[00:00.000 --> 00:05.840]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[00:05.840 --> 00:09.520]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[00:09.520 --> 00:10.920]  Our liberty depends on it.
[00:10.920 --> 00:14.920]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[00:14.920 --> 00:17.020]  your First Amendment rights.
[00:17.020 --> 00:18.600]  Privacy is under attack.
[00:18.600 --> 00:22.220]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[00:22.220 --> 00:27.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:27.000 --> 00:32.160]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[00:32.160 --> 00:33.160]  Privacy.
[00:33.160 --> 00:34.760]  It's worth hanging on to.
[00:34.760 --> 00:39.060]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private search
[00:39.060 --> 00:42.600]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[00:42.600 --> 00:44.600]  Start over with Startpage.
[00:44.600 --> 00:45.600]  Spar.
[00:45.600 --> 00:47.880]  It's what fighters do.
[00:47.880 --> 00:50.920]  It's also how I remember the five guarantees of the First Amendment.
[00:50.920 --> 00:54.560]  If you plan to take away my rights, I'm going to spar with you.
[00:54.560 --> 01:01.680]  Spar with an extra P. S for speech, P for press, another P for petition, A for assembly,
[01:01.680 --> 01:02.680]  and R for religion.
[01:02.680 --> 01:07.160]  Most Americans are familiar with the First Amendment guarantees of free speech, press,
[01:07.160 --> 01:08.620]  assembly, and religion.
[01:08.620 --> 01:10.600]  But petition for redress is another matter.
[01:10.600 --> 01:14.680]  We have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[01:14.680 --> 01:18.200]  It means that if we're unhappy with what's going on in our government, we can spell out
[01:18.200 --> 01:20.880]  the reasons without fear of being thrown into jail.
[01:20.880 --> 01:31.200]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31.200 --> 01:34.840]  The Bill of Rights contains the first 10 amendments of our Constitution.
[01:34.840 --> 01:38.320]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:38.320 --> 01:39.760]  Our liberty depends on it.
[01:39.760 --> 01:43.680]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[01:43.680 --> 01:46.820]  one of your constitutional rights.
[01:46.820 --> 01:48.400]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:48.400 --> 01:52.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:52.000 --> 01:56.800]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:56.800 --> 02:01.800]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[02:01.800 --> 02:04.560]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[02:04.560 --> 02:08.840]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[02:08.840 --> 02:12.360]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[02:12.360 --> 02:15.960]  Start over with StartPage.
[02:15.960 --> 02:20.320]  When I think of the Second Amendment, I visualize myself wrapping my two arms around the Bill
[02:20.320 --> 02:22.400]  of Rights in a big old bear hug.
[02:22.400 --> 02:26.880]  It's how I remember that the Second Amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms, arms
[02:26.880 --> 02:30.720]  that embrace our freedoms and won't let anyone take them away without a fight.
[02:30.720 --> 02:31.720]  Get it?
[02:31.720 --> 02:34.040]  Two arms, bear hug, bear arms?
[02:34.040 --> 02:37.640]  The late Senator Hubert Humphrey captured the spirit of the Second Amendment so well
[02:37.640 --> 02:43.400]  when he said, the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary
[02:43.400 --> 02:47.920]  conduct, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which
[02:47.920 --> 02:50.600]  historically has proved to always be possible.
[02:50.600 --> 02:52.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[02:52.520 --> 03:17.000]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:17.000 --> 03:18.000]  We are back.
[03:18.000 --> 03:21.640]  This is the Rule of Law Radio, Randy Kelton.
[03:21.640 --> 03:22.640]  I'm Brett Fountain.
[03:22.640 --> 03:30.200]  And this is the 3rd of June, Friday, the 3rd of June, 2022, and we're talking with Jason
[03:30.200 --> 03:31.200]  in Florida.
[03:31.200 --> 03:39.040]  Jason, you had one more question about taking these offenders into the federal court.
[03:39.040 --> 03:41.280]  What was your question about that?
[03:41.280 --> 03:42.280]  Yes.
[03:42.280 --> 03:51.240]  So, obviously, you know, I kind of want to open up my own case with regards to the breach
[03:51.240 --> 03:57.480]  of fiduciary duty, other torts as well, really two questions.
[03:57.480 --> 04:02.640]  One is, obviously, once I establish all my evidence in the state court, when I open up
[04:02.640 --> 04:14.560]  this breach of fiduciary duty case, as a common law tort, when I'm writing it, do I avoid
[04:14.560 --> 04:16.240]  statutory rules?
[04:16.240 --> 04:22.760]  How do I maintain a common law court when I'm filing it?
[04:22.760 --> 04:23.760]  Hmm.
[04:23.760 --> 04:25.960]  Now, that, I couldn't tell you.
[04:25.960 --> 04:26.960]  I don't know.
[04:26.960 --> 04:27.960]  Okay.
[04:27.960 --> 04:32.600]  I understand your question, but I don't know what, I don't know how you would do that.
[04:32.600 --> 04:35.400]  How do you maintain that or I have not been there?
[04:35.400 --> 04:40.800]  When I'm writing a pleading, what I'm saying is, is there a specific way that you write
[04:40.800 --> 04:44.800]  a pleading when it comes to a common law tort versus a statutory tort?
[04:44.800 --> 04:54.880]  Well, you would have to look for a common law cause of action, but I don't know how
[04:54.880 --> 04:57.280]  you would avoid one or the other.
[04:57.280 --> 05:03.520]  It looks like to me, again, not having been there, I would think it would be the same
[05:03.520 --> 05:04.520]  way as anything else.
[05:04.520 --> 05:08.000]  You look at the cause of action that you're bringing and what are the essential elements
[05:08.000 --> 05:11.360]  of it and that's all you need to worry about.
[05:11.360 --> 05:12.360]  Okay.
[05:12.360 --> 05:14.960]  I just don't bring in anything else extra.
[05:14.960 --> 05:15.960]  Okay.
[05:15.960 --> 05:16.960]  Yeah.
[05:16.960 --> 05:17.960]  And I tend to do that.
[05:17.960 --> 05:18.960]  I tend to overthink things though.
[05:18.960 --> 05:19.960]  I appreciate that.
[05:19.960 --> 05:20.960]  Okay.
[05:20.960 --> 05:21.960]  Yeah.
[05:21.960 --> 05:29.240]  And I guess the other, the last question is, you know, when you're, when I'm taking them
[05:29.240 --> 05:38.440]  to federal court, is that something that I should do along with the civil case or what
[05:38.440 --> 05:39.440]  do you think?
[05:39.440 --> 05:43.000]  Should I hold off on that for later?
[05:43.000 --> 05:46.960]  I would, if I were you, focus, you've got state court you're already trying to deal
[05:46.960 --> 05:50.880]  with and you've got criminal complaints and civil that you're dealing with.
[05:50.880 --> 05:58.760]  I wouldn't try to start another federal civil at the same time.
[05:58.760 --> 06:03.640]  Criminal is easier to do multiple things in parallel because if you're holding multiple
[06:03.640 --> 06:09.720]  criminals accountable, you don't have to keep juggling anything after them after that.
[06:09.720 --> 06:14.000]  You lob the grenade and it's over.
[06:14.000 --> 06:20.480]  If you're starting multiple civil proceedings, I think that could be difficult to keep track
[06:20.480 --> 06:21.480]  of.
[06:21.480 --> 06:22.480]  You're not a whole law firm.
[06:22.480 --> 06:29.600]  So, you know, you don't have software helping you with deadlines and prioritizing and getting
[06:29.600 --> 06:34.160]  your helpers to, you know, delegate resources and so forth.
[06:34.160 --> 06:39.200]  You probably are going to have your hands full with one, I would think.
[06:39.200 --> 06:46.000]  I wouldn't want to probably start more plus some of the things that you're going to hope
[06:46.000 --> 06:55.440]  to win or can be able to use, let's say, you're, it looks like you're already aiming to handle
[06:55.440 --> 06:56.840]  that in the state court.
[06:56.840 --> 07:02.840]  So, it would be helpful if that's already res judicata, it's already decided at that
[07:02.840 --> 07:03.840]  point.
[07:03.840 --> 07:04.840]  All right.
[07:04.840 --> 07:05.840]  Well, that's it.
[07:05.840 --> 07:06.840]  All right.
[07:06.840 --> 07:07.840]  Well, thanks for calling in.
[07:07.840 --> 07:08.840]  I appreciate it.
[07:08.840 --> 07:09.840]  Good talking with you.
[07:09.840 --> 07:10.840]  I hope that helps out.
[07:10.840 --> 07:11.840]  It does.
[07:11.840 --> 07:12.840]  I appreciate it.
[07:12.840 --> 07:13.840]  Thanks so much.
[07:13.840 --> 07:14.840]  All right.
[07:14.840 --> 07:15.840]  Have a good night.
[07:15.840 --> 07:16.840]  And now, Chris.
[07:16.840 --> 07:17.840]  We've got Chris in Colorado.
[07:17.840 --> 07:18.840]  Finally.
[07:18.840 --> 07:19.840]  You've been waiting so patiently.
[07:19.840 --> 07:27.840]  What's on your mind this evening?
[07:27.840 --> 07:30.840]  Hey, Brett.
[07:30.840 --> 07:33.840]  How's it going, man?
[07:33.840 --> 07:34.840]  It's going pretty well.
[07:34.840 --> 07:35.840]  Yeah.
[07:35.840 --> 07:36.840]  You're doing great tonight, man.
[07:36.840 --> 07:37.840]  Thank you.
[07:37.840 --> 07:38.840]  Oh.
[07:38.840 --> 07:39.840]  Thanks.
[07:39.840 --> 07:45.080]  So, I have a, I had a, I had a, it's obviously some questions about just some procedural
[07:45.080 --> 07:48.840]  things for my case, but I had a new, new thing just pop up.
[07:48.840 --> 07:50.520]  Hopefully, this is just a quick question.
[07:50.520 --> 07:55.840]  Have you ever seen anybody get a criminal record without ever being arrested?
[07:55.840 --> 07:56.840]  Huh.
[07:56.840 --> 08:00.840]  How about that?
[08:00.840 --> 08:01.840]  Without even being arrested.
[08:01.840 --> 08:02.840]  Well, yeah.
[08:02.840 --> 08:08.200]  I suppose that even in the beginning, the early stages of a case, it's going to show
[08:08.200 --> 08:12.920]  up on some sort of report, so if somebody's looking for, you know, criminal background
[08:12.920 --> 08:15.480]  check or something, it would, it would still show up.
[08:15.480 --> 08:23.320]  It wouldn't be a conviction, but if it's an open case, I suppose that's possible.
[08:23.320 --> 08:25.440]  I don't know the particulars completely.
[08:25.440 --> 08:27.720]  I'm trying to find it, but I've checked back with the county.
[08:27.720 --> 08:31.000]  The county says, we don't even have it on our record, but it's out there as a criminal
[08:31.000 --> 08:43.040]  misdemeanor, 25 years ago, and there was never an arrest or a warrant acted upon or anything.
[08:43.040 --> 08:49.640]  So I'm just, in my mind, that doesn't sound legit at all, but I'm going to screw it up
[08:49.640 --> 08:52.200]  to even make something like that happen.
[08:52.200 --> 08:57.200]  Well, yeah, you know, these people do make mistakes.
[08:57.200 --> 09:05.280]  So what I would suggest is find which court that supposedly came from and go to that court
[09:05.280 --> 09:12.840]  clerk and ask for the record, and then you can start to piece together what happened.
[09:12.840 --> 09:13.840]  It's so old.
[09:13.840 --> 09:14.840]  It's a microfilm.
[09:14.840 --> 09:15.840]  They can't even find it.
[09:15.840 --> 09:22.200]  So still, they're going to have to be able to produce it.
[09:22.200 --> 09:25.320]  That's just, they've got to.
[09:25.320 --> 09:29.120]  The cliff notes that they did have on the record is that it got dismissed.
[09:29.120 --> 09:31.680]  Nothing ever came of it because it was a BS, whatever.
[09:31.680 --> 09:35.640]  But the issue is that there is a record out there for a criminal misdemeanor on something
[09:35.640 --> 09:36.640]  that never happens.
[09:36.640 --> 09:37.640]  That's curious.
[09:37.640 --> 09:42.360]  That's why I'm wondering, can that happen or if it's a straight up fault, then somebody's
[09:42.360 --> 09:43.360]  got to be held accountable.
[09:43.360 --> 09:50.520]  And I'm wondering who in this process, because that would have to be the county prosecutor
[09:50.520 --> 09:58.440]  or a sheriff or a police officer would issue that type of, no, how would you do that?
[09:58.440 --> 10:00.040]  Because you don't even have the prints.
[10:00.040 --> 10:01.520]  You don't have them in possession.
[10:01.520 --> 10:04.480]  So who the heck could do that?
[10:04.480 --> 10:14.480]  Well, there's a DMV reporting email that, you know, presumably nobody knows about it,
[10:14.480 --> 10:20.680]  but you can find it in PowerPoint presentations to officials or whatever.
[10:20.680 --> 10:22.760]  And this is in Texas.
[10:22.760 --> 10:28.800]  So I'm sure that there's something similar in different places.
[10:28.800 --> 10:35.840]  Colorado has some kind of way that these people report to each other from department to department
[10:35.840 --> 10:41.840]  and they haven't always had tightly integrated systems on the back end.
[10:41.840 --> 10:44.280]  Sometimes things were being emailed.
[10:44.280 --> 10:49.720]  And especially 25 years ago, you know, they maybe didn't have any integration at all.
[10:49.720 --> 10:55.440]  So one person could just report one number wrong on something and it shows up as there
[10:55.440 --> 10:59.600]  being a crime.
[10:59.600 --> 11:05.760]  I would say the people who are displaying this information of a place, I would start
[11:05.760 --> 11:14.800]  to find out where the next step is, because you've got to establish a dotted line back
[11:14.800 --> 11:17.040]  to where the bad data came from.
[11:17.040 --> 11:21.600]  And since they're displaying the bad data, I would start there.
[11:21.600 --> 11:27.040]  Let them see, you know, ask them, hey, where did this report come from?
[11:27.040 --> 11:30.160]  I need to find out where this report came from.
[11:30.160 --> 11:32.040]  Oh, we get that.
[11:32.040 --> 11:39.160]  We have a batch update that we get every week and, well, I need to figure out where that's
[11:39.160 --> 11:41.120]  coming from because it's wrong.
[11:41.120 --> 11:44.200]  Oh, well, you're going to have to address that with the court.
[11:44.200 --> 11:45.200]  Yeah.
[11:45.200 --> 11:46.200]  Which court?
[11:46.200 --> 11:52.560]  So they've got to be able to tell you where they're getting their data.
[11:52.560 --> 11:53.560]  Okay.
[11:53.560 --> 11:54.560]  I'll keep digging.
[11:54.560 --> 11:55.560]  All right.
[11:55.560 --> 11:59.280]  Well, my gut feeling tells me this is wrong, but I don't know, eventually I'd like to
[11:59.280 --> 12:00.720]  hold somebody accountable for it.
[12:00.720 --> 12:04.600]  But anyway, it's 25 years old, half those people probably aren't even alive anymore.
[12:04.600 --> 12:11.060]  I had an issue where somebody was reporting falsely from a city court.
[12:11.060 --> 12:17.960]  It was a city that at the time that the report was, they didn't even have a court.
[12:17.960 --> 12:19.020]  It didn't exist.
[12:19.020 --> 12:24.440]  They took all of the, whatever issues they had, it was such a tiny little pimple in the
[12:24.440 --> 12:32.000]  middle of nowhere that they just, they took any issues they had to the county.
[12:32.000 --> 12:38.760]  And so then when I asked the county about this bad report that showed up on, with the
[12:38.760 --> 12:46.360]  DMV, and of course things get propagated from the DMV to other places.
[12:46.360 --> 12:52.840]  So when I saw this bad thing show up, I said to the county, what's going on?
[12:52.840 --> 12:59.920]  And they said, from there, they don't even have a court at all.
[12:59.920 --> 13:07.860]  So I went to the city and I gave them a hard time about it and they eventually ended up
[13:07.860 --> 13:10.000]  getting a court.
[13:10.000 --> 13:20.520]  And at that time I revived my hassling them and this time pointing it at the judge because
[13:20.520 --> 13:21.800]  they finally had a judge.
[13:21.800 --> 13:27.440]  It was a part time, but still they were starting to develop enough that they had somebody in
[13:27.440 --> 13:28.440]  their part time.
[13:28.440 --> 13:36.160]  And so that judge got the point of my wrath at that point.
[13:36.160 --> 13:39.360]  And that judge was pretty quick to reach out.
[13:39.360 --> 13:46.440]  Apparently they have an inside track to do this reporting and these municipalities do.
[13:46.440 --> 13:54.080]  So since it was obvious that something had been reported incorrectly and I'm being harmed
[13:54.080 --> 13:57.980]  by it, that judge is about to be called on the carpet for it.
[13:57.980 --> 14:02.440]  So they sent in their own report, didn't say anything to me.
[14:02.440 --> 14:08.600]  I was still mad and pressing on them when I noticed that it just got fixed, everything
[14:08.600 --> 14:10.000]  went away.
[14:10.000 --> 14:16.720]  So they obviously had gone through the process of talking to the DMV and getting a correction
[14:16.720 --> 14:18.520]  on that bad data.
[14:18.520 --> 14:24.280]  So I'm hoping you could do something similar to that by finding out which court it is that
[14:24.280 --> 14:28.680]  supposedly had an issue with you.
[14:28.680 --> 14:33.120]  And maybe if I talk to the clerk and let them know that this is under the judge now, because
[14:33.120 --> 14:37.520]  it's 25 years later, whoever that judge is now, they need to clean this up or I'm going
[14:37.520 --> 14:39.560]  to start filing complaints.
[14:39.560 --> 14:41.560]  Maybe they'll do just that.
[14:41.560 --> 14:49.960]  Well, maybe, but I wouldn't recommend telling them or I'm going to, because that comes across
[14:49.960 --> 14:54.560]  sounding like a threat.
[14:54.560 --> 15:01.360]  And technically, you can't commit a crime of threatening the public official for something
[15:01.360 --> 15:05.640]  that you have a right to do anyway, that wouldn't technically be a threat, but they can still
[15:05.640 --> 15:09.120]  give you a hard time about it if you have that approach.
[15:09.120 --> 15:17.000]  Instead, if their behavior calls for filing a complaint, just file the complaint.
[15:17.000 --> 15:23.280]  No, either you do this or I'm going to, you know what I mean?
[15:23.280 --> 15:24.280]  Good point.
[15:24.280 --> 15:25.280]  Yeah.
[15:25.280 --> 15:26.280]  Okay.
[15:26.280 --> 15:27.280]  Well, I'll keep that in my back pocket.
[15:27.280 --> 15:28.280]  All right.
[15:28.280 --> 15:32.920]  Well, that was an interesting thing that I just discovered this past week.
[15:32.920 --> 15:35.200]  But back to this lien stuff.
[15:35.200 --> 15:42.160]  You mentioned something earlier tonight about, where does it go?
[15:42.160 --> 15:45.920]  One of the guys talked about the lien, the previous caller, and they said...
[15:45.920 --> 15:46.920]  Oh, yeah.
[15:46.920 --> 15:57.880]  He was pretending like they had a lien against his condo, just apparently to be either to
[15:57.880 --> 16:04.560]  be mean to him and hurt him so that he couldn't do this sale or to try to do a double dipping
[16:04.560 --> 16:07.320]  or maybe even both.
[16:07.320 --> 16:08.320]  And there was no lien.
[16:08.320 --> 16:10.880]  They didn't have any valid reason to collect anything.
[16:10.880 --> 16:15.400]  They had already collected what they needed to and they didn't have any business saying
[16:15.400 --> 16:19.560]  this lie.
[16:19.560 --> 16:20.560]  So he had...
[16:20.560 --> 16:26.280]  What I was mentioning to him was in the Texas penal code, it's 32.49, I'm not sure what
[16:26.280 --> 16:29.240]  you would find in Colorado, but that would be parallel to that.
[16:29.240 --> 16:40.680]  But the upshot is, I'm giving you notice right now that your lien or claim is fraudulent
[16:40.680 --> 16:50.760]  and I'm requesting that you remove it, release it, execute a release of that false lien or
[16:50.760 --> 16:51.760]  claim.
[16:51.760 --> 16:52.760]  If they don't, they're criminal.
[16:52.760 --> 16:53.760]  All right.
[16:53.760 --> 17:00.280]  So we'll be right back in a moment, 512-646-1984.
[17:00.280 --> 17:04.960]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[17:04.960 --> 17:09.080]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears proven method.
[17:09.080 --> 17:13.400]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you
[17:13.400 --> 17:14.400]  can win too.
[17:14.400 --> 17:19.200]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[17:19.200 --> 17:25.080]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[17:25.080 --> 17:29.600]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[17:29.600 --> 17:33.800]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[17:33.800 --> 17:38.640]  The Michael Mears proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[17:38.640 --> 17:40.800]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[17:40.800 --> 17:46.600]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[17:46.600 --> 17:49.040]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[17:49.040 --> 17:59.080]  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
[17:59.080 --> 18:00.080]  collectors now.
[18:00.080 --> 18:04.680]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar.
[18:04.680 --> 18:08.520]  In today's America, we live in an us-against-them society and if we the people are ever going
[18:08.520 --> 18:12.320]  to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[18:12.320 --> 18:15.680]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act
[18:15.680 --> 18:19.360]  in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[18:19.360 --> 18:23.560]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[18:23.560 --> 18:24.920]  our rights through due process.
[18:24.920 --> 18:28.920]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the
[18:28.920 --> 18:32.680]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[18:32.680 --> 18:34.840]  is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[18:34.840 --> 18:39.080]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[18:39.080 --> 18:40.400]  ordering your copy today.
[18:40.400 --> 18:43.760]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[18:43.760 --> 18:48.160]  The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[18:48.160 --> 18:50.480]  documents and other useful resource material.
[18:50.480 --> 18:54.440]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[18:54.440 --> 18:58.720]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[18:58.720 --> 19:05.720]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, www.logosradionetwork.com
[19:28.720 --> 19:35.720]  The Texas Transportation Code, the law of the land, the law of the land, the law of the
[19:58.720 --> 19:59.720]  land.
[19:59.720 --> 20:10.720]  Okay we are back this is the Rule of Law Radio, Randy Kelty, I'm Brett Fountain and we're
[20:10.720 --> 20:16.040]  talking with Chris in Colorado and we've got room on the board if anybody wants to call
[20:16.040 --> 20:18.880]  in the number is 512-646-1984.
[20:18.880 --> 20:28.220]  All right well Chris go right ahead.
[20:28.220 --> 20:32.540]  Okay, so here's what I'm trying to unravel here.
[20:32.540 --> 20:38.140]  So I have a claim that's going to probably survive in my suit in Illinois, but the judge
[20:38.140 --> 20:41.780]  flipped from being very supportive of me as a pro-stator, hitting me harder than he's
[20:41.780 --> 20:42.780]  hitting the lawyers.
[20:42.780 --> 20:43.780]  Wow.
[20:43.780 --> 20:44.780]  What's happened?
[20:44.780 --> 20:54.420]  Well, he made a ruling on the 12b6, and he didn't dismiss the case, but he's knocked
[20:54.420 --> 20:58.820]  out so many of my claims with the ability to amend them.
[20:58.820 --> 20:59.820]  Okay.
[20:59.820 --> 21:05.060]  So one of my claims is conversion, and under conversion in Illinois for towing specifically,
[21:05.060 --> 21:10.700]  there's a case on it that says it has to be that they didn't have the ability to enforce
[21:10.700 --> 21:14.900]  a lien, which is that small mechanics lien for services.
[21:14.900 --> 21:18.940]  So if it's a legitimate tow, then they can enforce a lien, and they keep the car until
[21:18.940 --> 21:22.940]  they get their money for the car, et cetera, et cetera, or they keep the refrigerator until
[21:22.940 --> 21:25.140]  they get their, you know, for the repair.
[21:25.140 --> 21:26.140]  Okay.
[21:26.140 --> 21:32.060]  But if you steal somebody's car and then try to use a lien to say, look, I'm a tow company,
[21:32.060 --> 21:36.780]  you don't even have the protections of that lien.
[21:36.780 --> 21:41.420]  However, I can't find anything that says that.
[21:41.420 --> 21:45.100]  So I'm wondering if the judge is going to be like, you didn't cite any case, so therefore,
[21:45.100 --> 21:46.100]  blah, blah, blah.
[21:46.100 --> 21:49.580]  Well, common sense would tell you that you can't do that.
[21:49.580 --> 21:53.940]  And that's really what I want to say in my argument, but he's playing a lot of games.
[21:53.940 --> 22:00.100]  So do you know anything where it's kind of like this, sorry, there's a rule or there's
[22:00.100 --> 22:06.340]  just this thing where it says, if you've broken the law in order to do something, you can't
[22:06.340 --> 22:10.420]  use other laws as protection, you know, i.e. fraud.
[22:10.420 --> 22:14.820]  You can't pull in other laws to protect you when the whole thing was negated by fraud,
[22:14.820 --> 22:15.820]  you know?
[22:15.820 --> 22:19.740]  And that's the kind of thing I'm looking for.
[22:19.740 --> 22:27.180]  Yeah, I mean, it's obvious you don't have crime is not the basis for for starting any
[22:27.180 --> 22:30.660]  relationship that makes perfect sense.
[22:30.660 --> 22:38.060]  So if somebody is having a contract and a reasonable, I would say start from the other
[22:38.060 --> 22:39.060]  end of it.
[22:39.060 --> 22:44.620]  Like what does authorize somebody to legitimately put a lien on there, because they don't have
[22:44.620 --> 22:47.780]  whatever that is, they don't have it.
[22:47.780 --> 22:51.380]  And that's the only thing, the only way they got there is crime, and that's not a good
[22:51.380 --> 22:52.380]  starting point.
[22:52.380 --> 22:53.380]  Yeah.
[22:53.380 --> 22:56.300]  But I'll give you an example what the judge is doing.
[22:56.300 --> 23:01.060]  So my case is on fraud, I already have a judgment for fraud, but it's on a city level.
[23:01.060 --> 23:07.580]  And so I brought in common law fraud and he says, well, you have to have made a statement
[23:07.580 --> 23:11.060]  and they had to have had a relationship with you with that statement.
[23:11.060 --> 23:15.580]  What I've read in case law where omissions are statements, you know, if you had a duty
[23:15.580 --> 23:22.180]  to make a statement that informed the public and you omitted it, that's, that's in essence
[23:22.180 --> 23:24.340]  is misrepresentation and therefore fraud.
[23:24.340 --> 23:27.900]  And I've quoted that case, but apparently I didn't quote it quite correct, because now
[23:27.900 --> 23:31.940]  he's using, he's using the, he's picking it apart.
[23:31.940 --> 23:34.380]  So that's what he's doing in a lot of cases.
[23:34.380 --> 23:38.340]  He's acting like opposing counsel.
[23:38.340 --> 23:43.020]  So it looks like how long ago was this?
[23:43.020 --> 23:46.980]  Can you still challenge his ruling or has it been so long it became final?
[23:46.980 --> 23:51.700]  Oh no, I'm still, I have 30 days and he just, he just, he just, he just gave, put it out
[23:51.700 --> 23:52.700]  two weeks ago.
[23:52.700 --> 23:53.700]  Okay.
[23:53.700 --> 24:01.020]  So you need to ask him for findings of fact and conclusions of law.
[24:01.020 --> 24:08.020]  You're basically asking him to come up with law that says why he ruled the way he did.
[24:08.020 --> 24:14.780]  And whatever law he can comes up with should have come from the opposing counsel.
[24:14.780 --> 24:21.740]  He shouldn't just be like rummaging around in books on his own, but if he, if he does
[24:21.740 --> 24:30.340]  some kind of a sui sponte motion, you know, on his own, and he thinks he has reasons for
[24:30.340 --> 24:31.980]  it, he needs to be able to support that.
[24:31.980 --> 24:37.380]  He needs to say why, on what grounds your honor is the phrase that I like to use.
[24:37.380 --> 24:42.140]  If I'm right there in open court, they do something and you're like, Hey, that's not
[24:42.140 --> 24:43.140]  right.
[24:43.140 --> 24:46.460]  So you say on what grounds your honor.
[24:46.460 --> 24:51.900]  And I know they hate that question because what they really would like to do is because
[24:51.900 --> 24:59.300]  I said so, which you've put them in a position where they're saying so on the record, they
[24:59.300 --> 25:02.200]  have to say why.
[25:02.200 --> 25:11.540]  And they say, I don't have a reason, I raise an exception, noted, so they're not going
[25:11.540 --> 25:12.540]  to do.
[25:12.540 --> 25:13.540]  I'm sorry.
[25:13.540 --> 25:14.540]  I'm sorry.
[25:14.540 --> 25:15.540]  I thought you were done.
[25:15.540 --> 25:16.540]  I'm sorry.
[25:16.540 --> 25:17.540]  Okay.
[25:17.540 --> 25:18.540]  Keep going.
[25:18.540 --> 25:19.540]  Yeah.
[25:19.540 --> 25:24.980]  An objection is something that the judge sees you're pointing out in front of a judge, something
[25:24.980 --> 25:27.060]  else that's not right that's going on.
[25:27.060 --> 25:32.620]  And you are saying, uh, objection foundation, objection here, say whatever, and you're,
[25:32.620 --> 25:35.900]  and you're wanting the judge to sustain your objection.
[25:35.900 --> 25:43.500]  Well, if he overrules it, then you're going to say, on what grounds your honor.
[25:43.500 --> 25:49.780]  And then if he doesn't have grounds for that, then you're going to be raising an exception.
[25:49.780 --> 25:55.100]  An exception is very similar to an objection, except it's something that the judge is not
[25:55.100 --> 25:56.100]  going to rule on.
[25:56.100 --> 26:01.980]  It just makes a mark in the file so that the appellate court has something to review.
[26:01.980 --> 26:05.140]  You've highlighted this area, he's thrown a flag on the field.
[26:05.140 --> 26:12.020]  You said, there's some judicial error here that needs attention when I get to the appeals
[26:12.020 --> 26:13.020]  court.
[26:13.020 --> 26:21.620]  And that's a signal to the judge, you know, quiet, subtle signal to say, this is not okay.
[26:21.620 --> 26:26.340]  You're pushing through and I'm going to have the appellate court check you on this.
[26:26.340 --> 26:27.340]  Okay.
[26:27.340 --> 26:30.180]  Does that make sense?
[26:30.180 --> 26:32.900]  So this is what I'm a little confused about.
[26:32.900 --> 26:36.700]  I've read, I've been studying a jurisdiction area and I know Dr. Graves talks a lot about,
[26:36.700 --> 26:39.860]  but he always is referencing while we're in court.
[26:39.860 --> 26:45.300]  So everything that's been going on, I've only had a couple like status hearing type of things
[26:45.300 --> 26:47.660]  and everything that's been going on has been going out of court.
[26:47.660 --> 26:50.780]  He even judged, he even ruled on this outside of court as he said he would.
[26:50.780 --> 26:52.660]  He would do it electronically.
[26:52.660 --> 26:55.340]  So in order to raise an objection is my confusion.
[26:55.340 --> 27:03.380]  So I suppose I'm supposed to put in with a memorandum, but do I go, do I request a trial
[27:03.380 --> 27:06.580]  like a hearing and then that's where I object?
[27:06.580 --> 27:07.580]  And then we go through.
[27:07.580 --> 27:12.300]  No, you just put the objection in writing, just like you're writing a motion.
[27:12.300 --> 27:14.140]  It's almost identical.
[27:14.140 --> 27:18.500]  You're just, you'll put your objection in writing, you'll put the grounds for the objection
[27:18.500 --> 27:19.500]  there.
[27:19.500 --> 27:25.620]  You know, simple bullet point, keep it tight, succinct, just like you're writing a motion.
[27:25.620 --> 27:30.900]  And then you file that and into the court record with the court clerk.
[27:30.900 --> 27:32.100]  You serve it to the court clerk.
[27:32.100 --> 27:35.860]  You serve a copy to opposing counsel.
[27:35.860 --> 27:42.020]  You're basically doing in writing what would happen if you were there in person.
[27:42.020 --> 27:46.860]  You know, the other party gets a chance to, you know, quote, hear what you're saying.
[27:46.860 --> 27:51.500]  And so you send a copy to them, just like you would with a motion.
[27:51.500 --> 27:52.500]  It's all the same.
[27:52.500 --> 27:53.500]  Okay.
[27:53.500 --> 27:56.740]  And then that objection needs to be heard.
[27:56.740 --> 28:02.900]  So if, if the, if they go ahead and respond to it, fine, if they don't, then you need
[28:02.900 --> 28:08.300]  to get that put on for hearing, just like you would with a motion.
[28:08.300 --> 28:12.580]  You've got something that's before the court that needs a ruling.
[28:12.580 --> 28:14.580]  Okay.
[28:14.580 --> 28:16.460]  Okay.
[28:16.460 --> 28:20.180]  We already have a status hearing coming up in July, but I'm assuming I would need to
[28:20.180 --> 28:21.860]  get that in sooner.
[28:21.860 --> 28:23.860]  So we need to request a sooner hearing.
[28:23.860 --> 28:24.860]  Yeah.
[28:24.860 --> 28:29.260]  Go ahead and ask for them to do that.
[28:29.260 --> 28:31.460]  Some courts, it depends on what it is.
[28:31.460 --> 28:37.500]  They have a, they may have a schedule of, you know, every Tuesday we have motions hearing
[28:37.500 --> 28:41.060]  between 9 a.m. and noon.
[28:41.060 --> 28:46.180]  And you show up in there and if you've got business with the court, two minutes, everybody's
[28:46.180 --> 28:51.380]  lined up and they go through there and you know that they bring their issue.
[28:51.380 --> 28:52.380]  They get a signature.
[28:52.380 --> 29:01.740]  They move on next, or you might have, you might just ask the court coordinator, what's
[29:01.740 --> 29:02.740]  the best way?
[29:02.740 --> 29:05.340]  Hey, do I need to schedule this up?
[29:05.340 --> 29:13.140]  Is the judge generally available on Wednesdays and they'll help you to, to put it on for
[29:13.140 --> 29:14.140]  hearing.
[29:14.140 --> 29:15.140]  Okay.
[29:15.140 --> 29:22.940]  Then I'm there, the judge will say, I say, okay, plaintiff has a motion or has an objection.
[29:22.940 --> 29:24.940]  I'm overruling this objection.
[29:24.940 --> 29:31.300]  And then I say, on what grounds, your honor, and if he goes, if he goes silent, then whatever.
[29:31.300 --> 29:36.020]  If he says, well, I've made my case already, I've already referenced the cases, you have
[29:36.020 --> 29:37.180]  my judgment.
[29:37.180 --> 29:38.180]  It's overruled.
[29:38.180 --> 29:41.580]  And that's when I would say, okay, I'm making a notice of exception.
[29:41.580 --> 29:45.500]  Yeah, I'm raising an exception.
[29:45.500 --> 29:49.860]  What you're asking for in Texas, I think it's the same everywhere, but in Texas, it's called
[29:49.860 --> 29:52.820]  the findings of fact and the conclusions of law.
[29:52.820 --> 29:56.660]  Whenever the judge issues a ruling, we'll have to continue on the other side.
[29:56.660 --> 30:01.220]  We're going to our sponsors, hold that thought.
[30:01.220 --> 30:05.620]  Everyone knows that walking is great exercise, but you might not know that the way you walk
[30:05.620 --> 30:07.700]  could predict how long you're going to live.
[30:07.700 --> 30:12.980]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be back to tell you more about walking prognostication
[30:12.980 --> 30:14.660]  in just a moment.
[30:14.660 --> 30:16.260]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:16.260 --> 30:19.860]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:19.860 --> 30:24.620]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:24.620 --> 30:29.740]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[30:29.740 --> 30:32.380]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:32.380 --> 30:36.660]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[30:36.660 --> 30:40.180]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:40.180 --> 30:42.180]  Start over with StartPage.
[30:42.180 --> 30:47.900]  New research shows how fast you walk could predict how long you're going to live.
[30:47.900 --> 30:52.460]  The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that older adults who walk one meter
[30:52.460 --> 30:55.700]  per second or faster live longer than expected.
[30:55.700 --> 31:00.100]  In case you're wondering, one meter per second is about two and a quarter miles per hour.
[31:00.100 --> 31:04.800]  A senior's age, gender, and walking speed were as good at predicting life expectancy
[31:04.800 --> 31:07.180]  as more traditional statistical measures.
[31:07.180 --> 31:10.460]  Generally speaking, faster walkers live longer.
[31:10.460 --> 31:12.980]  Measuring walking speed is quick and inexpensive.
[31:12.980 --> 31:16.820]  It only takes a stopwatch, some space to walk, and a few minutes.
[31:16.820 --> 31:20.980]  Researchers say it could help doctors identify older patients who need special care.
[31:20.980 --> 31:22.860]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:22.860 --> 31:25.380]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:25.380 --> 31:31.260]  I lost my son.
[31:31.260 --> 31:32.260]  My nephew.
[31:32.260 --> 31:33.260]  My uncle.
[31:33.260 --> 31:34.260]  My son.
[31:34.260 --> 31:35.260]  That I lost most of my life.
[31:35.260 --> 31:38.380]  Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11th.
[31:38.380 --> 31:42.820]  World Trade Center Seven, a 47 story skyscraper was not hit by a plane.
[31:42.820 --> 31:46.580]  Although the official exclamation is that fire brought down building 7.
[31:46.580 --> 31:50.260]  Over 1,200 architects and engineers has looked into the evidence.
[31:50.260 --> 31:52.460]  And believed there is more to the story.
[31:52.460 --> 31:53.820]  Bring justice to my son.
[31:53.820 --> 31:54.820]  My uncle.
[31:54.820 --> 31:55.820]  My nephew.
[31:55.820 --> 31:56.820]  My son.
[31:56.820 --> 31:57.820]  Go to buildingwat.org.
[31:57.820 --> 32:01.680]  Why it fell, why it matters, and what you can do.
[32:01.680 --> 32:04.200]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God.
[32:04.200 --> 32:09.760]  and a better understanding of His Word? Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays
[32:09.760 --> 32:14.780]  from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time for Scripture Talk, where Nana and her guests discuss the
[32:14.780 --> 32:20.880]  Scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15. Study to show thyself approved unto God, a
[32:20.880 --> 32:26.400]  workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth. Starting in January,
[32:26.400 --> 32:30.800]  our first hour studies are in the Book of Mark, where we'll go verse by verse and discuss
[32:30.800 --> 32:36.320]  the true Gospel message. Our second hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions
[32:36.320 --> 32:41.400]  on sound doctrine and Christian character development. We wish to reflect God's light
[32:41.400 --> 32:46.200]  and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear. Our goal is to strengthen our faith and
[32:46.200 --> 32:51.480]  to transform ourselves more into the likeness of our Lord and Savior Jesus. So tune in to
[32:51.480 --> 32:57.560]  Scripture Talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com, Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire and
[32:57.560 --> 33:04.560]  motivate your studies of the Scriptures.
[33:27.560 --> 33:34.560]  Okay, we are back. This is the Rule of Law Radio, Randy Chilton. I'm Brat Fountain. And
[33:43.320 --> 33:48.920]  we're talking with the only caller we have right now, Chris in Colorado. If you would
[33:48.920 --> 33:57.920]  like to get on the caller board, maybe you've got a question about something. Well, 512-646-1984.
[33:57.920 --> 34:04.920]  All right, Chris, let's continue with that. Okay. Cool. I think this is the first time
[34:04.920 --> 34:19.920]  I don't feel bad about staying on the line. Yeah. All right. So, you know, you asked for
[34:22.600 --> 34:27.160]  finding the fact, and Randy hinted at that last time, too. He gave a lot of information,
[34:27.160 --> 34:31.880]  Brat, in a lot of the stuff. So he's, that's the confusing part. He did quote a lot of
[34:31.880 --> 34:37.600]  cases. I guess he, I got to make sure they're the same cases that Defense put together.
[34:37.600 --> 34:43.280]  But he also brought in some other cases on his own. I, again, I might have mis-defense
[34:43.280 --> 34:49.800]  meant referencing one of those cases and one of the claims. But he did give a lot of information
[34:49.800 --> 34:54.760]  as far as why he was saying what he was saying. But it's kind of like, really? Like, are we
[34:54.760 --> 34:59.640]  that particular that we're going to break it apart that much? This is ridiculous, you
[34:59.640 --> 35:03.800]  know? But he also gave me some outs, which was cool in some of those claims, including
[35:03.800 --> 35:08.400]  the fraud. He gave me different types of fraud that I could change it to. Like he said, for
[35:08.400 --> 35:13.440]  a moment. I don't understand. Are you saying that the judge was giving hints about what
[35:13.440 --> 35:20.040]  else you could put in there? Yeah, he gave me a lot. So he said my fraud claim wasn't
[35:20.040 --> 35:23.320]  sufficient because in order you have to have the elements. And I know all the elements.
[35:23.320 --> 35:29.000]  I've played all the elements. But he said me trying to state that fraud under, like
[35:29.000 --> 35:32.960]  in Illinois for fraud, the first element is they have to make a false statement, okay?
[35:32.960 --> 35:37.440]  And then you have to rely upon that statement, et cetera, et cetera. Well, he says that-
[35:37.440 --> 35:38.440]  But then omissions-
[35:38.440 --> 35:39.440]  Signage-
[35:39.440 --> 35:43.720]  Was something that he didn't know about or didn't, he didn't have an opportunity to bring
[35:43.720 --> 35:47.800]  that to his attention. And he's arguing against you.
[35:47.800 --> 35:55.280]  Yeah, that's my argument is they had a duty to make a statement. They didn't. And therefore,
[35:55.280 --> 36:00.720]  omissions was a misrepresentation. And that's what the fraud. He says, no, that can't be
[36:00.720 --> 36:06.880]  because of this case. And he says, however, he puts some other types of fraud that would
[36:06.880 --> 36:12.520]  relate to that making a false statement or not making a false statement if they had a
[36:12.520 --> 36:20.400]  duty to inform you in a certain way, which they did. So I got to redo that thing. But
[36:20.400 --> 36:25.920]  he's playing that type of level of game where like to some of the other claims he's dismissing
[36:25.920 --> 36:32.560]  like for, I have a case for insurance. You can't bring under, it's not law, but under
[36:32.560 --> 36:36.640]  public policy, you can't bring a direct action against insurance companies in Illinois. And
[36:36.640 --> 36:42.840]  that's in most states. But there are cases that say if they're committing fraud, you
[36:42.840 --> 36:47.680]  can bring direct actions against insurance companies. And that's exactly what I did.
[36:47.680 --> 36:50.840]  They help their client commit fraud. Therefore, they're committing fraud and therefore they
[36:50.840 --> 36:55.680]  conspire and they're aiding and abetting. And he's thinking, he just wiped right over
[36:55.680 --> 36:59.640]  all that. And he just said, no, you can't bring direct actions against consumer, against
[36:59.640 --> 37:03.760]  insurance companies. So that I actually have to make a motion for reconsideration, but
[37:03.760 --> 37:07.720]  that's the type of games he's playing. So he's real lenient on that one, right? And
[37:07.720 --> 37:09.520]  he's super tight on the fraud.
[37:09.520 --> 37:15.320]  Motion for reconsideration can be combined with your request for findings of fact and
[37:15.320 --> 37:25.000]  conclusions of law and rolled into either give me your findings and conclusions or accept
[37:25.000 --> 37:33.040]  mine and you put yours in there. It's almost like you're able to, you're not arguing again,
[37:33.040 --> 37:44.120]  but you're, but it's almost like that because when you do a motion for reconsideration,
[37:44.120 --> 37:49.320]  it's opening up the door for you to put something out there and emphasize something that the
[37:49.320 --> 37:55.000]  judge didn't see or didn't treat properly. And that's exactly what you've got going
[37:55.000 --> 38:00.400]  on here. One is you can't bring an action against an insurance company. So you can say
[38:00.400 --> 38:06.440]  in there, normally it is true that we can't bring the direct action. However, in this
[38:06.440 --> 38:17.040]  particular instance, and you show exactly why and you can say at first glance, it may
[38:17.040 --> 38:27.920]  appear that there was no statement made. However, an omission is a statement. And then you put
[38:27.920 --> 38:30.400]  the legal authority right behind that.
[38:30.400 --> 38:35.520]  Okay. And you know, that's the first part of what you just said. There's exactly what
[38:35.520 --> 38:40.760]  I said in my case, in my complaint. I said, normally exactly what you just said, literally
[38:40.760 --> 38:45.920]  almost verbatim, you don't bring public policy doesn't allow you to bring direct actions
[38:45.920 --> 38:53.480]  except in cases of fraud. And I, and I even broke it down. So it'd be clear. I think you
[38:53.480 --> 38:56.520]  didn't read it. I think you didn't read it.
[38:56.520 --> 38:57.520]  Wow.
[38:57.520 --> 39:03.040]  Yeah. So I think, I don't know, I think two things are going on. He still doesn't think
[39:03.040 --> 39:08.320]  that I'm good enough for him. I'm in federal court and I'm a pro se and it's really hard,
[39:08.320 --> 39:14.560]  but he was so helpful in the beginning. That's the thing. So it's, it's kind of confusing
[39:14.560 --> 39:18.840]  what he's trying to do here, unless we're into the politics of this. And if this keeps
[39:18.840 --> 39:23.080]  going, it's going to bring too much attention to his court. And maybe he doesn't want that.
[39:23.080 --> 39:28.600]  I have no idea. I really have no idea though, but he's making it hard for me at this point
[39:28.600 --> 39:35.640]  all of a sudden. And that's fine, but he hasn't kicked me out, which is cool. All right. So,
[39:35.640 --> 39:39.600]  so back to, back to, do you have any other callers yet?
[39:39.600 --> 39:44.000]  Oh yeah. The board filled up. I don't know what happened, but the whole board just filled
[39:44.000 --> 39:48.800]  up. No, but that's okay. Go ahead. You had, you had something else.
[39:48.800 --> 39:53.720]  Yeah. So, so the case, so the claims that do kind of maybe get, get tossed out, but
[39:53.720 --> 40:06.360]  without, without, what do you call it? With, without prejudice. Can, can I bring, because
[40:06.360 --> 40:11.920]  some of them are against the same parties, obviously. Can I, can I file a parallel suit
[40:11.920 --> 40:18.320]  in state court for those specific claims or is that kind of like somehow double jeoparding?
[40:18.320 --> 40:28.640]  Parallel mistake. I'm not sure if you can do that. That sounds like a Randy question.
[40:28.640 --> 40:37.240]  I don't know. Okay. Cause yeah, it does seem to smell like double jeopardy, but they are
[40:37.240 --> 40:45.080]  different offenses because you've got, one is in the territory of, I mean, in the jurisdiction
[40:45.080 --> 40:51.280]  of a state. And so the state offense is going to be worded a little differently, even if
[40:51.280 --> 40:59.080]  it's the same episode that started it. I don't know. It still feels like double jeopardy.
[40:59.080 --> 41:03.840]  Let's ask Randy. Okay. Cause he's basically, he basically gave
[41:03.840 --> 41:08.160]  me one of my claims. He says, I cannot bring it in his court, but he's just, that's basically
[41:08.160 --> 41:11.200]  what the client, what it says. There's a, there's a, there's a ruling when you dismiss
[41:11.200 --> 41:18.000]  without prejudice, but without leave to amend, that means you have to refile it in another
[41:18.000 --> 41:27.360]  case. That's what that motion means or that, that ruling means. But if I refile it and
[41:27.360 --> 41:32.880]  the same parties already in court in federal court for the same issue, but with a different
[41:32.880 --> 41:36.840]  definition, you know, type of thing, it's, it's, you know, he's making it extremely hard
[41:36.840 --> 41:40.360]  for me to get to the insurance company is really what he's doing.
[41:40.360 --> 41:46.160]  Yeah. And it could, could be because you've stepped on a nerve there.
[41:46.160 --> 41:51.800]  Well, yeah, I insurance companies have some weight to throw around.
[41:51.800 --> 41:56.560]  Well, that's the whole thing. I stepped on the nerve where insurance companies are, have
[41:56.560 --> 42:03.240]  plausible deniability in almost any situation and they're aiding their, their, their, their
[42:03.240 --> 42:09.760]  illegal clients by taking the, by taking their premiums and insuring them. I said that in
[42:09.760 --> 42:14.120]  my damn, my complaint. So I just stepped on the nerve of all the insurance companies across
[42:14.120 --> 42:17.360]  the United States of what they're doing. They can do exactly what they want and get away
[42:17.360 --> 42:24.120]  with it because we can't touch them. And I almost said that in my suit, but not that
[42:24.120 --> 42:28.720]  way, obviously, but I did say they're taking insurance premiums, they're insuring illegal
[42:28.720 --> 42:35.160]  contracts and we can't touch them because of public policy. I said it defies logic to
[42:35.160 --> 42:40.000]  say, that's literally my verbatim. It defies logic to say that public policy shields insurance
[42:40.000 --> 42:47.240]  companies from fraudulent activity. So he's supposed to read all that and consider all
[42:47.240 --> 42:53.640]  of that. And he just like, no, so I'll, I'll keep pushing on it, but it is, it is an interesting
[42:53.640 --> 42:57.400]  thing that we might've hit that big one because the insurance companies have been lobbying
[42:57.400 --> 43:02.400]  for decades to make sure they have, you can't touch them and they can do whatever they want
[43:02.400 --> 43:07.640]  behind the scenes. And so I'm trying, I'm trying to knock on that door hard, but I'm
[43:07.640 --> 43:12.200]  obviously getting thrown out the door pretty quick.
[43:12.200 --> 43:23.000]  Well you've also got, when you, when he says that there, it's been a motion with no, no
[43:23.000 --> 43:28.280]  leave to amends and all that stuff, that's part of his ruling. So you can appeal that
[43:28.280 --> 43:35.440]  and you can even go to an appeals court to ask them to address that. You know, you've
[43:35.440 --> 43:46.280]  got motion to reconsider, motion to rehear. I think you need to do that hearing again.
[43:46.280 --> 43:53.320]  And if you put grounds on there for why he should, even if you sound like a broken record,
[43:53.320 --> 44:02.760]  he hasn't addressed those issues yet. So, through advances in technology, our lives
[44:02.760 --> 44:07.800]  have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition. People feed their pets better
[44:07.800 --> 44:12.920]  than they feed themselves. And it's time we changed all that. Our primary defense against
[44:12.920 --> 44:18.640]  aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition in a world where natural
[44:18.640 --> 44:24.600]  foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated. Young Jevity can provide the nutrients
[44:24.600 --> 44:30.400]  you need. Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of
[44:30.400 --> 44:36.440]  which we reject. We have come to trust Young Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor
[44:36.440 --> 44:42.480]  along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others. When you order from logosradionetwork.com,
[44:42.480 --> 44:49.000]  your health will improve as you help support Quality Radio. As you realize the benefits
[44:49.000 --> 44:54.400]  of Young Jevity, you may want to join us. As a distributor, you can experience improved
[44:54.400 --> 44:59.520]  health, help your friends and family, and increase your income. Order now.
[44:59.520 --> 45:07.520]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with JurisDictionary,
[45:07.520 --> 45:14.520]  the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by
[45:14.520 --> 45:19.880]  step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't have
[45:19.880 --> 45:26.120]  a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step-by-step course,
[45:26.120 --> 45:33.120]  and now you can too. JurisDictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning
[45:33.120 --> 45:38.920]  experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:38.920 --> 45:44.440]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts. You'll receive our audio
[45:44.440 --> 45:51.440]  classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much
[45:51.440 --> 46:03.440]  more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:21.440 --> 46:36.640]  Okay, we are back. This is the Rule of Law Radio, Randy Kelton. I'm Brett Fountain,
[46:36.640 --> 46:45.360]  and we are talking with Chris in Colorado. All right, Chris, we were looking at post-judgment
[46:45.360 --> 46:52.760]  motions before the judgment becomes final when the judge gave a bad ruling and it needs
[46:52.760 --> 47:01.600]  to be modified, corrected. What's the other word they use for it? Reformed. And so you've
[47:01.600 --> 47:07.880]  got some options there before it actually cures. I'm a little concerned about your findings
[47:07.880 --> 47:13.320]  and conclusions timeframe. I know in Texas, you said you think it was about a couple of
[47:13.320 --> 47:21.840]  weeks ago, but in Texas, we have 20 days after the trial court signs its judgment. So I don't
[47:21.840 --> 47:27.760]  know. Have you looked at what your rules say there? I don't know what those are, actually.
[47:27.760 --> 47:33.000]  I thought I had a little bit of time, but I have 30 days to amend. I get to amend most
[47:33.000 --> 47:39.720]  of my suit. A couple of things are kicked out, which sucks, but it's okay. No, no, no.
[47:39.720 --> 47:48.480]  I'm saying the time that you have to ask the judge to fix his mess, not how much time do
[47:48.480 --> 47:55.720]  you have to file the next thing. In Texas, you have 30 days, but then if you're asking
[47:55.720 --> 48:04.480]  the judge to fix things, boom, your time just went from 30 days to 90 days to file your
[48:04.480 --> 48:11.000]  amended whatever you need to, or file an appeal, because you don't know how the judge ruled.
[48:11.000 --> 48:16.600]  You don't know why he came up with what he did. It was completely arbitrary in the face
[48:16.600 --> 48:21.160]  of the facts and law that were presented. So how are you supposed to appeal that? You
[48:21.160 --> 48:28.440]  don't know why he came up with that. And you're asking for the findings of fact and the conclusions
[48:28.440 --> 48:34.720]  of law, because how else are you going to know what to argue from here?
[48:34.720 --> 48:40.160]  So when he puts in his decision, okay, here's the case references that I'm using, or here's
[48:40.160 --> 48:45.760]  what it is, is his findings in fact a conclusion, or do I need to ask for a little more detail?
[48:45.760 --> 48:52.200]  Well, if it's unclear, ask for more detail, for sure.
[48:52.200 --> 48:57.640]  Okay. It's convoluted is what it is. It's a fricking mess. It's like, okay, let's just
[48:57.640 --> 49:02.920]  be schizophrenic and rule because somebody said it should be that, but he is quoting
[49:02.920 --> 49:10.080]  stuff. All right. I'll find that date and then I'll re-listen to what we talked about
[49:10.080 --> 49:16.680]  and I'll put a motion together to get before him and just put some pressure on him. And
[49:16.680 --> 49:22.880]  then I wasn't going to ask this, but I will ask it. I don't know Illinois law. I do know
[49:22.880 --> 49:27.720]  that it's corrupt in there. There's an attorney or some attorney that finally found, I was
[49:27.720 --> 49:31.280]  looking for a research attorney just to pay them a few hundred bucks to help me find some
[49:31.280 --> 49:35.840]  of this stuff. There's an attorney who's willing to help me behind the scenes, but he wants
[49:35.840 --> 49:40.200]  six hours, you know, just kind of as a flat rate. He thinks that it will take roughly
[49:40.200 --> 49:44.200]  that, but that's a lot of damn money. Do you recommend doing that at all? Are there any
[49:44.200 --> 49:45.200]  other resources?
[49:45.200 --> 49:54.880]  Shoot, I don't know. I have no idea how to count the time that it takes for an attorney.
[49:54.880 --> 50:01.280]  I would think that what takes me six hours would probably be really fast for an attorney
[50:01.280 --> 50:06.800]  because I'm thinking I have to look at a lot of things to find what I'm looking for. And
[50:06.800 --> 50:13.120]  he's got these cool tools that, you know, he paid $30,000 to have access to these tools
[50:13.120 --> 50:16.840]  and he ought to be able to hit it really fast. That's what I'm thinking.
[50:16.840 --> 50:20.840]  Yeah, I agree with that, but I'm wondering if I should even trust a guy like this or
[50:20.840 --> 50:26.600]  any attorney to help me amend a complaint. Like, I'm willing to do it, which is interesting,
[50:26.600 --> 50:27.600]  you know.
[50:27.600 --> 50:30.440]  Well, now you get into another question.
[50:30.440 --> 50:34.160]  Okay, I'll leave it then.
[50:34.160 --> 50:42.160]  No, that's fine. I'm just saying if an attorney is going to do something, these are going
[50:42.160 --> 50:46.600]  to get involved in the case. I have a one page document that I can't seem to get any
[50:46.600 --> 50:53.600]  attorney ever to sign. And all it is, I'm not kidding you, it just says, I'm not going
[50:53.600 --> 50:56.720]  to lie, cheat, and steal. I'm not going to throw you under the bus and waive your rights
[50:56.720 --> 51:02.880]  without telling you. I promise I'm going to just be ethical. And they won't sign it.
[51:02.880 --> 51:06.480]  That says a lot.
[51:06.480 --> 51:13.560]  Yeah, they kind of get mad about it, too.
[51:13.560 --> 51:17.480]  Yeah, I'm going to come up with another one towards the middle of the case when I actually
[51:17.480 --> 51:21.920]  have to hire an attorney if this gets to trial. And I'm going to say, look, meet me halfway.
[51:21.920 --> 51:26.240]  I'll pay half of your wages and you put the other half on hold until we get a settlement
[51:26.240 --> 51:32.240]  because you believe in my case. What do you think? We'll see how many stick around.
[51:32.240 --> 51:37.240]  Yeah, good luck.
[51:37.240 --> 51:44.640]  Okay, there's not a lot of time left, but I guess we'll let you go so you can answer
[51:44.640 --> 51:48.040]  somebody's question if they need some help.
[51:48.040 --> 51:54.360]  Yeah, that's great. Well, thanks for calling. It's good talking with you tonight.
[51:54.360 --> 51:57.360]  You too, Greg. Thank you.
[51:57.360 --> 52:05.360]  So next up, we've got, actually, we've got E.J. from California calling back. Hey, E.J.
[52:05.360 --> 52:08.360]  Hello, hello.
[52:08.360 --> 52:15.360]  Hi, your calls were sent, so I decided to call back. But if there are other people,
[52:15.360 --> 52:20.360]  new callers, then do you want me to call back later?
[52:20.360 --> 52:28.360]  That's totally fine. It filled up there and we do have, it looks like our first time caller
[52:28.360 --> 52:35.360]  in Florida does not know to drop off. He's got one of the slots and then the other person
[52:35.360 --> 52:43.360]  already hung up that called in right before you has now hung up. So I was just about to
[52:43.360 --> 52:51.360]  go to him. So what's on your mind? You had something else you were going to ask about?
[52:51.360 --> 53:01.360]  Yeah, back to the civil suit against the hospital. Right now, I still can't find a second defendant.
[53:01.360 --> 53:04.360]  It's been on the back burner.
[53:04.360 --> 53:05.360]  Can't find.
[53:05.360 --> 53:07.360]  Because the first defendant, I'm sorry?
[53:07.360 --> 53:13.360]  You mean like a police officer that was in the or whatever security officer, whatever
[53:13.360 --> 53:18.360]  they are, and you can't find the name? Is that what you mean?
[53:18.360 --> 53:26.360]  It would be the security officer at the hospital. He's the one who made the claim of punching
[53:26.360 --> 53:28.360]  him in the face.
[53:28.360 --> 53:34.360]  But he didn't identify himself?
[53:34.360 --> 53:43.360]  No, I know his name, but I look for him in all the, just everywhere over the internet.
[53:43.360 --> 53:49.360]  I had the process server try to serve him at the hospital, but I can't find him without
[53:49.360 --> 54:01.360]  any, I would say identifiers like his birthday.
[54:01.360 --> 54:15.360]  Well, I know somebody in California who has been able to find, you know, to find information
[54:15.360 --> 54:21.360]  on people, let's put it that way. And I'll connect you up with her if that would be useful
[54:21.360 --> 54:28.360]  to you. But she's probably going to need the same thing, like at least give a range of
[54:28.360 --> 54:35.360]  how old do you think this person is so that she can try to nail it down and what city,
[54:35.360 --> 54:37.360]  you know?
[54:37.360 --> 54:40.360]  Is it Tina? Are you referring to Tina?
[54:40.360 --> 54:41.360]  Yes.
[54:41.360 --> 54:51.360]  I've already asked her. She went into her, I guess the database, not database, but she
[54:51.360 --> 54:58.360]  subscribed to our database and I gave her all the information that I had. We had two
[54:58.360 --> 55:07.360]  things pop up, but it seems to be a lot older than he looks, so I'm 100% sure.
[55:07.360 --> 55:12.360]  So what happens if you just go over there? Does he still work there?
[55:12.360 --> 55:17.360]  No, the process server tried to serve them and they said he no longer works there. He
[55:17.360 --> 55:24.360]  left about in August. That's when I did the public records request, but anyway. So yeah,
[55:24.360 --> 55:32.360]  I can't find him. He's the second defendant. And I was going to amend my complaint also
[55:32.360 --> 55:39.360]  because I forgot to put conversion. He stole my phone at the hospital.
[55:39.360 --> 55:47.360]  Yeah. That's also a violation of your, you have a right to be secure in your person and
[55:47.360 --> 55:53.360]  your papers and effects. So if he goes and starts looking through your phone, that's
[55:53.360 --> 56:02.360]  a violation. He didn't have any search warrant or, you know, not even anything to support
[56:02.360 --> 56:04.360]  a search warrant.
[56:04.360 --> 56:05.360]  No.
[56:05.360 --> 56:11.360]  It's also a violation of that. But so what comes to my mind is, did you say you did a
[56:11.360 --> 56:15.360]  records request to the hospital?
[56:15.360 --> 56:21.360]  No, to the police who made the false declaration of my arrest.
[56:21.360 --> 56:26.360]  Okay. And they're just not answering you?
[56:26.360 --> 56:29.360]  Who's not answering me? The police?
[56:29.360 --> 56:36.360]  I'm trying to figure out where your dead end is. Is it at the police station? The officer
[56:36.360 --> 56:41.360]  used to work there and they won't tell you his name?
[56:41.360 --> 56:47.360]  Oh, no. It's a security officer at the hospital.
[56:47.360 --> 56:48.360]  Right.
[56:48.360 --> 56:55.360]  Oh, so he was hired by the hospital or he was, okay.
[56:55.360 --> 57:00.360]  Yeah. He's an employee at the hospital or a contractor. I'm not too sure.
[57:00.360 --> 57:09.360]  Okay. So you know his name, but you don't know enough about the age to be able to pin
[57:09.360 --> 57:17.360]  it down and you've asked the hospital, but they won't tell you?
[57:17.360 --> 57:21.360]  I didn't really ask the hospital about the information because everything's at a stay.
[57:21.360 --> 57:33.360]  I did a summary judgment after they, after, I'm sorry, they, no pronouns, the shysters
[57:33.360 --> 57:44.360]  for the hospital put in a answer past the 30 days. By law, they're supposed to answer
[57:44.360 --> 57:52.360]  within 30 days, but they passed it. Seven days?
[57:52.360 --> 57:57.360]  Yeah. You got to be quick. When they pass that, by that, you just go for the next day,
[57:57.360 --> 58:01.360]  you go ahead and make your move in the court.
[58:01.360 --> 58:05.360]  I don't know. I waited too long. I was just asking.
[58:05.360 --> 58:09.360]  It's okay. Not a problem because then they've wasted all their time. Everything they've
[58:09.360 --> 58:18.360]  been building up to, their pleadings look like it's even worse for them. It's not that
[58:18.360 --> 58:24.360]  they were seven days late. It only showed up after you asked for summary judgment.
[58:24.360 --> 58:31.360]  So anyway, yeah, we're just about to go to our sponsors again. Let me give the call out
[58:31.360 --> 58:40.360]  call in number. It is 512-646-1984. Got any questions? We got room on the board.
[58:40.360 --> 58:49.360]  512-646-1984. All right, EJ, we will be right back.
[58:49.360 --> 58:54.360]  Would you like to make more definite progress in your walk with God? Bibles for America
[58:54.360 --> 59:00.360]  is offering a free study Bible and a set of free Christian books that can really help.
[59:00.360 --> 59:05.360]  The New Testament Recovery Version is one of the most comprehensive study Bibles available
[59:05.360 --> 59:09.360]  today. It's an accurate translation and it contains thousands of footnotes that will
[59:09.360 --> 59:13.360]  help you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[59:13.360 --> 59:18.360]  The free books are a three-volume set called Basic Elements of the Christian Life. Chapter
[59:18.360 --> 59:23.360]  by chapter, Basic Elements of the Christian Life clearly presents God's plan of salvation,
[59:23.360 --> 59:29.360]  growing in Christ, and how to build up the church. To order your free New Testament Recovery
[59:29.360 --> 59:36.360]  Version and Basic Elements of the Christian Life, call Bibles for America toll free at
[59:36.360 --> 59:49.360]  888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102. Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[59:49.360 --> 01:00:02.360]  You're listening to the Logos Radio Network at logosradionetwork.com.
[01:00:02.360 --> 01:00:06.360]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution. They guarantee
[01:00:06.360 --> 01:00:10.360]  the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect. Our liberty depends on it.
[01:00:10.360 --> 01:00:14.360]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[01:00:14.360 --> 01:00:16.360]  one of your constitutional rights.
[01:00:16.360 --> 01:00:21.360]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back
[01:00:21.360 --> 01:00:26.360]  again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:00:26.360 --> 01:00:32.360]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:00:32.360 --> 01:00:36.360]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by
[01:00:36.360 --> 01:00:43.360]  startpage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with
[01:00:43.360 --> 01:00:46.360]  startpage.
[01:00:46.360 --> 01:00:50.360]  Imagine your mom and dad are getting ready for bed. They pull back the covers and find
[01:00:50.360 --> 01:00:55.360]  a third party there. He announces, I'm with the military and I'm sleeping here tonight.
[01:00:55.360 --> 01:00:59.360]  That shocking image of a third party in my parents' bed reminds me what the third amendment
[01:00:59.360 --> 01:01:04.360]  was designed to prevent. It protects us from being forced to share our homes with soldiers,
[01:01:04.360 --> 01:01:09.360]  a common demand in the days of our founding fathers. Third party, third amendment, get it?
[01:01:09.360 --> 01:01:13.360]  So if you answer a knock at your door and guys in fatigues demand lodging, tell them
[01:01:13.360 --> 01:01:18.360]  to dust off their copy of the Bill of Rights and reread the third amendment. I'm Dr. Katherine
[01:01:18.360 --> 01:01:31.360]  Albrecht. More news and information at KatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:01:31.360 --> 01:01:36.360]  The Bill of Rights contains the first 10 amendments of our Constitution. They guarantee the specific
[01:01:36.360 --> 01:01:41.360]  freedoms Americans should know and protect. Our liberty depends on it. I'm Dr. Katherine
[01:01:41.360 --> 01:01:45.360]  Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember one of your constitutional
[01:01:45.360 --> 01:01:46.360]  rights.
[01:01:46.360 --> 01:01:51.360]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back
[01:01:51.360 --> 01:01:57.360]  again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:01:57.360 --> 01:02:02.360]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:02:02.360 --> 01:02:07.360]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This public service announcement is brought to you by
[01:02:07.360 --> 01:02:14.360]  StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing. Start over with
[01:02:14.360 --> 01:02:15.360]  StartPage.
[01:02:15.360 --> 01:02:21.360]  Imagine four eyes staring at you through binoculars, a magnifying glass or a pair of X-ray goggles.
[01:02:21.360 --> 01:02:26.360]  That imagery reminds me that the Fourth Amendment guarantees Americans freedom from unreasonable
[01:02:26.360 --> 01:02:31.360]  search and seizure. Fourth Amendment, four eyes staring at you, get it? Unfortunately,
[01:02:31.360 --> 01:02:36.360]  the government is trampling our Fourth Amendment rights in the name of security. Case in point,
[01:02:36.360 --> 01:02:41.360]  TSA airport scanners that peer under your clothing. When government employees demand
[01:02:41.360 --> 01:02:45.360]  a peep at your privates without probable cause, I say it's time to sound the constitutional
[01:02:45.360 --> 01:02:50.360]  alarm bells. Join me in asking our representatives to dust off the Bill of Rights and use their
[01:02:50.360 --> 01:02:53.360]  googly eyes to take a gander at the Fourth.
[01:02:53.360 --> 01:03:22.360]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:03:22.360 --> 01:03:27.360]  Here we are back. This is the Rule of Law Radio, Randy Kelton. I'm Brett Fountain and
[01:03:27.360 --> 01:03:37.360]  we're talking with EJ in California. So EJ, let's see, where were we? You were trying
[01:03:37.360 --> 01:03:45.360]  to find out who this second defendant is and he works at the hospital, but he works for
[01:03:45.360 --> 01:03:49.360]  some kind of security company. Is that right?
[01:03:49.360 --> 01:03:50.360]  Correct.
[01:03:50.360 --> 01:03:53.360]  Are you not quite sure?
[01:03:53.360 --> 01:04:02.360]  I'm not quite sure because I didn't do any discovery since I submitted and filed the
[01:04:02.360 --> 01:04:09.360]  summary judgment, but I do need to let the court know during my case management hearing
[01:04:09.360 --> 01:04:16.360]  on Monday regarding that because I had to submit a case management statement and in
[01:04:16.360 --> 01:04:22.360]  that statement I said I could not find the second defendant.
[01:04:22.360 --> 01:04:30.360]  Well, I think here's what I would do. I would serve the CEO of the hospital and then see
[01:04:30.360 --> 01:04:35.360]  if he wants to throw somebody else under the bus. Maybe he wants to say, oh, it wasn't
[01:04:35.360 --> 01:04:43.360]  me. It was that security company that one of my hospitals hired, a security company.
[01:04:43.360 --> 01:04:53.360]  You go after them. He could do a cross claim for that, but probably he will just tell you
[01:04:53.360 --> 01:04:59.360]  who it is and then you can just amend your pleadings to put a different defendant on
[01:04:59.360 --> 01:05:00.360]  there.
[01:05:00.360 --> 01:05:13.360]  If I amend the pleadings and the judge allows that, that would be my second amend?
[01:05:13.360 --> 01:05:20.360]  I don't know. That might be a question for your conference hearing. I don't know.
[01:05:20.360 --> 01:05:30.360]  Okay. Do you know if I do the second amendment? I'm sorry, amend? Does that allow the defendant
[01:05:30.360 --> 01:05:35.360]  Scheister to answer again, a second answer?
[01:05:35.360 --> 01:05:43.360]  Only if you change the content of it. If you're adding a defendant, then there's a very limited
[01:05:43.360 --> 01:05:48.360]  kind of way they could respond. Oh, my goodness, you can't have that defendant. That's like
[01:05:48.360 --> 01:05:56.360]  the other guy said, you can't sue an insurance company. If you add a defendant that they
[01:05:56.360 --> 01:06:04.360]  can balk at or they can say, I'm going to have to recuse myself because that's my wife
[01:06:04.360 --> 01:06:09.360]  or whatever, then that's the kind of thing they could talk to. But if you didn't change
[01:06:09.360 --> 01:06:16.360]  anything in the content, then they pretty much don't have anything to say.
[01:06:16.360 --> 01:06:25.360]  Another thing you could do is you have the person's name and you just can't serve them.
[01:06:25.360 --> 01:06:35.360]  In your local rules, look for service by publication and that's where you put basically a notice
[01:06:35.360 --> 01:06:42.360]  in the paper. You have to run it, I think, three times or look at your local rules.
[01:06:42.360 --> 01:06:47.360]  It'll say, here's how you serve somebody. If you don't know, you can't get their address,
[01:06:47.360 --> 01:06:51.360]  you can't figure out where to serve them, here's how you do it.
[01:06:51.360 --> 01:07:02.360]  Okay. Yeah, there are steps to notice the judge that you've exhausted your research
[01:07:02.360 --> 01:07:09.360]  and finding, but she's going to say why didn't you do discovery then to the hospital to get
[01:07:09.360 --> 01:07:18.360]  his information? That's something that she may ask since I had this period, but then
[01:07:18.360 --> 01:07:24.360]  I did the summary judgment and I'm going to be filing the motion to stay. But let's see
[01:07:24.360 --> 01:07:28.360]  what she says. Yeah, I think that makes sense.
[01:07:28.360 --> 01:07:36.360]  Yeah. There's a lot of little things here and there, not little, but kind of like puzzles.
[01:07:36.360 --> 01:07:46.360]  You're trying to get it all together and make it run smoothly, of course, but things
[01:07:46.360 --> 01:07:58.360]  pop up and the summary judgment, I followed right afterwards. But let's see. I think that's
[01:07:58.360 --> 01:08:06.360]  fine. Okay. Going back to, and this is my last question, going back to the misdemeanor
[01:08:06.360 --> 01:08:18.360]  for not showing my ID to the peace officer, can I go ahead and serve the officer, my AOS
[01:08:18.360 --> 01:08:25.360]  and AOS prior to the hearing and let him answer?
[01:08:25.360 --> 01:08:33.360]  You can. I wouldn't really recommend it. I don't think that fits the situation. You're
[01:08:33.360 --> 01:08:40.360]  being accused of a crime and there's a court case that's already stirred up against you.
[01:08:40.360 --> 01:08:44.360]  This is not like you're going to be able to stay out of their courts, which is kind of
[01:08:44.360 --> 01:08:52.360]  what that was originally aiming for, that particular approach. This is really not that.
[01:08:52.360 --> 01:09:01.360]  What you need to do is go look up that accusation, find the code that says whatever number in
[01:09:01.360 --> 01:09:07.360]  California, statute number, this or that, that says what you're accused of doing, this
[01:09:07.360 --> 01:09:17.360]  refusal to identify. Is it under which circumstances? There'll be some essential elements in there.
[01:09:17.360 --> 01:09:27.360]  For example, my father got accused of failure to identify, but he wasn't under arrest.
[01:09:27.360 --> 01:09:32.360]  In Texas, that's a key element. You have to be under arrest before you can be guilty of
[01:09:32.360 --> 01:09:45.360]  that as a crime. There has to be some other valid reason why somebody gets arrested. If
[01:09:45.360 --> 01:09:54.360]  there wasn't a valid arrest, then this crime doesn't kick in. It was simply you didn't
[01:09:54.360 --> 01:10:01.360]  feel like talking to a random stranger and dumping your ID out for them. There was no
[01:10:01.360 --> 01:10:07.360]  reason to. Why should you have to? It's not a crime to not show your ID to every stranger.
[01:10:07.360 --> 01:10:11.360]  It's only if you're under arrest. So take a look at what does it say? Go read it, go
[01:10:11.360 --> 01:10:18.360]  find it and mull over it and see which part of it is like the weak link in the chain.
[01:10:18.360 --> 01:10:25.360]  There'll be something that you can pick on that destroys their case or not. Maybe you
[01:10:25.360 --> 01:10:31.360]  really did it. Maybe everything in all those elements actually lines up to exactly what
[01:10:31.360 --> 01:10:35.360]  you did. I don't know. You'll have to read it and see.
[01:10:35.360 --> 01:10:45.360]  Okay. I mean, there's no probable cause for me to identify myself because the two tickets
[01:10:45.360 --> 01:10:54.360]  were gone. They evaporated. So I don't know what they're trying to drag me into again.
[01:10:54.360 --> 01:11:00.360]  Okay. So they were two specific tickets. Well, probable cause would have been at the
[01:11:00.360 --> 01:11:08.360]  time. You can't say now there's no probable cause. There might have been probable cause
[01:11:08.360 --> 01:11:16.360]  then. You have to look at it in the past context, right? When it happened.
[01:11:16.360 --> 01:11:23.360]  Right. Oh, right. I mean, I should say at that time when they pulled me over saying
[01:11:23.360 --> 01:11:32.360]  that I made a right without stopping and they pulled me over, they said they wanted to see
[01:11:32.360 --> 01:11:41.360]  the ID and I said, no, there's nothing that I did. Show me the evidence. And then he came
[01:11:41.360 --> 01:11:48.360]  back and said, oh, here's your ticket and so forth.
[01:11:48.360 --> 01:11:57.360]  Okay. Well, yeah, go look that up and see what does that exact code say? What is the
[01:11:57.360 --> 01:12:04.360]  offense? And see if you can find in there what specifically is their weak link.
[01:12:04.360 --> 01:12:08.360]  Their weak link. Okay. Thank you so much. I think that's it.
[01:12:08.360 --> 01:12:10.360]  Yeah, you bet. Have a good night.
[01:12:10.360 --> 01:12:19.360]  Right. Okay. You too. And now we are going to go to Penny in Texas. Penny, thank you
[01:12:19.360 --> 01:12:23.360]  for your patience. What is on your mind?
[01:12:23.360 --> 01:12:25.360]  Can you hear me?
[01:12:25.360 --> 01:12:26.360]  Yes.
[01:12:26.360 --> 01:12:28.360]  Can you hear me?
[01:12:28.360 --> 01:12:29.360]  I hear you.
[01:12:29.360 --> 01:12:31.360]  Hey, Brett, can you hear me?
[01:12:31.360 --> 01:12:32.360]  I do hear you.
[01:12:32.360 --> 01:12:34.360]  Hello, Brett.
[01:12:34.360 --> 01:12:36.360]  Are you not hearing me?
[01:12:36.360 --> 01:12:38.360]  I'm hearing you.
[01:12:38.360 --> 01:12:40.360]  Okay, great.
[01:12:40.360 --> 01:12:42.360]  But you're not hearing me? Are you hearing me?
[01:12:42.360 --> 01:12:45.360]  Yes. Go right ahead.
[01:12:45.360 --> 01:12:56.360]  Okay. Yeah, let's go on. Hello. Hello. This is for EJ. If the hospital hired a company
[01:12:56.360 --> 01:13:05.360]  in order to get security guards, they would still probably have a list of not only the
[01:13:05.360 --> 01:13:10.360]  names of the offices that work for the hospital, but also their social security numbers. And
[01:13:10.360 --> 01:13:14.360]  all it takes to find somebody is their social security number.
[01:13:14.360 --> 01:13:15.360]  I bet you're right.
[01:13:15.360 --> 01:13:18.360]  So they should have that on record or they...
[01:13:18.360 --> 01:13:23.360]  Well, they have records, but they're not going to be necessarily very eager to share it.
[01:13:23.360 --> 01:13:29.360]  They would have to have a good reason to want to do that. And that was my thinking about
[01:13:29.360 --> 01:13:36.360]  if she names the CEO, then that might get them interested in figuring out who to point
[01:13:36.360 --> 01:13:38.360]  the finger at.
[01:13:38.360 --> 01:13:40.360]  Right. Right.
[01:13:40.360 --> 01:13:45.360]  Because I bet you're right. I bet they do have that information. They just don't feel
[01:13:45.360 --> 01:13:48.360]  any particular need to open it up.
[01:13:48.360 --> 01:13:54.360]  Right. Well, I would not only take on the CEO of the hospital, but whoever the chief
[01:13:54.360 --> 01:13:59.360]  of the security company is too, because his men did wrong.
[01:13:59.360 --> 01:14:02.360]  You're right. That's exactly right.
[01:14:02.360 --> 01:14:08.360]  Yeah. There is no reason for her not to go after them. And you can bet they have a social
[01:14:08.360 --> 01:14:13.360]  security number. If they don't just hand them over, then she can just see the company in
[01:14:13.360 --> 01:14:18.360]  general. You know, for having what I would consider...
[01:14:18.360 --> 01:14:24.360]  The dog has... He's the principal, and they're the agents. So whatever they did wrong, he's
[01:14:24.360 --> 01:14:25.360]  on the hook.
[01:14:25.360 --> 01:14:33.360]  Yeah. Yeah. Well, if it were her, I would do suits on both. The CEO is the...
[01:14:33.360 --> 01:14:35.360]  Very good point.
[01:14:35.360 --> 01:14:41.360]  Yeah. And the company. I mean, because how easy is it to get somebody's social security
[01:14:41.360 --> 01:14:48.360]  number now? I mean, by rights, you would think the hospital would have his social security
[01:14:48.360 --> 01:14:56.360]  number on file simply because their accounting would have to be able to say, yeah, this man
[01:14:56.360 --> 01:15:05.360]  worked here on such and such a date, and you're trying to double charge him from the security
[01:15:05.360 --> 01:15:12.360]  company. So they have to keep pretty good time clock records of who's there on the grounds
[01:15:12.360 --> 01:15:19.360]  and when. And you can bet their social security number is attached to that. So...
[01:15:19.360 --> 01:15:20.360]  Yeah.
[01:15:20.360 --> 01:15:32.360]  I hope he just pounds tacos with those guys. I love you, Jay. I'm on your side. That's
[01:15:32.360 --> 01:15:33.360]  all I had to say, Bert.
[01:15:33.360 --> 01:15:38.360]  Cool. Did you have some other things about your situation? Anything going on with you
[01:15:38.360 --> 01:15:40.360]  that you were wondering about?
[01:15:40.360 --> 01:15:52.360]  Oh, no. I'm just waiting for the best stuff to happen in our government. That's all. Like
[01:15:52.360 --> 01:15:53.360]  everybody else, I think.
[01:15:53.360 --> 01:15:57.360]  Well, we don't have to scratch very deep to find some of that.
[01:15:57.360 --> 01:15:58.360]  No.
[01:15:58.360 --> 01:16:03.360]  All right. Well, thanks for calling in. I really appreciate it. And I'm sure E.J. will
[01:16:03.360 --> 01:16:05.360]  appreciate that input as well.
[01:16:05.360 --> 01:16:12.360]  Yeah. If I could find my brother back in 85 with nothing more than his name, she could
[01:16:12.360 --> 01:16:14.360]  find this bad character.
[01:16:14.360 --> 01:16:17.360]  I think you're right.
[01:16:17.360 --> 01:16:21.360]  Yeah. See you, darling. Later.
[01:16:21.360 --> 01:16:23.360]  Okay. Have a good night.
[01:16:23.360 --> 01:16:27.360]  You too. Bye.
[01:16:27.360 --> 01:16:36.360]  All right. And we've only got 30 seconds left. We've got a first time caller from 512. If
[01:16:36.360 --> 01:16:43.360]  you're in the 512 area code, give me a first name and a state.
[01:16:43.360 --> 01:16:45.360]  Sarlee.
[01:16:45.360 --> 01:16:52.360]  Sarlee. All right. Well, Sarlee, I'm looking forward to talking with you. And we're going
[01:16:52.360 --> 01:16:59.360]  to go to our sponsors. Just hold on for a moment, and we'll be right back.
[01:16:59.360 --> 01:17:04.360]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:17:04.360 --> 01:17:09.360]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method. Michael Mears has won
[01:17:09.360 --> 01:17:14.360]  six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win two. You'll get
[01:17:14.360 --> 01:17:19.360]  step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil
[01:17:19.360 --> 01:17:24.360]  rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[01:17:24.360 --> 01:17:29.360]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[01:17:29.360 --> 01:17:34.360]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away. The Michael Mears Proven Method
[01:17:34.360 --> 01:17:40.360]  is the solution for how to stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:17:40.360 --> 01:17:46.360]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[01:17:46.360 --> 01:17:53.360]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com. That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l
[01:17:53.360 --> 01:17:59.360]  m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:17:59.360 --> 01:18:04.360]  I love logos. Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends. I'm
[01:18:04.360 --> 01:18:08.360]  so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back. I need my truth fixed. I'd be
[01:18:08.360 --> 01:18:13.360]  lost without logos, and I really want to help keep this network on the air. I'd love to
[01:18:13.360 --> 01:18:17.360]  volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite, and I really don't have any
[01:18:17.360 --> 01:18:21.360]  money to give because I spent it all on supplements. How can I help logos?
[01:18:21.360 --> 01:18:26.360]  Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[01:18:26.360 --> 01:18:31.360]  You can order new supplies or holiday gifts. First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:31.360 --> 01:18:37.360]  Now, go to logosradio.network.com. Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it. Now, when
[01:18:37.360 --> 01:18:43.360]  you order anything from Amazon, you use that link, and logos gets a few pesos. Do I pay
[01:18:43.360 --> 01:18:48.360]  extra? No. Do you have to do anything different when I order? No. Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[01:18:48.360 --> 01:18:55.360]  No. I mean, yes. Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money. This is perfect.
[01:18:55.360 --> 01:19:00.360]  Thank you so much. We are welcome. Happy holidays, logos.
[01:19:00.360 --> 01:19:10.360]  This is the Logos Radio Network.
[01:19:30.360 --> 01:19:42.360]  Okay, we are back. This is the Rule of Law Radio, Randy Kelton. I'm Brat Fountain, and
[01:19:42.360 --> 01:19:51.360]  we are talking with Charlai. Did I say that right? Charlai in Texas. Charlai. Charlai.
[01:19:51.360 --> 01:20:01.360]  All right. Well, what is on your mind this evening? Okay. Well, I have... How do I start?
[01:20:01.360 --> 01:20:07.360]  Okay. I live in a neighborhood where there is a state trooper that lives in my neighborhood,
[01:20:07.360 --> 01:20:14.360]  like up the street from me, and he has stopped some teenage kids from riding a four-wheeler
[01:20:14.360 --> 01:20:21.360]  up and down the street, and he issued them a written warning, and I don't think that
[01:20:21.360 --> 01:20:28.360]  he has the authority to do so, and I've spoken to the kids about it, and they said they called
[01:20:28.360 --> 01:20:33.360]  and made a complaint, but I didn't... I know about holding them accountable. I know some
[01:20:33.360 --> 01:20:39.360]  of it, but not enough, really, but it just... It fired me up because these boys are totally
[01:20:39.360 --> 01:20:42.360]  respectful. They don't do anything wrong. They just ride their four-wheeler up and down
[01:20:42.360 --> 01:20:48.360]  the street, and when I talked to them today, the young men, they told me that he threatened
[01:20:48.360 --> 01:20:51.360]  to take them to Juvenile Hall if he caught them doing it again, but he didn't write them
[01:20:51.360 --> 01:20:58.360]  a ticket, and they weren't... Wow. Well, my question to you is, what kind of information...
[01:20:58.360 --> 01:21:01.360]  Can I kind of know, and I've been following you guys a little bit, but I don't know what
[01:21:01.360 --> 01:21:05.360]  kind of questions to ask the boys, because they're willing to bring me the citation and
[01:21:05.360 --> 01:21:08.360]  sit down... Not citation, the warning, and we can sit and talk about it, because they've
[01:21:08.360 --> 01:21:14.360]  already called and filed... Or made a complaint over the phone. They didn't know how to do
[01:21:14.360 --> 01:21:18.360]  anything else, and I didn't even know if they had done that or how they... I didn't know
[01:21:18.360 --> 01:21:23.360]  what had happened with it, but after talking to them today, they said they called to complain,
[01:21:23.360 --> 01:21:34.360]  and they didn't know what else to do. Okay. Well... So, I think that a state trooper...
[01:21:34.360 --> 01:21:41.360]  I'm going to have to go and research this to back it up. It's been a while, and I'm not
[01:21:41.360 --> 01:21:48.360]  sure I could cite it for you, but I believe that the state trooper doesn't have authority
[01:21:48.360 --> 01:21:56.360]  to go messing around with the little city, the back roads like in the neighborhood. I
[01:21:56.360 --> 01:22:03.360]  think he needs to stay on the highways. I think that that's the city, the county, they
[01:22:03.360 --> 01:22:09.360]  need to deal with that stuff, but not the state trooper. I wish I could remember where
[01:22:09.360 --> 01:22:20.360]  I read that Texas Administrative Code or... I actually have it. You found that? I'm sorry?
[01:22:20.360 --> 01:22:30.360]  You found that? Yes, I did. One moment. Let me... Beautiful. Yes, I think that would be
[01:22:30.360 --> 01:22:38.360]  a good place to start. Complaints that go to... If you want the complaint to go somewhere,
[01:22:38.360 --> 01:22:45.360]  it needs to go to T. Cole, and there's a difference between a formal complaint and an informal
[01:22:45.360 --> 01:22:54.360]  complaint. And this guy may have earned both. I know I had a guy that I had to report one
[01:22:54.360 --> 01:23:01.360]  time, and he actually earned both. One, the informal complaint speaks to, hey, he was
[01:23:01.360 --> 01:23:09.360]  unprofessional. He did something that was inappropriate. The formal complaint speaks
[01:23:09.360 --> 01:23:17.360]  to crime. He did something that was outside of his authority. He stepped out of bounds.
[01:23:17.360 --> 01:23:26.360]  He actually committed a crime. Well, I think that this trooper committed a crime by not
[01:23:26.360 --> 01:23:30.360]  only stopping them, telling them they couldn't do it anymore, and then threatening them if
[01:23:30.360 --> 01:23:43.360]  they did it again. Yeah. That seems overbearing. Right. I don't know if you care to look at
[01:23:43.360 --> 01:23:47.360]  it or what the deal is, because I don't... Here's the thing. I don't understand some
[01:23:47.360 --> 01:23:53.360]  of the definitions in the Administrative Code, and I don't know where to find the definitions
[01:23:53.360 --> 01:23:59.360]  that they use. Does that make sense? Definitions like what? Well, like some of the words that
[01:23:59.360 --> 01:24:11.360]  they use. I'm looking here where it says... Shoot. I'm so sorry. That's fine. Like rural
[01:24:11.360 --> 01:24:22.360]  highways. Well, I know what that is. Okay. They use the word individual, person, public,
[01:24:22.360 --> 01:24:38.360]  and citizen. Yeah. I don't know. Okay. I don't know. If you are in a section and you roll
[01:24:38.360 --> 01:24:44.360]  up to the top of that section, that's generally where you find some terms that are used in
[01:24:44.360 --> 01:24:50.360]  that section. And if there are no definitions, then just go with what makes sense. Everybody
[01:24:50.360 --> 01:24:54.360]  knows what this word is, and it doesn't need to be defined. They don't have to define every
[01:24:54.360 --> 01:25:01.360]  word. So if you don't have a definition that they've given for that, then they're not
[01:25:01.360 --> 01:25:10.360]  overriding the common sense understanding, and you can just take it as you read it. Some
[01:25:10.360 --> 01:25:17.360]  that you might take a look at... I don't know if you... Sorry? I'm sorry. No, go ahead.
[01:25:17.360 --> 01:25:24.360]  Some that you might take a look at in this Texas Administrative Code as to your question
[01:25:24.360 --> 01:25:32.360]  about how do you do this reporting and what's required of them. Take a look at 2.11, Section
[01:25:32.360 --> 01:25:40.360]  2.11 and 2.23. There's some good stuff in there about the handling of your reporting
[01:25:40.360 --> 01:26:03.360]  to them. So specifically, 2.11.3, 2.11.27 and 2.28, 2.23.15, 2.19, 2.23.2. These are
[01:26:03.360 --> 01:26:09.360]  speaking to what action they have to take when you report something to them. You say,
[01:26:09.360 --> 01:26:14.360]  I've got this complaint. They have reporting responsibilities. They have disciplinary
[01:26:14.360 --> 01:26:19.360]  options that they can take, and you can just ask them, did you suspend his license? Did
[01:26:19.360 --> 01:26:26.360]  you revoke his license? Were there administrative penalties? Oh, by the way, you, being his
[01:26:26.360 --> 01:26:32.360]  supervisor, are required to file a report up higher. Did you do that? Why not? What
[01:26:32.360 --> 01:26:42.360]  happened? You get to follow up on that. And this touches their license as a peace officer.
[01:26:42.360 --> 01:26:49.360]  So how would I find out for sure that he was acting outside of his scope? I mean, I'm almost
[01:26:49.360 --> 01:26:54.360]  positive because everything in here says, rural highway, rural highway, rural highway,
[01:26:54.360 --> 01:26:59.360]  right? And repeat that over and over when it talks about what he's allowed to do. And
[01:26:59.360 --> 01:27:06.360]  then it actually speaks to the obligation of the members of the department to uphold
[01:27:06.360 --> 01:27:11.360]  the constitution of the United States and Texas. But it also says, as well as to enforce
[01:27:11.360 --> 01:27:16.360]  the statutory enactment. Now, I don't think that that applies to the kids, does that?
[01:27:16.360 --> 01:27:23.360]  Well, let's see why it wouldn't. It's about the statutes. But are they in the commerce?
[01:27:23.360 --> 01:27:28.360]  He's a state trooper. He should know better than anybody. Some of these city cops don't
[01:27:28.360 --> 01:27:33.360]  know any better. They're not even authorized to go to the training. But he's a state trooper.
[01:27:33.360 --> 01:27:40.360]  So he ought to know that those roads are for commerce purposes. I mean, the driving, all
[01:27:40.360 --> 01:27:46.360]  the transportation stuff is for commerce. Those roads are ours. We the people own those
[01:27:46.360 --> 01:27:52.360]  roads. We get to do what we want. And anybody who wants to go run a business on those roads
[01:27:52.360 --> 01:27:58.360]  needs to get our permission through the legislature, doing all that licensing and the regulating
[01:27:58.360 --> 01:28:05.360]  and all that. And yeah, he needs to go and make sure that if they're giving Uber rides
[01:28:05.360 --> 01:28:12.360]  or something, and they're using the roadways as a business for hire is the term.
[01:28:12.360 --> 01:28:17.360]  Well, okay, so then they're doing transportation. That's the activity that's regulated. He
[01:28:17.360 --> 01:28:22.360]  should know that. He's a state trooper.
[01:28:22.360 --> 01:28:28.360]  Yes. And I just read this, if I may read it to you. It says the department recognizes
[01:28:28.360 --> 01:28:34.360]  as a basic responsibility for the enforcement of the criminal laws rests with the local
[01:28:34.360 --> 01:28:42.360]  officers in their respective jurisdiction. So that, yeah, okay. So he had no right to
[01:28:42.360 --> 01:28:46.360]  say anything to him. That's what I thought. He just did it because he lives in the neighborhood.
[01:28:46.360 --> 01:28:57.360]  Yeah, probably. So what I think I would do in this case, I would do an informal complaint
[01:28:57.360 --> 01:29:08.360]  just because I don't know yet where he thinks he's getting his authority. And parallel to
[01:29:08.360 --> 01:29:15.360]  the informal report, I would be putting in a records request to his boss or some, whoever
[01:29:15.360 --> 01:29:22.360]  the elected official or appointed official. I don't know if that would go all the way
[01:29:22.360 --> 01:29:31.360]  up to McCraw or what, but they have some cronyism issues going on. It's hard to say whether
[01:29:31.360 --> 01:29:38.360]  that would be a good thing politically for you to do or not, but the records request
[01:29:38.360 --> 01:29:46.360]  would ostensibly give you back some records that would show where he thinks he got that
[01:29:46.360 --> 01:29:51.360]  authority, because he probably doesn't have it at all, like you said. We're about to go
[01:29:51.360 --> 01:29:58.360]  to our sponsors. 512-646-1984 will be a right fact.
[01:29:58.360 --> 01:30:06.360]  A top cybersecurity expert has a warning for America. If you build an electrical smart
[01:30:06.360 --> 01:30:12.360]  grid, the hackers will come and they could cause a catastrophic blackout. I'm Dr. Catherine
[01:30:12.360 --> 01:30:15.360]  Albrecht, back with the shocking details in a moment.
[01:30:15.360 --> 01:30:20.360]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back
[01:30:20.360 --> 01:30:26.360]  again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:26.360 --> 01:30:31.360]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:31.360 --> 01:30:37.360]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to. This message is brought to you by Startpage.com, the private
[01:30:37.360 --> 01:30:44.360]  search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with Startpage.
[01:30:44.360 --> 01:30:49.360]  Governments love power, so it's only natural they'd want to control the power going into
[01:30:49.360 --> 01:30:54.360]  your home too with a smart grid. So they're installing a national network of smart meters
[01:30:54.360 --> 01:31:00.360]  to remotely monitor electric use for efficiency and avoid grid failure. But cybersecurity
[01:31:00.360 --> 01:31:05.360]  expert David Chalk says not so fast. If we make the national power grid controllable through
[01:31:05.360 --> 01:31:10.360]  the web, hackers will have a field day. Working remotely, they could tap in and black out
[01:31:10.360 --> 01:31:16.360]  the entire nation, leaving us vulnerable to our enemies. I've long opposed smart meters
[01:31:16.360 --> 01:31:21.360]  for privacy and health reasons. The catastrophic failures caused by hackers, there's nothing
[01:31:21.360 --> 01:31:23.360]  smart about that.
[01:31:23.360 --> 01:31:30.360]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:30.360 --> 01:31:36.360]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11th.
[01:31:36.360 --> 01:31:41.360]  The government says that fire brought it down. However, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded
[01:31:41.360 --> 01:31:45.360]  it was a controlled demolition. Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their
[01:31:45.360 --> 01:31:50.360]  lives. And thousands of my fellow first responders are dying. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
[01:31:50.360 --> 01:31:53.360]  I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correction officer. I'm an Air Force pilot.
[01:31:53.360 --> 01:32:00.360]  I'm a father who lost his son. We're Americans, and we deserve the truth. Go to RememberBuilding7.org
[01:32:00.360 --> 01:32:01.360]  today.
[01:32:01.360 --> 01:32:06.360]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law traffic seminar. In today's America,
[01:32:06.360 --> 01:32:09.360]  we live in an us-against-them society. And if we, the people, are ever going to have a
[01:32:09.360 --> 01:32:13.360]  free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those
[01:32:13.360 --> 01:32:16.360]  rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own
[01:32:16.360 --> 01:32:20.360]  private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law. Traffic courts
[01:32:20.360 --> 01:32:24.360]  afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights
[01:32:24.360 --> 01:32:28.360]  through due process. Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law
[01:32:28.360 --> 01:32:32.360]  Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you
[01:32:32.360 --> 01:32:36.360]  understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law. You can get
[01:32:36.360 --> 01:32:40.360]  your own copy of this invaluable material by going to RuleOfLawRadio.com and ordering
[01:32:40.360 --> 01:32:43.360]  your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas
[01:32:43.360 --> 01:32:48.360]  Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar,
[01:32:48.360 --> 01:32:51.360]  hundreds of research documents, and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight
[01:32:51.360 --> 01:32:55.360]  for your rights with the help of this material from RuleOfLawRadio.com. Order your copy
[01:32:55.360 --> 01:33:00.360]  today, and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:33:00.360 --> 01:33:12.360]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:30.360 --> 01:33:37.360]  Thank you.
[01:34:00.360 --> 01:34:12.360]  Oh, my goodness. Okay. Looks like I was mute. We're talking with Charlay in Texas. Charlay,
[01:34:12.360 --> 01:34:20.360]  when we went out, we were talking about the guy that didn't have any authority to bother
[01:34:20.360 --> 01:34:27.360]  the neighborhood children, and I just sent you those items that I was quoting out of
[01:34:27.360 --> 01:34:32.360]  the Texas Administrative Code, or citing. I just sent those to you in telegram, but
[01:34:32.360 --> 01:34:43.360]  over the break. But as far as his authority to enforce in that neighborhood, if you have
[01:34:43.360 --> 01:34:49.360]  found that, that's definitely worth citing in your complaint, and just a certain that
[01:34:49.360 --> 01:34:57.360]  he was, you know, outside of his authority. Did I understand you correctly? You found
[01:34:57.360 --> 01:34:58.360]  that?
[01:34:58.360 --> 01:34:59.360]  Yes.
[01:34:59.360 --> 01:35:00.360]  Wonderful.
[01:35:00.360 --> 01:35:13.360]  I think it was in the administrative code, Title 37, Part 1, Chapter 1, Subchapter B.
[01:35:13.360 --> 01:35:16.360]  That's where I found that.
[01:35:16.360 --> 01:35:17.360]  Okay.
[01:35:17.360 --> 01:35:28.360]  Great. So, yeah, just mention that in your complaint. Say he was exercising authority
[01:35:28.360 --> 01:35:38.360]  he didn't have. Well, guess what he did? When he decided to do that, he actually committed
[01:35:38.360 --> 01:35:45.360]  some other crimes in process. It wasn't just that he was being rude that day and scaring
[01:35:45.360 --> 01:35:53.360]  the kids. He actually committed some crimes. So take a look at Texas Penal Code 39.03.
[01:35:53.360 --> 01:35:56.360]  Official oppression, right?
[01:35:56.360 --> 01:36:06.360]  Yes. And did he ask them for their names and get their personal information when he wrote
[01:36:06.360 --> 01:36:12.360]  up these warnings, or did he just, you know, hand them a sheet of paper?
[01:36:12.360 --> 01:36:17.360]  I don't know for sure that the boys I talked to today, they're going to bring me the written
[01:36:17.360 --> 01:36:21.360]  warning so I can see it, but they only wrote one of them a warning, and it was the one
[01:36:21.360 --> 01:36:25.360]  that was 15, not the 17-year-old, which I find to be a little sus because they were
[01:36:25.360 --> 01:36:31.360]  both doing, he told the 17-year-old not to do it anymore, and he would arrest him if
[01:36:31.360 --> 01:36:35.360]  he saw him doing it again, and he told the 16-year-old that he would take him to juvenile
[01:36:35.360 --> 01:36:42.360]  court if he saw him doing it again, but the 16-year-old got the written piece of paper.
[01:36:42.360 --> 01:36:46.360]  And that's what my husband witnessed from down the street, because they live like two
[01:36:46.360 --> 01:36:55.360]  houses down from us, so that's why I think it all just seems very suspect.
[01:36:55.360 --> 01:37:01.360]  Well, this might be a fun civics course for those boys and their parents, huh?
[01:37:01.360 --> 01:37:03.360]  Yeah, I hope so.
[01:37:03.360 --> 01:37:11.360]  If they were to get interested enough to begin making some records requests, they could file
[01:37:11.360 --> 01:37:21.360]  a complaint as they see fit, and they could be hit not just from one person, concerned
[01:37:21.360 --> 01:37:26.360]  citizen down the road, but they could be hit from multiple directions.
[01:37:26.360 --> 01:37:33.360]  The boys themselves can file things, records requests, complaints.
[01:37:33.360 --> 01:37:37.360]  These T-code complaints are nothing to sneeze at.
[01:37:37.360 --> 01:37:44.360]  It has an effect on these officers, so that's definitely something their parents can do
[01:37:44.360 --> 01:37:46.360]  the same.
[01:37:46.360 --> 01:37:52.360]  Some attention from multiple angles here, and the criminal complaints, I mean, that's
[01:37:52.360 --> 01:38:01.360]  big, too, so you can reach out to a nearby county judge, district judge, JP, those are
[01:38:01.360 --> 01:38:02.360]  all magistrates.
[01:38:02.360 --> 01:38:05.360]  You can go to a grand jury.
[01:38:05.360 --> 01:38:11.360]  Because he's a public official, you have access to the county attorney or the district
[01:38:11.360 --> 01:38:17.360]  attorney in addition to the county judge, district judge, all the magistrates, because
[01:38:17.360 --> 01:38:22.360]  when it's a public official, they have a duty.
[01:38:22.360 --> 01:38:29.360]  Yeah, I know they probably would like to think that they are the only one that's holding
[01:38:29.360 --> 01:38:35.360]  an original of the criminal complaint, but I'll tell you, what I do is after I get it
[01:38:35.360 --> 01:38:40.360]  notarized, I've got the criminal complaint notarized, and I will go and get color copies
[01:38:40.360 --> 01:38:52.360]  of it and send an original, the color copy original, plus a black and white copy to take
[01:38:52.360 --> 01:38:58.360]  that to a clerk of, let's say I'm going to give this to a district judge.
[01:38:58.360 --> 01:39:05.360]  I go to the district clerk and I say, will you please give this to him and will you please
[01:39:05.360 --> 01:39:06.360]  stamp this?
[01:39:06.360 --> 01:39:10.360]  I want one file stamped for my records.
[01:39:10.360 --> 01:39:18.360]  And she'll look at that and she'll say, oh yeah, as soon as she sees the color, she says
[01:39:18.360 --> 01:39:22.360]  to herself, oh, this one's the original, I'm going to keep this one, and this is black
[01:39:22.360 --> 01:39:24.360]  and white, I'm going to give this one back to you.
[01:39:24.360 --> 01:39:30.360]  And nobody wonders about, is this really the original?
[01:39:30.360 --> 01:39:34.360]  I keep the original for my own records.
[01:39:34.360 --> 01:39:38.360]  And the same thing happens over at some other desk across the way.
[01:39:38.360 --> 01:39:47.360]  So now you've got multiple people on the hook for shielding for prosecution and it can blow
[01:39:47.360 --> 01:39:48.360]  up pretty quickly.
[01:39:48.360 --> 01:39:57.360]  I never thought of that.
[01:39:57.360 --> 01:40:03.360]  Yeah, so you've got, another thing that occurred to me is that he is, if he's asking these
[01:40:03.360 --> 01:40:08.360]  boys for their personal information, well, that's a crime too.
[01:40:08.360 --> 01:40:11.360]  He's not allowed to have access to that.
[01:40:11.360 --> 01:40:14.360]  That's called personal sensitive information.
[01:40:14.360 --> 01:40:16.360]  It's identifying information.
[01:40:16.360 --> 01:40:19.360]  There's a crime, let me see what that was.
[01:40:19.360 --> 01:40:21.360]  Was it in 32 or 38?
[01:40:21.360 --> 01:40:25.360]  Let's see if I can find that real quickly here.
[01:40:25.360 --> 01:40:31.360]  But I just accused somebody of that yesterday and now I've already forgotten the number.
[01:40:31.360 --> 01:40:40.360]  But it is access that he didn't have any business having to this personal information,
[01:40:40.360 --> 01:40:42.360]  depending on how much of it he got.
[01:40:42.360 --> 01:40:48.360]  If there was just a few items, like he had their name, but not their birth date.
[01:40:48.360 --> 01:40:57.360]  The more information that he has, then the more severe of a crime it is.
[01:40:57.360 --> 01:41:19.360]  Let's see, identifying information and 38.
[01:41:19.360 --> 01:41:23.360]  Yeah, I don't know yet which one that's going to be.
[01:41:23.360 --> 01:41:27.360]  I do have another question before I get off.
[01:41:27.360 --> 01:41:30.360]  It pertains to this, but.
[01:41:30.360 --> 01:41:33.360]  Sure, what's on your mind?
[01:41:33.360 --> 01:41:38.360]  I was just wondering, now that I think about this, what your thoughts are on why he would have given
[01:41:38.360 --> 01:41:40.360]  only one written warning.
[01:41:40.360 --> 01:41:44.360]  I mean, it just occurred to me since I've been on the phone with you that that's very odd
[01:41:44.360 --> 01:41:49.360]  because they were both, both the boys were engaged in the activity that he was trying to solve.
[01:41:49.360 --> 01:41:54.360]  And I can't imagine why that would be.
[01:41:54.360 --> 01:41:56.360]  I mean, I don't know if you would have any insight.
[01:41:56.360 --> 01:42:00.360]  Obviously, we don't know why he even stopped them to begin with.
[01:42:00.360 --> 01:42:03.360]  No, I think he just was throwing his weight around.
[01:42:03.360 --> 01:42:07.360]  He wanted the boys to not be doing that on the road where he lives.
[01:42:07.360 --> 01:42:18.360]  And he thought that his uniform and him acting intimidating was going to take care of this.
[01:42:18.360 --> 01:42:26.360]  And I think that's just all he was all he had to go on.
[01:42:26.360 --> 01:42:27.360]  I found that crime.
[01:42:27.360 --> 01:42:29.360]  It is in the penal code.
[01:42:29.360 --> 01:42:35.360]  It's the Texas Penal Code 3251.
[01:42:35.360 --> 01:42:39.360]  So it's a crime depending on how much information he has.
[01:42:39.360 --> 01:42:46.360]  It can go up if it's a state jail felony all the way up to his first degree felony,
[01:42:46.360 --> 01:42:50.360]  depending on whether he got 50 items or more.
[01:42:50.360 --> 01:42:52.360]  I don't think that's possible for a kid.
[01:42:52.360 --> 01:42:59.360]  He probably has less than five would be a state jail felony.
[01:42:59.360 --> 01:43:06.360]  If he had five or more, but less than 10, that's a third degree felony.
[01:43:06.360 --> 01:43:16.360]  Items are things like the name, any unique electronic identification number,
[01:43:16.360 --> 01:43:22.360]  which could be phone, could be any kind of card or bank account or anything like that.
[01:43:22.360 --> 01:43:27.360]  When you start having this information about somebody,
[01:43:27.360 --> 01:43:36.360]  then the possession of that is a crime if your intent is to defraud or harm.
[01:43:36.360 --> 01:43:37.360]  Let's see.
[01:43:37.360 --> 01:43:39.360]  Yep.
[01:43:39.360 --> 01:43:40.360]  To defraud or harm.
[01:43:40.360 --> 01:43:41.360]  Yeah, that's it.
[01:43:41.360 --> 01:43:42.360]  It's all right there.
[01:43:42.360 --> 01:43:43.360]  3251.
[01:43:43.360 --> 01:43:44.360]  Take a look at that.
[01:43:44.360 --> 01:43:45.360]  Thank you.
[01:43:45.360 --> 01:43:51.360]  Let's see if that lines up with your next criminal complaint you'd like to write.
[01:43:51.360 --> 01:43:52.360]  All right.
[01:43:52.360 --> 01:43:54.360]  We're just about to go to our sponsors again.
[01:43:54.360 --> 01:43:57.360]  Let me give out the call-in number for our last segment.
[01:43:57.360 --> 01:44:25.360]  It is 512-647.
[01:44:27.360 --> 01:44:34.360]  We have come to trust Young Jevities so much,
[01:44:34.360 --> 01:44:40.360]  we became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs and many others.
[01:44:40.360 --> 01:44:43.360]  When you order from logosradio.com,
[01:44:43.360 --> 01:44:47.360]  your health will improve as you help support quality radio.
[01:44:47.360 --> 01:44:52.360]  As you realize the benefits of Young Jevities, you may want to join us.
[01:44:52.360 --> 01:44:55.360]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health,
[01:44:55.360 --> 01:44:58.360]  help your friends and family, and increase your income.
[01:44:58.360 --> 01:45:03.360]  Order now.
[01:45:03.360 --> 01:45:06.360]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:06.360 --> 01:45:09.360]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[01:45:09.360 --> 01:45:17.360]  the affordable, easy-to-understand, 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:17.360 --> 01:45:21.360]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:21.360 --> 01:45:25.360]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:25.360 --> 01:45:30.360]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:30.360 --> 01:45:36.360]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:36.360 --> 01:45:41.360]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[01:45:41.360 --> 01:45:45.360]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:45.360 --> 01:45:50.360]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials,
[01:45:50.360 --> 01:45:54.360]  programs for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:54.360 --> 01:46:21.360]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free, 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:24.360 --> 01:46:26.360]  All right, we are back.
[01:46:26.360 --> 01:46:29.360]  This is the Rule of Law Radio, Randy Kelton.
[01:46:29.360 --> 01:46:36.360]  I'm Brett Fountain, and we're going to go to our next caller, which is Shane in New York.
[01:46:36.360 --> 01:46:41.360]  Good evening, Shane.
[01:46:41.360 --> 01:46:44.360]  How are you doing tonight?
[01:46:44.360 --> 01:46:49.360]  Hey there. I guess you're actually already into tomorrow, huh?
[01:46:49.360 --> 01:46:51.360]  What's on your mind this evening?
[01:46:51.360 --> 01:46:53.360]  Yes, I actually am.
[01:46:53.360 --> 01:46:55.360]  I just wanted to see how you guys are doing.
[01:46:55.360 --> 01:47:00.360]  How's Randy doing? Is he out on a holiday?
[01:47:00.360 --> 01:47:07.360]  No, he actually was having some trouble getting back to the house in time to get connected.
[01:47:07.360 --> 01:47:09.360]  I don't know exactly what the details are.
[01:47:09.360 --> 01:47:12.360]  He just wasn't going to make it back from Fort Worth.
[01:47:12.360 --> 01:47:15.360]  So I guess we'll find out.
[01:47:15.360 --> 01:47:17.360]  I don't know any more than that right now.
[01:47:17.360 --> 01:47:20.360]  But yeah, it's like I told him, that's a good reason.
[01:47:20.360 --> 01:47:27.360]  If somebody got in an accident or had to take your wife to the hospital or something, it's a fine reason.
[01:47:27.360 --> 01:47:29.360]  Well, that's good.
[01:47:29.360 --> 01:47:37.360]  Well, I just got maybe like a two, three-minute question, maybe a little guidance,
[01:47:37.360 --> 01:47:39.360]  but I think I know what's going to happen.
[01:47:39.360 --> 01:47:44.360]  But I filed a motion for extension of time to respond back to the motion to dismiss.
[01:47:44.360 --> 01:47:48.360]  I have a Pear Deck Collection Practices lawsuit against all...
[01:47:48.360 --> 01:47:56.360]  A motion? They had a motion to dismiss, and you had a motion for what?
[01:47:56.360 --> 01:47:59.360]  An extension of time to respond.
[01:47:59.360 --> 01:48:01.360]  Okay.
[01:48:01.360 --> 01:48:04.360]  So ultimately, I asked for 90 days, and it was granted.
[01:48:04.360 --> 01:48:07.360]  And it's a federal case I got going on.
[01:48:07.360 --> 01:48:09.360]  And I did the same thing for the state case,
[01:48:09.360 --> 01:48:13.360]  because I'm suing all the officers in the state case for long-term foreclosure action.
[01:48:13.360 --> 01:48:17.360]  And the federal case is under the Pear Deck Collection Practices lawsuit.
[01:48:17.360 --> 01:48:25.360]  So both judges granted the extension of time, and two different attorneys for two different cases.
[01:48:25.360 --> 01:48:30.360]  But they filed a motion last week to seal my motion for extension of time,
[01:48:30.360 --> 01:48:37.360]  because in my motion, I talked about the misbehavior and the corruption and misconduct by the attorney,
[01:48:37.360 --> 01:48:41.360]  and I attached the...
[01:48:41.360 --> 01:48:45.360]  Can't have that going out and becoming known.
[01:48:45.360 --> 01:48:48.360]  Yeah, by the way, it's taken years to get to this.
[01:48:48.360 --> 01:48:52.360]  But I finally got my first one ever, and it says that he's been reprimanded.
[01:48:52.360 --> 01:48:55.360]  We apologize for the bar grievance that this happened.
[01:48:55.360 --> 01:49:00.360]  I might get too deep into the complaint, but it was basically forging documents and so forth and so on.
[01:49:00.360 --> 01:49:05.360]  And they filed a motion to seal it in the state case and the federal case.
[01:49:05.360 --> 01:49:08.360]  The federal case, they have not made a ruling out of the state case.
[01:49:08.360 --> 01:49:14.360]  They went ahead and sealed it until the hearing coming up in July 30th or 29th.
[01:49:14.360 --> 01:49:16.360]  And they sealed it.
[01:49:16.360 --> 01:49:18.360]  Until the hearing?
[01:49:18.360 --> 01:49:19.360]  Until the hearing.
[01:49:19.360 --> 01:49:21.360]  The federal court has not taken an action on it.
[01:49:21.360 --> 01:49:24.360]  So what's going to be interesting, because it's almost the same motion.
[01:49:24.360 --> 01:49:29.360]  And both attorneys are from the same law firm with two different attorneys.
[01:49:29.360 --> 01:49:35.360]  You have one attorney representing the officers for KeyBank in the state case,
[01:49:35.360 --> 01:49:39.360]  and they have another attorney representing them in the federal lawsuit.
[01:49:39.360 --> 01:49:45.360]  Well, the only question they had is under confidentiality,
[01:49:45.360 --> 01:49:50.360]  once they raised that in the open court that I filed a bar grievance against them,
[01:49:50.360 --> 01:49:56.360]  because this particular attorney, David P. Case, out in Rochester, New York, that literally steals homes.
[01:49:56.360 --> 01:49:58.360]  I think it's well over.
[01:49:58.360 --> 01:50:01.360]  It's in the thousands and thousands of homes.
[01:50:01.360 --> 01:50:07.360]  And one of the most cocky, arrogant attorneys I've ever personally met in my entire life
[01:50:07.360 --> 01:50:12.360]  thinks he's going to get away, he might get away with it, but they're trying to seal it.
[01:50:12.360 --> 01:50:18.360]  I don't know if they can do that, but pursuant to the traditional law,
[01:50:18.360 --> 01:50:25.360]  I forget it's 90-10 here in New York, I don't know if they can seal that.
[01:50:25.360 --> 01:50:29.360]  But the state case already, the federal haven't made a ruling on it yet.
[01:50:29.360 --> 01:50:31.360]  But have you ever heard of such a thing?
[01:50:31.360 --> 01:50:34.360]  Well, what do they say is the grounds for sealing?
[01:50:34.360 --> 01:50:36.360]  When they do a motion to seal?
[01:50:36.360 --> 01:50:39.360]  You have to say grounds for it, show good cause.
[01:50:39.360 --> 01:50:41.360]  And what did they give?
[01:50:41.360 --> 01:50:43.360]  It's going to ruin his reputation.
[01:50:43.360 --> 01:50:45.360]  Sorry?
[01:50:45.360 --> 01:50:50.360]  It's going to ruin his reputation.
[01:50:50.360 --> 01:50:54.360]  Well, I'm sorry, but he shouldn't have been committing all those crimes.
[01:50:54.360 --> 01:50:56.360]  Is it true?
[01:50:56.360 --> 01:50:58.360]  Those are grounds for your motion.
[01:50:58.360 --> 01:51:04.360]  The stuff that he's complaining about is a matter of public record,
[01:51:04.360 --> 01:51:07.360]  because it's in your motion.
[01:51:07.360 --> 01:51:11.360]  Yes, and I responded back within two days, and I'll just cut right to it,
[01:51:11.360 --> 01:51:15.360]  is that since he brought this issue up in open court that I filed a bar grievance,
[01:51:15.360 --> 01:51:18.360]  he waives all confidentiality.
[01:51:18.360 --> 01:51:20.360]  There you go.
[01:51:20.360 --> 01:51:22.360]  I think that's perfectly fitting.
[01:51:22.360 --> 01:51:24.360]  He brought it up.
[01:51:24.360 --> 01:51:27.360]  Have you ever heard of that before?
[01:51:27.360 --> 01:51:30.360]  Have you ever heard of this situation?
[01:51:30.360 --> 01:51:33.360]  First of all, it's very difficult to get a ruling in your favor from the bar grievance.
[01:51:33.360 --> 01:51:36.360]  That's a huge accomplishment.
[01:51:36.360 --> 01:51:39.360]  But have you ever heard of anybody that happened to?
[01:51:39.360 --> 01:51:41.360]  No, I never have.
[01:51:41.360 --> 01:51:44.360]  You're the first.
[01:51:44.360 --> 01:51:51.360]  Okay, well, the motion is sealed, so I'm waiting for the federal judge to make a ruling,
[01:51:51.360 --> 01:51:54.360]  maybe sometime this week, but I already responded.
[01:51:54.360 --> 01:51:56.360]  So we'll see what happens.
[01:51:56.360 --> 01:52:01.360]  But the good news, I got the extension of time under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Lawsuit,
[01:52:01.360 --> 01:52:07.360]  and that's not due until August, and then the state case is going to be late July sometime,
[01:52:07.360 --> 01:52:09.360]  so I've got both cases split in half.
[01:52:09.360 --> 01:52:14.360]  But what I wanted to tell you is that it did stop the foreclosure sale of the property,
[01:52:14.360 --> 01:52:16.360]  because they were going to sell it last month.
[01:52:16.360 --> 01:52:18.360]  It did stop it.
[01:52:18.360 --> 01:52:20.360]  Wonderful.
[01:52:20.360 --> 01:52:21.360]  Right.
[01:52:21.360 --> 01:52:29.360]  Yeah, as far as sealing, I mean, I had one time in one case I had a judge get really angry with me,
[01:52:29.360 --> 01:52:36.360]  and I didn't really understand why, but he was frustrated and irritated,
[01:52:36.360 --> 01:52:44.360]  and he sealed one of my pleadings without me.
[01:52:44.360 --> 01:52:46.360]  I didn't have any weighing in on the matter or anything.
[01:52:46.360 --> 01:52:48.360]  It was just a done deal.
[01:52:48.360 --> 01:52:52.360]  And he was so upset, and he says, you did this on purpose.
[01:52:52.360 --> 01:52:54.360]  I'm sorry, Your Honor, what did I do?
[01:52:54.360 --> 01:52:56.360]  You know what you did.
[01:52:56.360 --> 01:52:58.360]  You did this on purpose.
[01:52:58.360 --> 01:53:06.360]  And after a while it clicked with me, the address that I had given,
[01:53:06.360 --> 01:53:11.360]  because these people were stirring up a case against me and did not serve me,
[01:53:11.360 --> 01:53:15.360]  so I didn't have any particular address to respond to.
[01:53:15.360 --> 01:53:18.360]  I didn't know where I'm supposed to send something.
[01:53:18.360 --> 01:53:25.360]  And I was already being, you know, as proactive as I knew how to be at the time,
[01:53:25.360 --> 01:53:31.360]  and sending something to, I had to call around, and I found out the attorney,
[01:53:31.360 --> 01:53:40.360]  and I looked up the attorney's address, and the judge was really furious
[01:53:40.360 --> 01:53:46.360]  because I had put the home address of his brand new attorney.
[01:53:46.360 --> 01:53:50.360]  She'd just popped out of law school, and she showed up in his courtroom,
[01:53:50.360 --> 01:53:54.360]  and then immediately I'm putting her home address in the public record,
[01:53:54.360 --> 01:53:57.360]  and she didn't like that.
[01:53:57.360 --> 01:54:01.360]  I said, well, she put my home address in the public record.
[01:54:01.360 --> 01:54:05.360]  I didn't think anybody minded about that.
[01:54:05.360 --> 01:54:07.360]  Exactly.
[01:54:07.360 --> 01:54:09.360]  It just made him more angry.
[01:54:09.360 --> 01:54:17.360]  Did you ever file a judicial complaint against the judge?
[01:54:17.360 --> 01:54:21.360]  I don't know if I knew about judicial complaints back then.
[01:54:21.360 --> 01:54:24.360]  I'm not sure I did.
[01:54:24.360 --> 01:54:25.360]  Let's see, that'll be Dean Fowler.
[01:54:25.360 --> 01:54:29.360]  No, I don't think I did.
[01:54:29.360 --> 01:54:30.360]  I think he didn't get one.
[01:54:30.360 --> 01:54:32.360]  I think that was Dean Fowler.
[01:54:32.360 --> 01:54:37.360]  I don't think I knew about judicial complaints back then.
[01:54:37.360 --> 01:54:38.360]  Oh, okay.
[01:54:38.360 --> 01:54:41.360]  Well, you know, there's one thing I always wonder about.
[01:54:41.360 --> 01:54:43.360]  Does that even affect the judge?
[01:54:43.360 --> 01:54:46.360]  Do they even really care if you file a judicial complaint?
[01:54:46.360 --> 01:54:51.360]  And if you do, before he makes a ruling, necessarily would that mean that they're going to deny you
[01:54:51.360 --> 01:54:56.360]  now that you did this, now we're going to pay you back, or denied?
[01:54:56.360 --> 01:55:00.360]  Well, once I've filed a judicial misconduct complaint,
[01:55:00.360 --> 01:55:07.360]  I go ahead and move for disqualification of that judge for bias.
[01:55:07.360 --> 01:55:13.360]  You know, he can't be 100% unbiased.
[01:55:13.360 --> 01:55:18.360]  When they feel something, and the state judge already did it, Emilio Cavallo,
[01:55:18.360 --> 01:55:20.360]  he already did it.
[01:55:20.360 --> 01:55:22.360]  No due process, no hearing, no nothing.
[01:55:22.360 --> 01:55:29.360]  Is that enough grounds to recuse a judge just based on that?
[01:55:29.360 --> 01:55:31.360]  Hmm.
[01:55:31.360 --> 01:55:38.360]  Yeah, if you can construe that as bias, which it seems like that you could,
[01:55:38.360 --> 01:55:44.360]  then nobody has to sit under a biased judge.
[01:55:44.360 --> 01:55:51.360]  You could put a motion to the court to vacate this, his rulings for bias,
[01:55:51.360 --> 01:55:58.360]  and move to disqualify him, get a judge in there that's fair and impartial.
[01:55:58.360 --> 01:56:01.360]  Right.
[01:56:01.360 --> 01:56:06.360]  You have a right to fair and impartial hearings, neutral and detached.
[01:56:06.360 --> 01:56:08.360]  That's part of it.
[01:56:08.360 --> 01:56:11.360]  I'm not going to do anything yet because I'm waiting for a ruling
[01:56:11.360 --> 01:56:16.360]  from the federal judge this week, once he makes his decision.
[01:56:16.360 --> 01:56:21.360]  So if he says, you know, your motion is hereby denied and sealed,
[01:56:21.360 --> 01:56:27.360]  a letter of, you know, behavior issues with this attorney,
[01:56:27.360 --> 01:56:30.360]  which is absolutely ridiculous.
[01:56:30.360 --> 01:56:34.360]  But I'm not sure if you noticed, I read a couple cases here in upstate New York
[01:56:34.360 --> 01:56:37.360]  that once you talk about your bar grievancy complaint in open court,
[01:56:37.360 --> 01:56:40.360]  you waive everything.
[01:56:40.360 --> 01:56:42.360]  See, that's beautiful.
[01:56:42.360 --> 01:56:46.360]  And you can actually move forward to get all of their complaints
[01:56:46.360 --> 01:56:49.360]  they've never had since they've been in office, been as an attorney.
[01:56:49.360 --> 01:56:50.360]  No way.
[01:56:50.360 --> 01:56:52.360]  That opens up the door.
[01:56:52.360 --> 01:56:54.360]  That opens up the door.
[01:56:54.360 --> 01:56:57.360]  I was going to get Randy and ask him about that because Randy did mention this to me,
[01:56:57.360 --> 01:57:01.360]  I think four or five years ago we talked about this on a radio show,
[01:57:01.360 --> 01:57:05.360]  and if the attorney brings up your bar grievance in open court,
[01:57:05.360 --> 01:57:10.360]  he waives confidentiality and also you can get all of his complaints
[01:57:10.360 --> 01:57:12.360]  since he's been in since day one.
[01:57:12.360 --> 01:57:18.360]  And then he can use that for, you know, got a whole slew of things.
[01:57:18.360 --> 01:57:20.360]  Oh, that's beautiful.
[01:57:20.360 --> 01:57:23.360]  Yeah, I love it.
[01:57:23.360 --> 01:57:25.360]  Wow.
[01:57:25.360 --> 01:57:28.360]  Can you get the details of that?
[01:57:28.360 --> 01:57:30.360]  Can you find out?
[01:57:30.360 --> 01:57:37.360]  Now that that's open, can you find out like what it was that was the content of the complaint
[01:57:37.360 --> 01:57:42.360]  and what did he respond back and so forth?
[01:57:42.360 --> 01:57:45.360]  Or do you just get to find out that there were some?
[01:57:45.360 --> 01:57:46.360]  Yes.
[01:57:46.360 --> 01:57:48.360]  The answer is yes to all that stuff.
[01:57:48.360 --> 01:57:49.360]  You can get all that stuff.
[01:57:49.360 --> 01:57:50.360]  I just need to find out.
[01:57:50.360 --> 01:57:51.360]  Oh, wow.
[01:57:51.360 --> 01:57:55.360]  I think you have to see in New York, you have to actually file right in the appellate court.
[01:57:55.360 --> 01:57:58.360]  You can't file in the lower courts.
[01:57:58.360 --> 01:58:01.360]  You have to get straight up to the appellate court and file a motion.
[01:58:01.360 --> 01:58:05.360]  So it's a beautiful nugget.
[01:58:05.360 --> 01:58:06.360]  Yeah.
[01:58:06.360 --> 01:58:10.360]  And I can hear the music in the background.
[01:58:10.360 --> 01:58:13.360]  Yeah, we're just about done for the night.
[01:58:13.360 --> 01:58:15.360]  I sure am glad you called in.
[01:58:15.360 --> 01:58:22.360]  That was great.
[01:58:22.360 --> 01:58:23.360]  All right.
[01:58:23.360 --> 01:58:26.360]  Well, this has been a really good evening.
[01:58:26.360 --> 01:58:33.360]  I hope you enjoyed all of the callers and hopefully Randy will be up for joining us
[01:58:33.360 --> 01:58:40.360]  as we come back around next week, Thursday and Friday, 8 p.m. Central.
[01:58:40.360 --> 01:58:50.360]  So thank you all and good night.
[01:58:50.360 --> 01:58:57.360]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version.
[01:58:57.360 --> 01:59:04.360]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the Bible says verse by verse,
[01:59:04.360 --> 01:59:08.360]  helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.360 --> 01:59:11.360]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:11.360 --> 01:59:20.360]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.360 --> 01:59:25.360]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references,
[01:59:25.360 --> 01:59:29.360]  plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:29.360 --> 01:59:32.360]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.360 --> 01:59:40.360]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:40.360 --> 01:59:49.360]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:49.360 --> 02:00:11.360]  Looking for some truth? You found it, LogosRadioNetwork.com.