Court Newbie Kicks Judges Butt During Arraignment

This is an awesome court audio recording with an exceptional commentary from our friends at Cop Watch Hawaii. A MUST SEE VIDEO! It is like listening to a sportscast commentary of a live sporting event. A great video to take notes to as well! As a matter of fact we have included some notes that one of our Facebook friends posted.

“So my e-friend here went to court, and kicked judicial butt all over courtroom. She violated a “fair and meaningful hearing” (ethics and logic obviously) so badly this should be on the news. This arraignment is basically proof that the courts are 100% full of gangmembers and bullshit.
This “video” is just me commenting on the first half of my friends 34 minute arraignment that included 3 breathers for the judge known as recesses. Will post part 2 and the uncut version asap”

Part 2 – “More BS broken record tactics, followed by the glorious grand finale of a judge who approves the prosecutions motion to enter a not guilty plea for the “defendant”, implying he HAS been informed of the nature of the charge and proceeding, then shoving him off to a “behavioral court” and an YOURE EXCUSED.

The state forced the unlawful plea, and the judge, as an impartial referee for the government, said my friend was crazy, and ordered him to a “behavioral court”. In America, this just happened… l”

Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page one
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page one
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page two
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page two
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page three
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page three
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page four
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page four
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page five
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page five
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page six
Court newbie kicks judges ass notes page six

Check out this list of objections in American law too.

UPDATE: Today I saw another awesome video by the same channel and I had to share it with you! (below)

List of Objections in American Law

This is a list of objections in American law:
Proper reasons for objecting to a question asked to a witness include:

  • Ambiguous, confusing, misleading, vague, unintelligible: the question is not clear and precise enough for the witness to properly answer.
  • Arguing the law: counsel is instructing the jury on the law.
  • Argumentative: the question makes an argument rather than asking a question.
  • Asked and answered: when the same attorney continues to ask the same question and they have already received an answer. Usually seen after direct, but not always.
  • Asks the jury to prejudge the evidence: the jury cannot promise to vote a certain way, even if certain facts are proved.
  • Asking a question which is not related to an intelligent exercise of a peremptory challenge or challenge for cause: if opposing counsel asks such a question during voir dire (i.e. the jury selection process.)
  • Assumes facts not in evidence: the question assumes something as true for which no evidence has been shown.
  • Badgering: counsel is antagonizing the witness in order to provoke a response, either by asking questions without giving the witness an opportunity to answer or by openly mocking the witness.
  • Best evidence rule: requires that the original source of evidence is required, if available; for example, rather than asking a witness about the contents of a document, the actual document should be entered into evidence. Full original document should be introduced into evidence instead of a copy, but judges often allow copies if there is no dispute about authenticity. Some documents are exempt by hearsay rules of evidence.[2]
  • Beyond the scope: A question asked during cross-examination has to be within the scope of direct, and so on.
  • Calls for a conclusion: the question asks for an opinion rather than facts.
  • Calls for speculation: the question asks the witness to guess the answer rather than to rely on known facts.
  • Compound question: multiple questions asked together.
  • Hearsay: the witness does not know the answer personally but heard it from another. However, there are several exceptions to the rule against hearsay in most legal systems.[2]
  • Incompetent: the witness is not qualified to answer the question.
  • Inflammatory: the question is intended to cause prejudice.
  • Leading question (Direct examination only): the question suggests the answer to the witness. Leading questions are permitted if the attorney conducting the examination has received permission to treat the witness as a hostile witness. Leading questions are also permitted on cross-examination, as witnesses called by the opposing party are presumed hostile.
  • Narrative: the question asks the witness to relate a story rather than state specific facts.
  • Privilege: the witness may be protected by law from answering the question.
  • Irrelevant or immaterial: the question is not about the issues in the trial.
  • Misstates evidence / misquotes witness / improper characterization of evidence: this objection is often overruled, but can be used to signal a problem to witness, judge and jury.[3]
  • Counsel is testifying: this objection is sometimes used when counsel is “leading” or “argumentative” or “assumes facts not in evidence.”

Proper reasons for objecting to material evidence include:

  • Lack of foundation: the evidence lacks testimony as to its authenticity or source.
  • Fruit of the poisonous tree: the evidence was obtained illegally, or the investigative methods leading to its discovery were illegal. Can be circumvented; see inevitable discovery
  • Incomplete: opposing party only introducing part of the writing (conversation/act/declaration), taken out of context. Under the evidence rule providing for completeness, other party can move to introduce additional parts.[4] If any documents presented for the review, the judge and other party entitled to a complete copy, not a partial copy, of the document. When a witness is presented with a surprise document, he should be able to take time to study it, before he can answer any questions.
  • Best evidence rule or hearsay evidence: requires that the original source of evidence is required, if available. However, some documents are self-authenticating under Rule 902, such as (1) domestic public documents under seal, (2) domestic public documents not under seal, but bearing a signature of a public officer, (3) foreign public documents, (4) certified copies of public records, (5) official publications, (6) newspapers and periodicals, (7) trade inscriptions and the like, (8) acknowledged documents (i.e. by a notary public), (9) commercial paper and related documents, (10) presumptions under Acts of Congress, (11) certified domestic records of regularly conducted activity, (12) certified foreign records of regularly conducted activity.[2]
  • More prejudicial than probative: Under Federal Rule of Evidence 403, a judge has the discretion to exclude evidence if “its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues, or misleading the jury.”

Proper reasons for objecting to a witness’s answer include:

  • Narrative: the witness is relating a story in response to a question that does not call for one.
  • Non-responsive: the witness’s response constitutes an answer to a question other than the one that was asked, or no answer at all
  • Nothing pending: the witness continues to speak on matters irrelevant to the question.

Example: “Did your mother call?” “Yeah. She called at 3:00.” Opposing counsel can object to the latter part of this statement, since it answers a question that was not asked. With some concern for annoying the court, counsel will selectively use this to prevent a witness from getting into self-serving answers.

References

Birth Certificate To Death Certificate – A Slave From Cradle To Grave

It’s one of those things that most of us never think about.

“What is a Birth Certificate for, anyway?”

We just accept it unconditionally, without ever questioning. It sounds “official,” so we leave it to the officials. That’s their business, not ours, and American Idol is starting, anyway. We’d rather not bother our pretty little minds with it (emphasis on “little”).

If a child asks a parent this question, the parent would probably answer “It’s so the government is notified of your birth.” Or, so that the birth is official. Funny how important it is to the government that everything be “official.”

But why does a birth need to be documented? God knows you were born – after all, it was he who put you here! Why does the State need to know this? Maybe, just maybe, it’s because they think they are God.

A parent might respond, if pressed, “Oh, it’s so they can enter you into the System.”

Yes – it is for that reason. To be “in the System” is to be a subject of it as well. It comes with certain privileges, but also carries with it its own liabilities. It’s those liabilities they never tell you about, meanwhile they broadcast all of the so-called “privileges” 24/7.

In fact, it goes much farther than that: you are never informed that there is any alternative at all to being in the System. You’ve never been informed that you have the choice to opt out.

No matter – remaining silent in a business contract is synonymous with granting consent, according to Black’s Law Dictionary, and since the System operates under Uniform Commercial Code (commercial law), remaining silent = tacit consent. It doesn’t matter that little baby can’t understand abstract thought or even speak yet, we’ll take his silence on the matter as authorized consent to the terms of the contract being offered by the State through means of the Birth Certificate. The signature of the parents only serves to further sanction the deal.

So, now that the Birth Certificate is signed and the deal complete, little baby can now be officially entered into the System.

Where does little baby reside during his first hours on the planet? Why, in the Maternity Ward, of course. To understand the import of this, you have to understand the legal definition of a ward:

5. An infant placed by authority of law under the care of a guardian. –Black’s Law Dictionary

They did WHAT??

They did WHAT??

When that Birth Certificate is signed and the contract made, that baby becomes a Ward of the State. Indefinitely. Even if you’re 60 years old and the president of your own company, in the eyes of the State, you are an infant, and they are legally entitled to make all judgements concerning your person and property, because as a Ward, your person and property belongs to them. Like it or not, this is the truth of how the System operates. Your development is arrested at the point of infancy, and you never get to grow up and inherit the freedoms and responsibilities of a Sovereign adult human being. Not unless you wake up and reclaim those God-given rights. It’s about Free Will, and that was granted to you by God.

ALL-CAPS = deader than a doorknob

ALL-CAPS = deader than a doorknob

The Birth Certificate signifies you as a non-living, fictional entity, and shows this by spelling your name in ALL-CAPS. Corporation names are spelled this way. So are the names of dead people on gravestones. So too the names that appear on driver’s licenses, auto registration and title, land titles, marriage licenses, tax forms, and also on all court documents.

Detecting a pattern yet?

A living, breathing human being signs their name with capital and lowercase letters. The State sees you as a fictional non-entity – the Ward of the State. They see you as an infant, and you better believe they treat you as such.

As Black’s Law Dictionary explains, the full capitalization of the letters of one’s natural name, results in a diminishing or complete loss of legal or citizenship status, wherein one actually becomes a slave or an item of inventory. The method, by which the State causes a natural person to “volunteer” himself into slavery, is through forming legaljoinder, implied or stated, with the entity or legal fiction (name all CAPS). Of course, most natural persons wouldn’t willingly form such an unlawful but legally reductionist joinder, so trickery and obfuscation are used; and this starts when our birth certificates are created. –abodia.com

It is said to have started when the U.S. Government defaulted in 1933. Out of options and with no collateral to secure a loan with, the Federal Reserve saw its chance and pounced.

They suggested a plan so sinister that only a banker’s mind could have devised it. They suggested that the future citizens of the country (and the earnings derived from their labors) could be pledged by the government as collateral for the loan. And the means of securing that pledge was to be the Birth Certificate.

A Birth Certificate is a financial instrument known as a security. Because it is an instrument of value, it gets passed onto the Treasury and eventually winds up being traded on the stock market. It’s really no different than a Stock Certificate, Gold Certificate, or Silver Certificate. They all represent items of value – property, in other words. It’s an “account” opened with a Birth Certificate, and closed with a Death Certificate – a property that has been liquidated.

So, you and I, we are property, owned by the Federal Reserve. How does that sit with you? For me, I can honestly say it sits about as well as a truck driver with a raging case of hemorrhoids. But there is some light at the end of this dark, depressing tunnel.

The Good News

tunnelYes, right now you may be a slave, but a slave you needn’t remain if you don’t choose to. Like I said before, it’s true that there are certain privileges that go along with being a Ward of the State. If that works for you, then change nothing. For those it doesn’t work for, read on.

I’ve understood for quite awhile that the forces that shape our physical reality are spiritual forces. God is real, and what he ordains will come to pass. Given that, if God grants you Free Will, then what power in the Universe could ever prevent or usurp that? The honest answer is – NONE!

And that is how you exercise your Sovereign Free Will – exactly with that kind of authority. Sovereignty is not granted by anyone on this earth because it can only be given by God, and what is given by God cannot be taken away. It must be claimed on earth, claimed with conviction! They will try to trick, confuse, and deceive you into givingyour Sovereignty away, but they cannot ever legally take it away. They must have your permission.

You might be a Sovereign if:

  • You chafe at being told that you must wear a helmet when you ride your motorcycle, even though you are the only one at risk for riding without one.
  • You bristle at the thought that the State, if they claimed any reason deemed acceptable by them, could come and take away one or more of your children into custody.
  • It vexes you that every time you go to court to contest a ticket, you end up paying it anyway.
  • It bothers you that you not only have to register your guns, but now they are bending over backwards trying to take them all away.
  • You resent having to apply for a license to drive, when the constitution guarantees you the right to travel.
  • You dislike having to apply for a license to be married, when God is more than happy to witness and authorize that marriage and give it all his blessings.
  • You cringe when you realize that upwards of 25% of your yearly earnings now go to income tax, a tax that didn’t even exist until 1913, then reinforced in 1942, sold to help with the War effort and promised to include a sunset clause, which of course was summarily ignored later.
  • You become angry that cops try every trick in the book to “upgrade” any minor violation into a major offense, and act as money collecting agents, not “keepers of the peace.”
  • You’re sick and tired of being treated like a child that can’t choose anything for himself, but instead must be told what to do in every circumstance.

If any of those things resonate with you than you just might be a candidate for becoming Sovereign.

Now, of course the PTB are going to demonize this concept – slavery is a huge, huge, HUGE revenue source for them. Have you noticed that there are always more codes, rules, and regulations on the books, never less? The more potential offenses there are, the more the money comes streaming in. The PTB don’t want that gravy train to ever dry up, and they will fight tooth and nail to retain it. Don’t let them – they have no right to the fruits of your labor, nor do they have any claim upon your freedom. You just need to stand up and reclaim it for yourself:

Where you STAND is where you make your lawful truthful claims, in a courtroom ON the public record, with witnesses to your claim. There is NO HIGHER AUTHORITY THAN CREATOR. Our Freedom is our Inheritance, Birthright of Freeborn Natural People [not corporate fictions]. It is up to US to stop compromising our birthright and posterity. It is called STANDING. – Trent Goodbaudy, Freedom from Governement

Amen, Trent. It’s called STANDING, as opposed to KNEELING, which is what most of us do before Judges. Well, at least for me, no more of that bullcrap!

I truly believe that it was designed this way for a purpose. As grim as the current situation might look for the wakeful among us, I have faith in the fact that it all is designed perfectly according to God’s Will. Yes, he granted us all Free Will, but in our world it has become hidden from us, hidden so that we first need to wake up, realize what’s going on, then decide what we will do next. If we want Free Will, we have to exercise Free Will. In truth, it’s beautifully constructed.

I believe that God designed our world precisely like this because he wants us to wake up, to reclaim the promise of his gift to us, to reclaim our birthright from the enemies that have concealed it from us. There’s a wondrous victory in that, and I cannot imagine anything more honorable than STANDING before our accusers and reclaiming our God-given Sovereignty. Remain kneeling, or stand. It’s your choice.

Continue reading “Birth Certificate To Death Certificate – A Slave From Cradle To Grave”

Are you SICK of PAYING the Government to TRAVEL?

U.S. COURT DECISIONS CONFIRM “DRIVING A MOTOR VEHICLE” IS A
CITIZENS RIGHT AND NOT A GOVERNMENT GRANTED PRIVILEGE.
By Jack McLamb (from Aid & Abet Newsletter)

For many years Professionals within the criminal justice System have acted upon the belief that traveling by motor vehicle upon the roadway was a privilege that was gained by a citizen only after approval by their respective state government in the form of the issuance of a permit or license to that Particular individual. Legislators, police officers and court officials are becoming aware that there are now court decisions that prove the fallacy of the legal opinion that” driving is a privilege and therefore requires government approval, i.e. a license”.

Some of these cases are:

Case # 1 – “Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience. – Chicago Motor Coach v Chicago 169 NE 22

(“Regulated” here means traffic safety enforcement, stop lights, signs, etc. NOT a privilege that requires permission i.e.- licensing, mandatory insurance, vehicle registration, etc.)

Case # 2 – “The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”- Thompson v Smith 154 SE 579.

It could not be stated more conclusively that Citizens of the states have a right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S. Constitution. Here are other court decisions that expound the same facts:

Case # 3 – “The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment.” –Kent v Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125.

Case # 4 – “Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the l4th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution.” – Schactman v Dulles, 96 App D.C. 287, 293. Continue reading “Are you SICK of PAYING the Government to TRAVEL?”

The Crown Really Appreciates Your Apathy

It’s as simple as this. Everything that we have been told about ‘Ireland’ (26 Counties) being somehow a sovereign entity is a lie.
It’s existence is from and under the Crown. This upsets a lot of folks. Personally I just wanted to know the Truth of the matter.
I needed to understand how it all happened. I never gave a jot about Politics (And still don’t).

The methods used on Ireland to control and manipulate it’s population into thinking it was a Free and Sovereign entity are exactly the same as those used by the Crown on many other Countries to do the exact same thing.

Do you think that the crown just gave up on trying to control the world?
Do you think that the crown just gave up on trying to control the world?

India, Australia, Canada, America etc. If you do some simple research and have a logical mind you will clearly see how they match. Look at Sheriffs globally for example. You will be told that each area that has Sheriffs have them under different situations, but in reality they couldn’t possibly. it’s pretty simple to deduce that the Crown empire simply made it ‘look’ like they have receded from all of these areas when in fact they had not. They still maintain control.

Does anybody really think that the Crown simply decided to ‘Give’ Ireland back to the Irish ? even though it had control. Even though it took the time effort and energy to violently suppress a sovereign government and it’s people. Are we to think the Crown simply tired of Ireland and decided that the strategically placed island on the doorstep to the Atlantic was fine to let go after all … Sure there’d be no hard feelings from the way the Crown treated the Irish people…. Right?
What’s a little Rape Murder and pillage after all between friends.

The Crown realized that the only way to ‘Feel’ safe from all of it’s global conquest was to convince all they had abused that somehow they are now ‘Free’ …. It’s nothing but a despicable lie.

If you don’t see this I’m okay with that … I’m happy that finally I see through all the bullshite.

Kind regards

Vin

Source