[01:06:46.840 --> 01:06:51.960]  I had been invited by another group just to tell my story.
[01:06:51.960 --> 01:06:56.320]  And when I met them, I thanked the CEO and said, I really appreciate what you did for
[01:06:56.320 --> 01:06:57.320]  me.
[01:06:57.320 --> 01:07:02.280]  I'm looking forward to working with you and getting this situation resolved.
[01:07:02.280 --> 01:07:04.840]  And she said, great, I'm pleased to meet you.
[01:07:04.840 --> 01:07:07.640]  Did you sign your papers?
[01:07:07.640 --> 01:07:09.000]  Did you get them into our office?
[01:07:09.000 --> 01:07:13.400]  And I said, yes, but I will doubly make sure I get them in tomorrow.
[01:07:13.400 --> 01:07:19.200]  Again, if you're missing anything, I will coordinate getting it in.
[01:07:19.200 --> 01:07:20.200]  Okay, great.
[01:07:20.200 --> 01:07:21.200]  Thank you.
[01:07:21.200 --> 01:07:23.040]  Nice to meet you.
[01:07:23.040 --> 01:07:30.400]  That was before the hearing went ahead and seven days later, I got this email from their
[01:07:30.400 --> 01:07:36.200]  council saying, oh, we can't help you anymore, Mr. you know, Mr. Otting, it's just far too
[01:07:36.200 --> 01:07:37.200]  good.
[01:07:37.200 --> 01:07:38.200]  But it wasn't close.
[01:07:38.200 --> 01:07:40.400]  Okay, I don't think you have standing.
[01:07:40.400 --> 01:07:46.840]  You're talking about something that they had a right, had a choice in whether or not
[01:07:46.840 --> 01:07:48.880]  they did this thing.
[01:07:48.880 --> 01:07:54.880]  It wasn't something they had a contractual or statutory duty to do.
[01:07:54.880 --> 01:08:00.520]  If there are a non-profit housing agency, don't think it was supposed to help people.
[01:08:00.520 --> 01:08:10.200]  I don't know that the non-profit doesn't bind them to do, it doesn't bind them.
[01:08:10.200 --> 01:08:15.400]  They don't have to do something for you if they want to, unless there's some specific
[01:08:15.400 --> 01:08:20.760]  contractual requirement.
[01:08:20.760 --> 01:08:23.280]  If they're getting federal funds, though, to help.
[01:08:23.280 --> 01:08:28.040]  That doesn't automatically force them to do whatever you want them to do.
[01:08:28.040 --> 01:08:31.760]  There has to be something specific.
[01:08:31.760 --> 01:08:32.760]  It can choose.
[01:08:32.760 --> 01:08:40.640]  It was just a duty that they were statutorily required to perform.
[01:08:40.640 --> 01:08:44.360]  I don't know how to figure that part out.
[01:08:44.360 --> 01:08:51.040]  Yeah, there would have had to be a statutory duty to help 9000 people, just not me.
[01:08:51.040 --> 01:08:55.320]  Otherwise, they can pretty well do business with who they want to and for the most part
[01:08:55.320 --> 01:09:01.760]  however they want to, unless the law says, if they're receiving some type of funds and
[01:09:01.760 --> 01:09:06.840]  based on receiving those funds, there are certain procedures they must follow and they
[01:09:06.840 --> 01:09:12.280]  don't follow those procedures, then you may have standing.
[01:09:12.280 --> 01:09:18.200]  But just because they're a non-profit doesn't mean they're bound to do any one thing or
[01:09:18.200 --> 01:09:19.200]  another.
[01:09:19.200 --> 01:09:23.720]  There has to be some statutory or contractual requirement.
[01:09:23.720 --> 01:09:30.600]  How do you find that caught out?
[01:09:30.600 --> 01:09:33.760]  Research their non-profit.
[01:09:33.760 --> 01:09:34.760]  Where do they get their money?
[01:09:34.760 --> 01:09:36.360]  Do they get any government money?
[01:09:36.360 --> 01:09:37.360]  Yes.
[01:09:37.360 --> 01:09:39.360]  What are their bylaws?
[01:09:39.360 --> 01:09:41.440]  What are their rules?
[01:09:41.440 --> 01:09:49.440]  And what contractual privity do you have with them that would bind their rules to you?
[01:09:49.440 --> 01:09:57.000]  That's tough trying to get to the bottom of that and get that information.
[01:09:57.000 --> 01:10:00.040]  I don't know if I would be allowed it under freedom of information.
[01:10:00.040 --> 01:10:04.440]  Yeah, you have to find something that compels them.
[01:10:04.440 --> 01:10:12.800]  Otherwise, they're within their discretion.
[01:10:12.800 --> 01:10:22.560]  So any organization that receives federal funds for helping anyone can decide, I don't
[01:10:22.560 --> 01:10:23.560]  want to help these people.
[01:10:23.560 --> 01:10:27.320]  I don't like these people and I like these people, I'll help them.
[01:10:27.320 --> 01:10:28.320]  Maybe.
[01:10:28.320 --> 01:10:37.840]  It depends on the nature of their funding and what they are required to do.
[01:10:37.840 --> 01:10:42.160]  You can't just assume that they have a specific duty.
[01:10:42.160 --> 01:10:46.680]  You have to be able to show what that duty is.
[01:10:46.680 --> 01:10:56.800]  And with every group, they're going to have a certain amount of discretion.
[01:10:56.800 --> 01:11:01.920]  And it sounds like you're within their discretion unless you can find something specific that
[01:11:01.920 --> 01:11:05.880]  commands them to act the way you want them to.
[01:11:05.880 --> 01:11:12.120]  Is it a conflict of interest or can it be?
[01:11:12.120 --> 01:11:13.120]  I don't know.
[01:11:13.120 --> 01:11:15.760]  You've got this entity here.
[01:11:15.760 --> 01:11:17.200]  I have no idea what it is.
[01:11:17.200 --> 01:11:19.760]  I don't know what its interest is.
[01:11:19.760 --> 01:11:26.040]  That's all going to be in contract and if they're receiving funding, it will be within
[01:11:26.040 --> 01:11:31.240]  the contract under which they get the funding and I have no idea what it says so I couldn't
[01:11:31.240 --> 01:11:33.920]  even guess.
[01:11:33.920 --> 01:11:43.840]  What about, you know, the fact that this entity, this CEO of this entity suddenly got a position
[01:11:43.840 --> 01:11:49.520]  on the advisory board of the various banks she's supposed to be helping people with and
[01:11:49.520 --> 01:11:58.440]  then also suddenly get that position under the form of CEO and now the Traderage Secretary.
[01:11:58.440 --> 01:12:05.760]  These sound like they're private entities doing private business with one another and
[01:12:05.760 --> 01:12:11.960]  I don't know that they have any specific duty to you.
[01:12:11.960 --> 01:12:21.880]  You would have to be able to show a specific either statutory or contractual duty.
[01:12:21.880 --> 01:12:27.040]  If I'm the CEO of a company and I'm dealing with someone and they do something that makes
[01:12:27.040 --> 01:12:34.960]  me uncomfortable or think that their behavior could lead to a problem for my company, I
[01:12:34.960 --> 01:12:42.560]  can choose not to do business with them.
[01:12:42.560 --> 01:12:48.600]  Even if I'm doing it capriciously and arbitrarily, you know, I run my own business and do it
[01:12:48.600 --> 01:12:55.280]  the way I want to and that may be the position that you're in.
[01:12:55.280 --> 01:12:56.280]  Okay.
[01:12:56.280 --> 01:13:02.320]  How do I, what's the way I can go about finding this out, what their duty is?
[01:13:02.320 --> 01:13:07.520]  Of course, you have to find out what federal funding they have and the conditions under
[01:13:07.520 --> 01:13:09.080]  which they get that funding.
[01:13:09.080 --> 01:13:12.640]  That will all be public record.
[01:13:12.640 --> 01:13:14.560]  And where do I get that public record?
[01:13:14.560 --> 01:13:15.560]  Do you know?
[01:13:15.560 --> 01:13:16.560]  I don't know.
[01:13:16.560 --> 01:13:17.560]  I don't know what the company is.
[01:13:17.560 --> 01:13:22.120]  I don't know where in the Fed they got that.
[01:13:22.120 --> 01:13:25.320]  Association of Asian Americans.
[01:13:25.320 --> 01:13:28.840]  Whatever commission they got it from, you go to them and make a request for them for
[01:13:28.840 --> 01:13:29.840]  the contracts.
[01:13:29.840 --> 01:13:32.840]  Okay.
[01:13:32.840 --> 01:13:39.160]  Well, I'll see if I can figure this out and get that information.
[01:13:39.160 --> 01:13:40.720]  That's all I have for this question.
[01:13:40.720 --> 01:13:41.720]  Okay.
[01:13:41.720 --> 01:13:42.720]  Great.
[01:13:42.720 --> 01:13:43.720]  Thank you, Tina.
[01:13:43.720 --> 01:13:44.720]  Very interesting.
[01:13:44.720 --> 01:13:45.720]  Yeah.
[01:13:45.720 --> 01:13:46.720]  Okay.
[01:13:46.720 --> 01:13:49.560]  Now we're going to go to Ken in New York.
[01:13:49.560 --> 01:13:50.560]  Hello, Ken.
[01:13:50.560 --> 01:13:51.560]  Hi, Randy.
[01:13:51.560 --> 01:13:57.480]  I'm not going to ask how you're doing because I know you're doing famously.
[01:13:57.480 --> 01:14:07.240]  I have a couple of questions about evidence and I want to tie it to the story you were
[01:14:07.240 --> 01:14:12.080]  telling at the beginning of the show.
[01:14:12.080 --> 01:14:19.760]  When you submit something as an exhibit into the record along with your case, like as part
[01:14:19.760 --> 01:14:25.720]  of your answer, is that the same thing as submitting evidence to the court?
[01:14:25.720 --> 01:14:33.800]  Yes, the opposing party has the option of objecting to the exhibit.
[01:14:33.800 --> 01:14:34.800]  Okay.
[01:14:34.800 --> 01:14:41.520]  Now, does it make it more difficult or less difficult to exhibit to it when the evidence
[01:14:41.520 --> 01:14:46.360]  is based on an official document that was made by the government?
[01:14:46.360 --> 01:14:50.480]  I'm not sure I understand that question.
[01:14:50.480 --> 01:14:52.200]  Does it make it more difficult?
[01:14:52.200 --> 01:14:53.200]  It should make it easier.
[01:14:53.200 --> 01:15:01.520]  If it's a government document, it should always be a matter of public record and something
[01:15:01.520 --> 01:15:07.400]  that is official, so it should be acceptable as evidence.
[01:15:07.400 --> 01:15:10.920]  That's what I was getting at.
[01:15:10.920 --> 01:15:18.160]  It could not be reasonably objected to in court.
[01:15:18.160 --> 01:15:25.440]  It could if the objection was relevance or foundation.
[01:15:25.440 --> 01:15:26.440]  Right.
[01:15:26.440 --> 01:15:27.440]  Ben?
[01:15:27.440 --> 01:15:37.840]  Your Honor, I have evidence that opposing counsel is fat.
[01:15:37.840 --> 01:15:39.840]  Objection relevance.
[01:15:39.840 --> 01:15:42.600]  Okay.
[01:15:42.600 --> 01:15:50.200]  In the death case that I had back in 2012, I was looking for evidence and I was told
[01:15:50.200 --> 01:15:57.160]  by the Chief Counsel of the Department of Health in New York State that I said, is this
[01:15:57.160 --> 01:16:03.320]  piece that I found, it was a PDF file, is this suitable as evidence, and he said, yes,
[01:16:03.320 --> 01:16:08.640]  of course, he said it's a government document, you know, it's a PDF file.
[01:16:08.640 --> 01:16:18.280]  When I did submit it, and, well, make a long story short, the case never went to court.
[01:16:18.280 --> 01:16:22.640]  I was threatened with a summary judgment and seven months later they offered stipulations
[01:16:22.640 --> 01:16:29.320]  to discontinue, so I guess it was relevant and they didn't want to contest it.
[01:16:29.320 --> 01:16:35.360]  Well, court is always kind of like poker.
[01:16:35.360 --> 01:16:41.240]  If you bring something that's absolutely damning, they're going to say, oh, that's nothing,
[01:16:41.240 --> 01:16:45.960]  we don't care about that, they're not going to say, oh my goodness, you're going to clobber
[01:16:45.960 --> 01:16:46.960]  me good.
[01:16:46.960 --> 01:16:47.960]  Right.
[01:16:47.960 --> 01:16:48.960]  All right.
[01:16:48.960 --> 01:16:49.960]  You're going to break.
[01:16:49.960 --> 01:16:50.960]  Okay.
[01:16:50.960 --> 01:16:51.960]  Hang on.
[01:16:51.960 --> 01:16:52.960]  We'll be right back.
[01:16:52.960 --> 01:17:04.960]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:17:04.960 --> 01:17:09.040]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mirris Proven Method.
[01:17:09.040 --> 01:17:13.320]  Michael Mirris has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[01:17:13.320 --> 01:17:14.320]  can win two.
[01:17:14.320 --> 01:17:19.200]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[01:17:19.200 --> 01:17:24.920]  civil rights statute, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[01:17:24.920 --> 01:17:29.560]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[01:17:29.560 --> 01:17:33.760]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:17:33.760 --> 01:17:38.880]  The Michael Mirris Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:17:38.880 --> 01:17:41.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:17:41.000 --> 01:17:46.560]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mirris banner
[01:17:46.560 --> 01:17:49.520]  or email Michael Mirris at yahoo.com.
[01:17:49.520 --> 01:17:58.520]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt
[01:17:58.520 --> 01:18:00.200]  collectors now.
[01:18:00.200 --> 01:18:01.200]  I love logos.
[01:18:01.200 --> 01:18:04.760]  To stop the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[01:18:04.760 --> 01:18:07.400]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back.
[01:18:07.400 --> 01:18:08.600]  I need my truth fake.
[01:18:08.600 --> 01:18:13.360]  I'd be lost without logos, and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[01:18:13.360 --> 01:18:17.040]  I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite, and I really don't
[01:18:17.040 --> 01:18:20.440]  have any money to give, because I spent it all on supplements.
[01:18:20.440 --> 01:18:21.960]  How can I help logos?
[01:18:21.960 --> 01:18:23.960]  Well, I'm glad you asked.
[01:18:23.960 --> 01:18:28.280]  Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos with ordering your supplies
[01:18:28.280 --> 01:18:29.280]  or holiday gifts.
[01:18:29.280 --> 01:18:31.480]  The first thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:31.480 --> 01:18:37.520]  Now, go to LogosRadioNetwork.com, tick on the Amazon logo and bookmark it.
[01:18:37.520 --> 01:18:43.480]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link, and logos get a few pesos.
[01:18:43.480 --> 01:18:44.480]  Do I pay extra?
[01:18:44.480 --> 01:18:45.480]  No.
[01:18:45.480 --> 01:18:47.120]  Do you have to do anything different when I order?
[01:18:47.120 --> 01:18:48.120]  No.
[01:18:48.120 --> 01:18:49.120]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:18:49.120 --> 01:18:50.120]  No.
[01:18:50.120 --> 01:18:51.120]  I mean, yes.
[01:18:51.120 --> 01:18:55.960]  Wow, giving without doing anything or spending any money, this is perfect.
[01:18:55.960 --> 01:18:56.960]  Thank you so much.
[01:18:56.960 --> 01:18:58.440]  We are welcome.
[01:18:58.440 --> 01:19:00.440]  Happy holidays, Logos.
[01:19:00.440 --> 01:19:06.440]  This is the Logos, Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:06.440 --> 01:19:15.440]  Oh, come on.
[01:19:15.440 --> 01:19:32.560]  Okay, we are back, Randy Kelton from Rue de la Radio on this Friday, the 12th day of
[01:19:32.560 --> 01:19:37.960]  April, 2019, and we're talking to Ken in New York.
[01:19:37.960 --> 01:19:39.960]  Okay, go ahead, Ken.
[01:19:39.960 --> 01:19:45.760]  Did I save us from sliding down the road of station break traditions?
[01:19:45.760 --> 01:19:52.400]  Yes, you weren't like that John that ran me off to cliff.
[01:19:52.400 --> 01:19:55.240]  You saved my hide.
[01:19:55.240 --> 01:19:56.240]  Thank you.
[01:19:56.240 --> 01:20:03.680]  Okay, how I'd like to tie that to the conversation that you started, or rather the story you
[01:20:03.680 --> 01:20:10.840]  were telling in the beginning of the show, you were trying to convince the judge, if
[01:20:10.840 --> 01:20:18.640]  I understood correctly, the evils of the prison system.
[01:20:18.640 --> 01:20:24.440]  And do you think it would be helpful if you were to get, for example, a comprehensive
[01:20:24.440 --> 01:20:31.720]  annual financial report better known as the CAFR that would show that his pension and
[01:20:31.720 --> 01:20:37.440]  all of his other buddies are invested in the very prison system that they're railroading
[01:20:37.440 --> 01:20:38.440]  people into?
[01:20:38.440 --> 01:20:43.800]  Do you think that would be good or do you think that would be a little too harsh?
[01:20:43.800 --> 01:20:50.280]  I think that would put them on the defensive.
[01:20:50.280 --> 01:21:02.320]  And the impression I got from this judge is that he really wanted to do the right thing.
[01:21:02.320 --> 01:21:07.640]  And he felt trapped inside the system.
[01:21:07.640 --> 01:21:12.840]  They felt he had a duty to do things the way things were done.
[01:21:12.840 --> 01:21:19.160]  And I come across this, I have a friend who was the Justice of the Peace for a long time.
[01:21:19.160 --> 01:21:24.120]  He had been a captain on the Sheriff's Department, the president of the school board, and in
[01:21:24.120 --> 01:21:29.560]  every one of those positions, I had worked him over.
[01:21:29.560 --> 01:21:35.320]  And when he was Justice of the Peace, I went to him and took him chapter and verse and
[01:21:35.320 --> 01:21:40.480]  showed him, this is what the law commands.
[01:21:40.480 --> 01:21:46.400]  And this is what you're doing based on what the statutes say and what you're doing.
[01:21:46.400 --> 01:21:53.440]  On any arrest, I've got 19 criminal charges against all the people involved.
[01:21:53.440 --> 01:21:59.760]  And he said, Mr. Kelton, are you telling me that everything I've been doing for the
[01:21:59.760 --> 01:22:03.080]  last 20 years of law enforcement is wrong?
[01:22:03.080 --> 01:22:07.920]  That everything, everybody in the state is doing wrong and you're right?
[01:22:07.920 --> 01:22:10.520]  Don't ask me, Mark.
[01:22:10.520 --> 01:22:12.160]  I didn't write the code.
[01:22:12.160 --> 01:22:15.240]  I just read it.
[01:22:15.240 --> 01:22:17.400]  Now he was genuine.
[01:22:17.400 --> 01:22:23.440]  He really wanted to do the right thing and I've said on the show that it is my opinion
[01:22:23.440 --> 01:22:31.760]  that Mark Autry would do what he thinks was right if it heralypped the pope.
[01:22:31.760 --> 01:22:38.880]  And he said to me, are you really saying that you're right and everybody else is wrong?
[01:22:38.880 --> 01:22:41.400]  Here's the code, Mark.
[01:22:41.400 --> 01:22:42.400]  I didn't write it.
[01:22:42.400 --> 01:22:44.000]  There it is.
[01:22:44.000 --> 01:22:51.920]  He just could not accept that I hadn't missed something.
[01:22:51.920 --> 01:22:55.280]  He couldn't accept that everybody could be doing it wrong.
[01:22:55.280 --> 01:23:00.000]  Just wasn't something he could wrap his head around.
[01:23:00.000 --> 01:23:05.840]  So like this judge, I set the code out in front of him.
[01:23:05.840 --> 01:23:10.360]  This is absolute command.
[01:23:10.360 --> 01:23:18.080]  Everyone are forbidden to imprison a person without a preliminary hearing.
[01:23:18.080 --> 01:23:21.680]  The codes were in front of him, but this is the way they've always been doing it.
[01:23:21.680 --> 01:23:27.120]  If this is the way they've always been doing it and what you're saying is true, somebody
[01:23:27.120 --> 01:23:28.880]  would have brought this up already.
[01:23:28.880 --> 01:23:31.840]  This would have been fixed.
[01:23:31.840 --> 01:23:37.080]  I can trust all of these officials to do the right thing.
[01:23:37.080 --> 01:23:41.160]  I'm here to do the right thing and I'm sure the rest of these people are here to do the
[01:23:41.160 --> 01:23:42.480]  right thing.
[01:23:42.480 --> 01:23:48.080]  So when everybody's trying to do the right thing, I trust them to do it right.
[01:23:48.080 --> 01:23:51.200]  And then somebody comes along and says, it's all wrong.
[01:23:51.200 --> 01:23:54.160]  He just couldn't wrap his head around it.
[01:23:54.160 --> 01:24:00.680]  This judge here will have a hard time wrapping his head around the fact that he, being learned
[01:24:00.680 --> 01:24:09.200]  counsel, a lawyer, he's been in practice all this time, he's worked with these procedures.
[01:24:09.200 --> 01:24:15.840]  And then some chump, nobody comes along and tells him everything you've been doing all
[01:24:15.840 --> 01:24:24.560]  these years is wrong, it's hard to shift that gear.
[01:24:24.560 --> 01:24:30.200]  And we can get up on an emotional high horse and decide what they should do and ought to
[01:24:30.200 --> 01:24:31.200]  do and all that.
[01:24:31.200 --> 01:24:36.600]  But that doesn't help us to get to our outcome.
[01:24:36.600 --> 01:24:47.880]  I needed to be able to demonstrate to this judge in a way that wasn't challenging or
[01:24:47.880 --> 01:24:57.680]  that wasn't condemning, in a way that he could take an honest look at it.
[01:24:57.680 --> 01:25:08.760]  And I could tell by the way he was responding to me that what I was saying was resonating.
[01:25:08.760 --> 01:25:12.080]  He recognized something in what I was saying.
[01:25:12.080 --> 01:25:24.040]  So I was careful to try to start him down a road of legal logic without pushing too hard.
[01:25:24.040 --> 01:25:29.800]  So what I'm suggesting might be more suitable for a town council or somebody, really.
[01:25:29.800 --> 01:25:32.600]  They know what they're doing and they just don't care.
[01:25:32.600 --> 01:25:36.960]  Yeah, those are the ones I would love to slam them.
[01:25:36.960 --> 01:25:42.600]  This captain I talked about, he knew what he was doing was wrong.
[01:25:42.600 --> 01:25:47.280]  He knew it was improper and so he was fun.
[01:25:47.280 --> 01:25:53.080]  Technically I enjoyed playing him like a fiddle, cheap fiddle.
[01:25:53.080 --> 01:25:55.560]  He was easy, but he deserved it.
[01:25:55.560 --> 01:25:58.760]  He was acting out.
[01:25:58.760 --> 01:26:02.760]  And he needed someone to draw that out and then sting him with it and that's exactly
[01:26:02.760 --> 01:26:04.080]  what I did.
[01:26:04.080 --> 01:26:07.120]  The judge, he was not doing that at all.
[01:26:07.120 --> 01:26:13.760]  He was serious and he was mindful about what he was doing and he cared about doing the
[01:26:13.760 --> 01:26:14.760]  right thing.
[01:26:14.760 --> 01:26:20.400]  Those guys, you don't want to step in the middle of them because he's doing things
[01:26:20.400 --> 01:26:24.040]  the way everybody's always done them.
[01:26:24.040 --> 01:26:29.680]  Best thing I could do to him is giving some information and step back out of the way and
[01:26:29.680 --> 01:26:32.080]  let him make his own connections.
[01:26:32.080 --> 01:26:39.480]  If I can find a string of judges leading up to the higher courts in Tennessee, I might
[01:26:39.480 --> 01:26:45.840]  be able to get Tennessee at least as an experiment in an accounting or two to adopt this questionnaire
[01:26:45.840 --> 01:26:49.440]  just to see how it works.
[01:26:49.440 --> 01:26:56.000]  And if it does give a beneficial result, take that to the rest of the state.
[01:26:56.000 --> 01:27:03.200]  Get this thing launched and I won't tell him what the end result would be.
[01:27:03.200 --> 01:27:06.440]  They were eliminating the professional lawyer and getting lawyer's pay us to do it.
[01:27:06.440 --> 01:27:07.440]  We don't want to do that.
[01:27:07.440 --> 01:27:12.120]  Actually I told him that kind of ingest.
[01:27:12.120 --> 01:27:16.040]  He asked me what is it you're trying to accomplish and I told him I got this program where we're
[01:27:16.040 --> 01:27:22.640]  eliminating the professional lawyer and getting lawyer's pay us to do it.
[01:27:22.640 --> 01:27:32.880]  He took that, he looked at me like, good luck, he didn't really believe it, but we really
[01:27:32.880 --> 01:27:33.880]  are.
[01:27:33.880 --> 01:27:39.120]  And down the road he'll probably remember that when this starts to come about.
[01:27:39.120 --> 01:27:44.240]  But here I was trying to be careful with this guy, but then again he was being equally careful
[01:27:44.240 --> 01:27:48.920]  with me.
[01:27:48.920 --> 01:27:49.920]  That was a very good sign.
[01:27:49.920 --> 01:27:53.800]  He treated me with absolute respect.
[01:27:53.800 --> 01:27:58.520]  An extremely rare occurrence as far as the judge is concerned.
[01:27:58.520 --> 01:27:59.680]  Absolutely.
[01:27:59.680 --> 01:28:03.960]  And he absolutely earned my respect in return.
[01:28:03.960 --> 01:28:06.120]  He was a district court judge?
[01:28:06.120 --> 01:28:10.880]  No, he was like a county court judge.
[01:28:10.880 --> 01:28:16.000]  Here we have the general sessions and circuit.
[01:28:16.000 --> 01:28:24.480]  So the general sessions handles misdemeanors and they've eliminated justices of the peace
[01:28:24.480 --> 01:28:28.040]  and now the general sessions court handles that.
[01:28:28.040 --> 01:28:34.800]  But if in order to do the preliminary hearings they can appoint special commissioners for
[01:28:34.800 --> 01:28:36.400]  that specific purpose.
[01:28:36.400 --> 01:28:41.920]  And it's not a bad idea because you've got these commissioners, this is all they do and
[01:28:41.920 --> 01:28:47.000]  I've talked to a few of them and they really take what they're doing serious.
[01:28:47.000 --> 01:28:58.040]  So it's not a bad practice, it's just that they're not trained properly.
[01:28:58.040 --> 01:29:03.920]  They're trained to do it the way it's done, instead of doing it the way the law commands
[01:29:03.920 --> 01:29:08.440]  them to and trying to get this sorted out.
[01:29:08.440 --> 01:29:14.640]  The best strategy I could take is craft what I'm doing based on how the law is written.
[01:29:14.640 --> 01:29:18.800]  That would be the easiest way for me to leverage it in.
[01:29:18.800 --> 01:29:20.320]  Now it looks like it just may work.
[01:29:20.320 --> 01:29:22.040]  Okay, I'm about to go to break.
[01:29:22.040 --> 01:29:24.200]  Do you have anything else for me, Kent?
[01:29:24.200 --> 01:29:30.920]  Yeah, if you have five minutes I have something on the police chief that was put in prison.
[01:29:30.920 --> 01:29:34.360]  I told you about this a while ago, they just released them.
[01:29:34.360 --> 01:29:37.760]  Okay, I'll pick this up on the other side.
[01:29:37.760 --> 01:29:43.640]  This is Randy Kelton with our radio, we're getting close to the end and I've got Sonny
[01:29:43.640 --> 01:29:50.200]  and Shane, I will get to, let's see, I've got 30 minutes so we'll get to Sonny.
[01:29:50.200 --> 01:29:52.880]  Shane, I'm not sure how long Sonny's going to take.
[01:29:52.880 --> 01:29:55.240]  I'll try to get to both of you.
[01:29:55.240 --> 01:29:56.240]  We'll be right back.
[01:29:56.240 --> 01:29:57.240]  I can say.
[01:29:57.240 --> 01:30:03.560]  Cover up that tattoo.
[01:30:03.560 --> 01:30:08.720]  The FBI is building a database that analyzes body art as a way of identifying people.
[01:30:08.720 --> 01:30:14.000]  I'm Dr. Cameron Albrecht and I'll have details on the weird new program the feds call tattoo
[01:30:14.000 --> 01:30:16.760]  recognition in a moment.
[01:30:16.760 --> 01:30:18.480]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:18.480 --> 01:30:22.880]  When you give up data about yourself you'll never get it back again and once your privacy
[01:30:22.880 --> 01:30:27.080]  is gone you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:27.080 --> 01:30:32.040]  Never protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:32.040 --> 01:30:34.840]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:30:34.840 --> 01:30:40.440]  This message is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[01:30:40.440 --> 01:30:42.160]  Yahoo and Bing.
[01:30:42.160 --> 01:30:45.720]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:45.720 --> 01:30:52.000]  Iris patterns, email records, cell phone coordinates, the FBI is collecting data on us all.
[01:30:52.000 --> 01:30:57.680]  Now the feds want images of tattoos as a way of knowing who we are and what we might do.
[01:30:57.680 --> 01:31:03.480]  Tattoo recognition is part of the next generational identification program that identifies Americans
[01:31:03.480 --> 01:31:06.200]  beyond fingerprints and mug shots.
[01:31:06.200 --> 01:31:11.760]  Tattoo symbols are collected by the FBI's Biometric Center of Excellence, a one-stop
[01:31:11.760 --> 01:31:16.280]  shop of biometric data from voice patterns to footprints to hand geometry.
[01:31:16.280 --> 01:31:21.960]  Needless to say this is one more step towards the establishment of a total surveillance state.
[01:31:21.960 --> 01:31:24.120]  What's next, microchips for us all?
[01:31:24.120 --> 01:31:31.640]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrack for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:31.640 --> 01:31:37.040]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:31:37.040 --> 01:31:39.040]  The government says that fire brought it down.
[01:31:39.040 --> 01:31:44.080]  However, 1,500 architects and engineers have concluded it was a controlled demolition.
[01:31:44.080 --> 01:31:48.120]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives and thousands of my fellow
[01:31:48.120 --> 01:31:49.520]  force responders have died.
[01:31:49.520 --> 01:31:53.400]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a structural engineer, I'm a New York City correction officer,
[01:31:53.400 --> 01:31:58.040]  I'm an Air Force pilot, I'm a father who lost his son, we're Americans and we deserve
[01:31:58.040 --> 01:31:59.040]  the truth.
[01:31:59.040 --> 01:32:03.040]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:03.040 --> 01:32:06.040]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar.
[01:32:06.040 --> 01:32:09.600]  In today's America we live in a us against them society and if we the people are ever
[01:32:09.600 --> 01:32:13.800]  going to have a free society then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:32:13.800 --> 01:32:16.760]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to
[01:32:16.760 --> 01:32:21.000]  act in our own private capacity and most importantly the right to due process of law.
[01:32:21.000 --> 01:32:24.880]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[01:32:24.880 --> 01:32:26.760]  our rights through due process.
[01:32:26.760 --> 01:32:30.240]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio has put together the
[01:32:30.240 --> 01:32:34.000]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[01:32:34.000 --> 01:32:36.400]  is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[01:32:36.400 --> 01:32:40.360]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[01:32:40.360 --> 01:32:41.760]  ordering your copy today.
[01:32:41.760 --> 01:32:45.040]  By ordering now you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book The Texas Transportation Code,
[01:32:45.040 --> 01:32:49.480]  The Law vs. the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[01:32:49.480 --> 01:32:51.800]  documents and other useful resource material.
[01:32:51.800 --> 01:32:55.760]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:32:55.760 --> 01:33:25.600]  After your copy today and together we can have free society we all want to have to serve.
[01:33:25.600 --> 01:33:37.320]  Thank you.
[01:33:37.320 --> 01:34:01.320]  Okay, we are back. Randy Calton with our radio and we're talking to Ken in New York.
[01:34:01.320 --> 01:34:04.320]  Okay, Ken, you had another issue for us?
[01:34:04.320 --> 01:34:11.320]  Yeah, you know, I didn't realize the other people backed up. This will keep until next week. I'll send you the link to it.
[01:34:11.320 --> 01:34:15.320]  I think you'll get a laugh out of it.
[01:34:15.320 --> 01:34:19.320]  Okay, thank you, Ken.
[01:34:19.320 --> 01:34:27.320]  Then we will go on to Sonny in Georgia. Hello, Sonny. What do you have for us today?
[01:34:27.320 --> 01:34:42.320]  Good evening, Randy. Got a couple of questions. One, did you get my email with the judge's fiduciary duty information in it?
[01:34:42.320 --> 01:34:45.320]  Yes, I did.
[01:34:45.320 --> 01:34:48.320]  Hopefully that brightens your day.
[01:34:48.320 --> 01:34:58.320]  It definitely did brighten my day. I know some judges that I would tend to work over with that.
[01:34:58.320 --> 01:35:17.320]  Well, I was just so thrilled to find that and I just couldn't help but think of all the many times that the judge was hugging the car baby and we didn't even know it.
[01:35:17.320 --> 01:35:40.320]  Let's see. The court has a fiduciary duty to the people and that includes the accused McNally V us quoting us the whole sir fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit.
[01:35:40.320 --> 01:35:49.320]  And this is one of the meanings that fraud bears in the statute. See, that makes sense.
[01:35:49.320 --> 01:35:57.320]  Includes the deliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation.
[01:35:57.320 --> 01:36:15.320]  The public official is a fiduciary toward the public, including in the case of a judge, the litigants who appear before him, and if he deliberately conceals material information from them, he is guilty of fraud.
[01:36:15.320 --> 01:36:33.320]  Now, I need to read the rest of this case to get the context for this reference to deliberately conceals information from them.
[01:36:33.320 --> 01:36:45.320]  Okay, the court shall take judicial notice that a superior court judge is an elected official. The court shall take judicial notice that it owes a fiduciary duty. Okay, I'll have to read this.
[01:36:45.320 --> 01:37:06.320]  Sometimes we get these cases and we get quotes out of the case that can be misleading out of context. And in reading this one, I get the impression there is a contractual framework.
[01:37:06.320 --> 01:37:23.320]  That I said contractual contextual framework that I need to better understand to know what they mean by this conceals material information from a litigant.
[01:37:23.320 --> 01:37:42.320]  What information would a judge, I mean, what does that mean that he blocks information from being put into the court so that the litigant doesn't know about it? How does he conceal this information?
[01:37:42.320 --> 01:37:46.320]  But that is unclear. Do you have any idea about that?
[01:37:46.320 --> 01:38:06.320]  Well, one of my just thoughts as far as where this might apply would be at the very beginning of so many cases when you've heard so many stories of people asking the judge what the jurisdiction of this court is.
[01:38:06.320 --> 01:38:22.320]  Is this admiralty? Is this statutory? Is this common law? And the judges conceal what's really going on?
[01:38:22.320 --> 01:38:36.320]  That presupposes that the court is not what the court purports to be and these arguments that I've heard before. The admiralty is easy enough.
[01:38:36.320 --> 01:38:55.320]  Admiralty was absorbed into the civil code in 1965. So technically, yes and no. The admiralty is part of the civil code, so it's always admiralty.
[01:38:55.320 --> 01:39:07.320]  And no, it's not admiralty. Now it's something different. But we have people complaining that the courts are a corporation.
[01:39:07.320 --> 01:39:27.320]  And so that's a false and misleading idea about the courts. Yeah, the courts are incorporated. But when the judge steps up behind the bench, he does not do so in his corporate capacity.
[01:39:27.320 --> 01:39:43.320]  He does so in his constitutional capacity. So whether the court is incorporated or not is irrelevant. And so what I'm going to is there's the implication that there's a hidden thing about the way the court's working.
[01:39:43.320 --> 01:39:51.320]  I don't know what that is. So I still don't know what the court could hide from me.
[01:39:51.320 --> 01:40:01.320]  Understanding the nature of the court. It is the duty of the court to determine the facts in accordance with the rules of evidence.
[01:40:01.320 --> 01:40:14.320]  Then apply the laws that comes to him to the facts in the case. The court is not bringing anything to the case. So what could he not disclose?
[01:40:14.320 --> 01:40:34.320]  Well, how about in my case when, for example, when I presented my motion for new trial and it was completely unopposed by the state,
[01:40:34.320 --> 01:40:46.320]  they offered not one word or one written piece of information to rebut or oppose my motion, yet the judge ruled against me.
[01:40:46.320 --> 01:41:06.320]  Okay, this is a place where you're asking the motion for new trial is in effect a motion for reconsideration. You're asking the judge to rule that he made a mistake or he could have made a mistake and we need to revisit something.
[01:41:06.320 --> 01:41:16.320]  Did you bring any specific issues as to why he should reconsider?
[01:41:16.320 --> 01:41:24.320]  Well, just going off of memory. One, he used the wrong law.
[01:41:24.320 --> 01:41:38.320]  No, hold on. What I'm saying is in your motion, did you state in your motion reasons he should grant a new trial?
[01:41:38.320 --> 01:41:42.320]  I don't remember.
[01:41:42.320 --> 01:41:56.320]  Okay, that's that's what's required. You say your honor, the court ruled on this issue this way. And based on this case law, we believe that the court failed to properly apply the law to the facts.
[01:41:56.320 --> 01:42:06.320]  And they should rule this other way. And on this issue, they should rule this other way. And you ask the court then to reconsider and grant a new trial.
[01:42:06.320 --> 01:42:19.320]  You have to give the judge something to look at and tell him why you believe you need it. The what went wrong that would warrant a new trial.
[01:42:19.320 --> 01:42:40.320]  This sort of gets to one of my other questions, which is I've noticed a lot of holes in trying to prepare for my appeal, a lot of holes in my case, things that I did not bring up.
[01:42:40.320 --> 01:43:04.320]  And I guess my question is, can I bring up these questions, these objections in another motion that may even be out of time or maybe not exactly in the right procedure?
[01:43:04.320 --> 01:43:12.320]  Do any of these issues go to subject matter jurisdiction?
[01:43:12.320 --> 01:43:27.320]  I believe so, in that if any of it leads to a due process violation, then he should lose subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:43:27.320 --> 01:43:43.320]  Okay, if there is a due process violation, it needs really needs to be brought due process, you can bring any time. That's why I said, I'm sorry, jurisdictional issues, you can bring at any time.
[01:43:43.320 --> 01:43:51.320]  Are any of the issues that you fail to adjudicate based on new information? Hang on.
[01:43:51.320 --> 01:44:00.320]  We've got to go to break. Randy Kelton, Rural Law Radio, we'll be right back.
[01:44:00.320 --> 01:44:11.320]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition. People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[01:44:11.320 --> 01:44:25.320]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition. In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[01:44:25.320 --> 01:44:31.320]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[01:44:31.320 --> 01:44:47.320]  We have come to trust Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor, along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others. When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[01:44:47.320 --> 01:45:02.320]  As you realize the benefits of Jevity, you may want to join us. As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and increase your income. Order now.
[01:45:02.320 --> 01:45:17.320]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:17.320 --> 01:45:36.320]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step by step course, and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:36.320 --> 01:45:54.320]  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. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosay tactics, and much more.
[01:45:54.320 --> 01:46:10.320]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:24.320 --> 01:46:49.320]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton with our radio and we're talking to Sonny and Georgia.
[01:46:49.320 --> 01:46:57.320]  Is any of the issues that weren't adjudicated based on new information?
[01:46:57.320 --> 01:47:00.320]  Yes.
[01:47:00.320 --> 01:47:10.320]  Any new information you can come back with at appeal?
[01:47:10.320 --> 01:47:27.320]  Okay. Well, I will probably put all of this in a motion and file it before the appeal anyway in another motion for a new trial.
[01:47:27.320 --> 01:47:32.320]  You can do another motion for a new trial based on new information.
[01:47:32.320 --> 01:47:33.320]  Yeah.
[01:47:33.320 --> 01:47:39.320]  And that will give the judge reason to reconsider.
[01:47:39.320 --> 01:47:57.320]  This is information based on what the definition of a trailer is under the law, which the prosecutor has a duty to know and would go straight to the validity of the claim.
[01:47:57.320 --> 01:48:12.320]  That's not new information. They're going to say whatever the definition of trailer is, it was at the time of the trial and the argument could have been brought at that time.
[01:48:12.320 --> 01:48:35.320]  See, here's what I would argue is that the prosecutor, knowing what the law is and having a duty to know what the law is and what these definitions were, this is clear evidence to show her malicious prosecution
[01:48:35.320 --> 01:48:52.320]  and her unscrupulous activities in proving that there was no probable cause from the very get-go. This has all been a big, huge waste of time.
[01:48:52.320 --> 01:48:57.320]  Okay. Was that addressed in the trial court?
[01:48:57.320 --> 01:49:02.320]  Not with the definition of trailer.
[01:49:02.320 --> 01:49:25.320]  Okay. Definition of trailer, that's not a new issue. The definition is not new facts. If that goes to law, you may be able to bring that in appeal.
[01:49:25.320 --> 01:49:45.320]  On, I did a little bit of research on this hearing that they're trying to bring me into here in a couple of weeks, this status hearing.
[01:49:45.320 --> 01:50:13.320]  And apparently, you can't bring in any evidence, call any witnesses. It's usually, from what I read from another attorney's website, it's usually when the two side, the two attorneys will try to negotiate a deal just prior to trial and just see what they can work out.
[01:50:13.320 --> 01:50:25.320]  And so, my fear went in was that they were going to try to bamboozle me somehow and try to undermine my emotions.
[01:50:25.320 --> 01:50:30.320]  Okay. Are you before the Court of Appeals yet?
[01:50:30.320 --> 01:50:34.320]  No. No.
[01:50:34.320 --> 01:50:46.320]  Have you been, okay, you've been adjudicated against, you asked for a new trial that was denied, what is still before the trial court?
[01:50:46.320 --> 01:51:04.320]  I filed a motion to disqualify the judge and a motion to waive all costs of appeal, which were, they were trying to charge me over $1,000 to send the file to the appellate court.
[01:51:04.320 --> 01:51:06.320]  Oh, okay.
[01:51:06.320 --> 01:51:09.320]  And so, that was 11 months ago.
[01:51:09.320 --> 01:51:14.320]  Well, they might not want this to go to the appellate court.
[01:51:14.320 --> 01:51:16.320]  So, I'll put it without a doubt.
[01:51:16.320 --> 01:51:28.320]  So, they might offer you a deal to, you know, give you some kind of deal so they get this to keep, to get you to drop the appeal.
[01:51:28.320 --> 01:51:36.320]  Yeah. I just, I just don't see myself doing that.
[01:51:36.320 --> 01:51:49.320]  Oh, when you start moving out of their court and moving into a court that's going to look over what they've done, their perspective tends to change.
[01:51:49.320 --> 01:52:04.320]  So, if, since he's not ruled on my motion, there's a, during the statute, under statutory law, it says that the judge has a duty
[01:52:04.320 --> 01:52:18.320]  to decide promptly within 90 days all other motions of any nature submitted to him without argument.
[01:52:18.320 --> 01:52:26.320]  Okay. That raises an issue because you already had trial.
[01:52:26.320 --> 01:52:38.320]  So, speedy trial goes to when the style of trial starts. Once the trial is started, speedy trial act no longer applies.
[01:52:38.320 --> 01:52:54.320]  Well, this isn't that. This is, this says, submit it to him without argument, all motions for new trials, injunctions, the mirrors, and all other motions of any nature.
[01:52:54.320 --> 01:53:15.320]  So, any nature, that's where my motion, the Wave All Cost, fits under a motion of any nature and he has 90 days to rule by law, which it says the penalty for violating this statute for a judge
[01:53:15.320 --> 01:53:23.320]  is grounds for impeachment and the penalty is removal from office.
[01:53:23.320 --> 01:53:28.320]  So, he has been over a, close to a year?
[01:53:28.320 --> 01:53:30.320]  Yeah, 11 months.
[01:53:30.320 --> 01:53:38.320]  Violet. Petition, okay, how do you petition for impeachment?
[01:53:38.320 --> 01:54:00.320]  Petition for impeachment. That did not do process. You can ask, move to dismiss the whole case because you did not do process. You left an essential limbo for an extra year. It extends the time this claim is hanging over you.
[01:54:00.320 --> 01:54:22.320]  Sure, and there are other motions where he's done the same thing, but this one, you know, is fresh and that's definitely something that I think has some, might have some legs.
[01:54:22.320 --> 01:54:24.320]  Yeah, it might.
[01:54:24.320 --> 01:54:32.320]  Or at least would create some more leverage going into the status hearing.
[01:54:32.320 --> 01:54:42.320]  Exactly. That would, it's time to go for that. You know, the judge is not going to do you any favors, so it doesn't matter if he's upset at you.
[01:54:42.320 --> 01:54:58.320]  And if you're trying to get him impeached, then you actually have grounds, he may want to make your case go away. That's what happened in my case in Cherokee County. When I filed criminal charges against the judge, he told the prosecutor make my case go away.
[01:54:58.320 --> 01:55:03.320]  And that's what they did.
[01:55:03.320 --> 01:55:31.320]  And this may be the time to pull out the, this little trick that I found in the judicial conduct code where once a judge finds out that there's been an offense,
[01:55:31.320 --> 01:55:45.320]  then they have a duty to report it. So if I report it to his other judicial brothers in his circuit, that would create some inside politics.
[01:55:45.320 --> 01:55:57.320]  He'll get them all upset at him if you're coming after these other judges for trying to protect him.
[01:55:57.320 --> 01:56:11.320]  So if I wanted to try to make this judge rule on the motion without going to moral argument.
[01:56:11.320 --> 01:56:13.320]  Ridham and Damos.
[01:56:13.320 --> 01:56:17.320]  Okay. So I'll have to go to the appellate court for that, right?
[01:56:17.320 --> 01:56:28.320]  Yeah. It won't take a very long motion just that it's been over a year and you've got this issue hanging over your head.
[01:56:28.320 --> 01:56:31.320]  You asked for a mandamus to order him to make the ruling.
[01:56:31.320 --> 01:56:41.320]  It can also ask the court to look at what it takes to impeach and ask the court to initiate breaching the procedures.
[01:56:41.320 --> 01:56:52.320]  Under Georgia statute, it can be done by the legislature or by the judicial conduct commission.
[01:56:52.320 --> 01:57:03.320]  Talk to your legislators. You might be able to get your local representative or your senator to talk to the court.
[01:57:03.320 --> 01:57:11.320]  Tell them what you're trying to do and the court may come back and make a deal to get you to go away and quit harassing them.
[01:57:11.320 --> 01:57:32.320]  Yeah, I had the thought of actually going a little bit bigger than that because you can get the email addresses of all your legislators online and send this information to all of them.
[01:57:32.320 --> 01:57:48.320]  The only legislator who will respond to you is the one in whose district you reside and going to the other is probably will do nothing.
[01:57:48.320 --> 01:57:51.320]  Okay.
[01:57:51.320 --> 01:57:59.320]  Okay, we are just about out of time and sorry Shane and Tim we didn't get to you.
[01:57:59.320 --> 01:58:06.320]  If you have anything else quickly sonny we got about a minute.
[01:58:06.320 --> 01:58:17.320]  Would you recommend sanctions trying to file sanctions against the prosecutor with the court?
[01:58:17.320 --> 01:58:19.320]  For what?
[01:58:19.320 --> 01:58:31.320]  For because she has prosecuted this thing without probable cause that she should rightfully know it's a fault.
[01:58:31.320 --> 01:58:35.320]  Okay, if that has been addressed in court it won't do any good.
[01:58:35.320 --> 01:58:38.320]  Okay, I am sorry we are out of time.
[01:58:38.320 --> 01:58:40.320]  Randy Kelton, move our radio.
[01:58:40.320 --> 01:58:41.320]  We'll be back next week.
[01:58:41.320 --> 01:58:50.320]  Thank you all for listening and good night.
[01:58:50.320 --> 01:58:57.320]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament recovery version.
[01:58:57.320 --> 01:59:08.320]  The New Testament recovery version has over 9000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says verse by verse helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.320 --> 01:59:20.320]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.320 --> 01:59:30.320]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13000 cross references plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.320 --> 01:59:32.320]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.320 --> 01:59:49.320]  To get your free copy of the New Testament recovery version call us toll free at 888-551-0102 that's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.