ROL_2009-04-17_16k_Hr1-2.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:11.920]  An Iraq Tuesday, 15 Iraqis were killed and 27 wounded. Barack Obama made a secret visit
[00:11.920 --> 00:19.640]  to Iraq and told U.S. troops there is still a lot of work to do. Journalist Muntadar Alzaidi,
[00:19.640 --> 00:25.640]  famous for throwing his shoes at George Bush, had his prison sentence reduced to one year.
[00:25.640 --> 00:31.000]  On Afghanistan Tuesday, a Romanian officer was killed in a roadside blast. On Monday,
[00:31.000 --> 00:36.400]  rockets killed a Dutch soldier and wounded five others. In London, England, police clashed
[00:36.400 --> 00:42.080]  with thousands of Tamils as they lay siege to parliament. Protesters flying a Tamil Tiger's
[00:42.080 --> 00:47.720]  flag threatened to leap en masse from Westminster Bridge if they were not allowed to speak to
[00:47.720 --> 00:58.800]  Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Peru's former president, Alberto Fujimori, has been jailed
[00:58.800 --> 01:05.600]  for 25 years after being found guilty of crimes against humanity and other charges. Fujimori,
[01:05.600 --> 01:11.520]  who said he would appeal the verdict, was found to have ordered massacres and kidnappings during
[01:11.520 --> 01:17.960]  the 1990s dirty war against the Shining Path rebel group. The former president, already
[01:17.960 --> 01:23.200]  serving a six-year term for abuse of power, was sentenced after the verdict was read to
[01:23.200 --> 01:31.040]  a packed courtroom in Lima, the capital, Tuesday. Maria McFarland, a senior Americas researcher
[01:31.040 --> 01:36.800]  at Human Rights Watch, said after years of evading justice, Fujimori is finally being
[01:36.800 --> 01:43.840]  held to account for some of his crimes. Fujimori could still be pardoned by Alan Garcia, the
[01:43.840 --> 01:49.520]  current Peruvian president, if he loses his appeal. Fujimori's jail sentence marks the
[01:49.520 --> 01:55.320]  first time a democratically elected Latin American leader has been found guilty of rights
[01:55.320 --> 02:02.600]  abuses. As Vancouver, British Columbia, prepares to host the 2010 Winter Olympics, a new reality
[02:02.600 --> 02:08.720]  has taken hold. Canada's major West Coast port, once described by The Economist as the
[02:08.720 --> 02:15.040]  most livable city in the world, is now the battlefield in a war between drug gangs. Vancouver's
[02:15.040 --> 02:21.640]  mayor, Gregor Robertson, confessed police are fighting a losing battle. Since mid-January,
[02:21.640 --> 02:27.880]  the city has recorded 50 gang-related shootings, 18 of them fatal. Illegal drugs are now the
[02:27.880 --> 02:34.160]  third largest industry in the province, whose mild climate and well-educated horticulturalists
[02:34.160 --> 02:40.720]  has led to a supply of a premium brand of cannabis called B.C. Bud. The drug's superior
[02:40.720 --> 02:46.480]  quality also found favor with customers in the U.S., encouraging an imaginative core
[02:46.480 --> 02:53.040]  of smugglers. One enterprising crew emulated World War II prisoners, digging a 100-yard
[02:53.040 --> 03:05.480]  tunnel under the U.S. border. This April will mark 14 years since the Oklahoma City bombing
[03:05.480 --> 03:12.480]  claimed 169 lives. Monday, April 20th at 7 p.m., Brave New Books in Austin, Texas is
[03:12.480 --> 03:17.520]  presenting a discussion by the hosts of Radio Free Oklahoma addressing many unanswered questions
[03:17.520 --> 03:23.000]  about that tragedy. Did you know that there was more than one bomb involved in this tragedy?
[03:23.000 --> 03:26.460]  Did you know that there are many concrete links between the Oklahoma City bombing and
[03:26.460 --> 03:32.640]  9-11? Did you know that current Attorney General Eric Holder was directly involved with a cover-up
[03:32.640 --> 03:37.520]  following the Oklahoma City bombing? Monday, April 20th, 7 p.m., at Brave New Books, Chris
[03:37.520 --> 03:41.960]  Emery, Andrew Griffin, and Haaland Vanden Noanoff will be discussing the results of
[03:41.960 --> 03:46.040]  their investigation into the Oklahoma City bombing. This event will also be broadcast
[03:46.040 --> 03:50.680]  on the Rule of Law radio program, hosted by Deborah Stevens and Randy Kelton. For more
[03:50.680 --> 03:57.840]  information, go to bravenewbookstore.com or ruleoflawradio.com. The Oklahoma City bombing,
[04:20.680 --> 04:41.840]  and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing,
[04:41.840 --> 05:02.200]  and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing,
[05:02.200 --> 05:22.560]  and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing,
[05:22.560 --> 05:42.920]  and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing,
[05:42.920 --> 05:58.000]  and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing, and the Oklahoma City bombing,
[05:58.000 --> 06:12.320]  We're here, it's Friday evening, April 17, 2009, and we have some very special guests
[06:12.320 --> 06:14.080]  for you this evening.
[06:14.080 --> 06:20.520]  We've got Eddie Craig, who's going to be going over the traffic code, the transportation
[06:20.520 --> 06:23.280]  code here in Texas.
[06:23.280 --> 06:29.920]  And also we have Karen Renick from Vote Rescue, who's going to be discussing some very important
[06:29.920 --> 06:35.440]  bills that are coming up for subcommittee hearings on Monday.
[06:35.440 --> 06:41.280]  And I feel a rant coming on myself.
[06:41.280 --> 06:50.320]  I was informed by an email, because these things always happen at the last minute.
[06:50.320 --> 06:55.240]  There is a very important bill here, actually resolution, House resolution coming up for
[06:55.240 --> 07:02.680]  committee hearing this Tuesday, this coming Tuesday, HCR number 50.
[07:02.680 --> 07:10.560]  This has to do with the sovereignty issue of the state, state of Texas.
[07:10.560 --> 07:14.280]  And I was looking at this bill and it's just incredible.
[07:14.280 --> 07:27.200]  Then come to find out there are over 70 House Reps that have signed as co-authors out of
[07:27.200 --> 07:29.160]  150.
[07:29.160 --> 07:31.920]  And there hasn't even been a committee hearing it.
[07:31.920 --> 07:37.800]  So I take this as very, very good news, all right?
[07:37.800 --> 07:44.480]  So I just want to encourage everyone to please call your State Rep, your House Rep, and encourage
[07:44.480 --> 07:52.520]  them to support HCR 50 and go to the committee hearing this Tuesday at the State Capitol
[07:52.520 --> 07:53.520]  here.
[07:53.520 --> 07:57.960]  If you are sovereign, you will be there.
[07:57.960 --> 08:01.000]  I mean, this is just incredible, people.
[08:01.000 --> 08:06.840]  I mean, finally somebody's doing something right, okay?
[08:06.840 --> 08:09.920]  I mean, if you read this bill, it's just incredible.
[08:09.920 --> 08:17.240]  It's talking about the federal government being in violation of the Constitution and
[08:17.240 --> 08:21.560]  the states claiming its sovereignty and just everything.
[08:21.560 --> 08:22.960]  I mean, it's incredible.
[08:22.960 --> 08:28.800]  So please call your State Rep and encourage them to support HCR 50 and go to the committee
[08:28.800 --> 08:30.600]  hearing.
[08:30.600 --> 08:43.360]  And also there's another bill, House Bill 2468, which my Rep, Eddie Rodriguez, has authored
[08:43.360 --> 08:50.040]  regarding the examinations of the voting systems.
[08:50.040 --> 08:56.520]  Now unfortunately, according to the legal definition, a voting system does involve either
[08:56.520 --> 09:03.600]  mechanical or some kind of electronic equipment, and we don't want any of that at all, period.
[09:03.600 --> 09:12.880]  But at least if they're going to force it on us, this bill 2468, which is going to be
[09:12.880 --> 09:20.360]  in a public hearing, heard it public hearing on Monday, this coming Monday, would enforce
[09:20.360 --> 09:28.480]  public oversight of the examination process by these examiners that the Secretary of State
[09:28.480 --> 09:35.440]  appoints, and it would allow for the public to videotape the examination.
[09:35.440 --> 09:44.080]  So I want to give a big thumbs up to my Rep, Eddie Rodriguez, for authoring this.
[09:44.080 --> 09:48.440]  And I want everyone to please support this bill as well and try to get down to the Capitol
[09:48.440 --> 09:49.440]  on Monday.
[09:49.440 --> 09:52.440]  Karen, thank you for joining us tonight.
[09:52.440 --> 09:53.440]  Yeah.
[09:53.440 --> 09:54.440]  Hi, Deb.
[09:54.440 --> 09:55.440]  And hi, Randy.
[09:55.440 --> 09:56.440]  How are you?
[09:56.440 --> 09:57.440]  I'm doing great.
[09:57.440 --> 09:58.440]  Good.
[09:58.440 --> 09:59.440]  Good.
[09:59.440 --> 10:00.440]  Yeah.
[10:00.440 --> 10:05.440]  Can I just sort of pick up where you left off with Eddie Rodriguez's bill?
[10:05.440 --> 10:06.440]  Yes.
[10:06.440 --> 10:14.440]  There's some back history, if you want to call it, to what that bill is trying to correct,
[10:14.440 --> 10:20.520]  let's say, that I'll fill your listeners in about.
[10:20.520 --> 10:26.360]  You know, there was a lawsuit, I think it was probably about five years ago, that I
[10:26.360 --> 10:32.840]  believe the ACLU filed to force these examinations.
[10:32.840 --> 10:39.080]  And this is when the examiners who are appointed by the Secretary of State's office, there's
[10:39.080 --> 10:45.080]  six of them, I think two are from the AG's office, Attorney General's office, and then
[10:45.080 --> 10:52.120]  I think the others come from either the Secretary of State's office or outside so-called experts.
[10:52.120 --> 10:58.380]  And these are the people who, they're the ones that the vendors, you know, run their
[10:58.380 --> 11:04.040]  dog and pony shows for, and they supposedly run these machines through all these tests
[11:04.040 --> 11:06.520]  and sort of pretend elections.
[11:06.520 --> 11:13.760]  Well, the ACLU did win a case about five years ago where they did get these meetings to be
[11:13.760 --> 11:16.640]  opened up again to the public.
[11:16.640 --> 11:23.360]  That only lasted though about, I believe, one year, if that, and then almost immediately
[11:23.360 --> 11:28.360]  a law was passed in the very next session of the legislature that closed the meetings
[11:28.360 --> 11:32.320]  down so the public couldn't be at those meetings.
[11:32.320 --> 11:36.760]  And what they did, they threw the public a bone and they said, oh, well, we'll give the
[11:36.760 --> 11:41.360]  public their chance to tell us what they think about these machines.
[11:41.360 --> 11:45.720]  Not at the time when the vendors are there to witness anything, but just sort of after
[11:45.720 --> 11:46.720]  the fact.
[11:46.720 --> 11:54.520]  And then supposedly the public's comment would be taken into consideration by the examiners
[11:54.520 --> 11:59.160]  and then the Secretary of State, supposedly.
[11:59.160 --> 12:06.440]  So that's the format that we've been operating under for probably the last three to four
[12:06.440 --> 12:07.440]  years.
[12:07.440 --> 12:15.680]  And it's a totally useless procedure because our comments, the public's comments, and our
[12:15.680 --> 12:20.200]  supporters of Out Rescue and other interested people have been going to these things ad
[12:20.200 --> 12:21.920]  nauseam over the years.
[12:21.920 --> 12:30.560]  Now, wait a minute, Karen, the last time these inspectors examined these machines after they
[12:30.560 --> 12:34.520]  programmed in the results, why, they counted the vote right.
[12:34.520 --> 12:36.920]  Isn't that great?
[12:36.920 --> 12:41.040]  Wait a minute, say that again.
[12:41.040 --> 12:42.040]  Randy?
[12:42.040 --> 12:51.760]  He's referring to the ES&S machines- They had the machine count 10 votes and it couldn't
[12:51.760 --> 12:55.120]  get it right until they programmed in the result.
[12:55.120 --> 12:59.880]  Oh, are you talking about, were you reading some of the reports by the examiners?
[12:59.880 --> 13:00.880]  Yes, yes.
[13:00.880 --> 13:01.880]  Oh, I know.
[13:01.880 --> 13:04.040]  No, these reports- The way it's going is working great, isn't
[13:04.040 --> 13:05.040]  it?
[13:05.040 --> 13:06.040]  Oh, yeah.
[13:06.040 --> 13:07.040]  Red like the onion.
[13:07.040 --> 13:08.040]  You know it.
[13:08.040 --> 13:11.960]  You almost think, yeah, that these are meant for the onion.
[13:11.960 --> 13:13.600]  You got it.
[13:13.600 --> 13:18.640]  And that is exactly one of the real serious problems.
[13:18.640 --> 13:22.400]  And you know, I guess to their credit, I mean, if you want to give them something, they do
[13:22.400 --> 13:25.360]  post these examiners' reports.
[13:25.360 --> 13:31.080]  And when you read them, you just, you know, you can't believe it because the machines
[13:31.080 --> 13:34.720]  aren't working during these tests.
[13:34.720 --> 13:39.920]  And yet, they all get passed and, you know, they're always promised by the vendor that
[13:39.920 --> 13:40.920]  it will get fixed.
[13:40.920 --> 13:44.880]  You know, that they write, yeah, this didn't work, but the vendor said that they would
[13:44.880 --> 13:45.880]  fix that.
[13:45.880 --> 13:51.160]  Yes, and keep in mind, this wasn't a surprise test.
[13:51.160 --> 13:57.000]  This is where they ask you to bring your machine down here and demonstrate it.
[13:57.000 --> 13:58.000]  Exactly.
[13:58.000 --> 14:02.440]  The company actually brought the machines there.
[14:02.440 --> 14:07.920]  If anyone read these reports, when I read them, I looked over at Deborah and I said,
[14:07.920 --> 14:09.880]  is this from the onion?
[14:09.880 --> 14:13.560]  No, it was absolutely unreal.
[14:13.560 --> 14:17.560]  I mean, they totally admit the machines couldn't count.
[14:17.560 --> 14:26.720]  There was a test, a test, quote, election of 10 ballots and the total was only three.
[14:26.720 --> 14:27.720]  Yeah.
[14:27.720 --> 14:28.720]  Okay.
[14:28.720 --> 14:30.920]  I mean, it was just absolutely ridiculous.
[14:30.920 --> 14:35.680]  And they couldn't, they could not get the software to work until they pre-programmed
[14:35.680 --> 14:42.240]  in the, quote, election data, whatever that means.
[14:42.240 --> 14:43.720]  Until the fake election that they're running.
[14:43.720 --> 14:45.320]  We're talking 10 votes.
[14:45.320 --> 14:46.320]  I know.
[14:46.320 --> 14:47.320]  I know.
[14:47.320 --> 14:48.320]  Well, we have...
[14:48.320 --> 14:55.440]  And one inspector complained that the machine had a switch that would reverse the votes
[14:55.440 --> 14:56.440]  of minorities.
[14:56.440 --> 14:57.760]  That was in California.
[14:57.760 --> 14:58.760]  That was the Stanford test.
[14:58.760 --> 14:59.960]  That was a different test.
[14:59.960 --> 15:00.960]  Yeah.
[15:00.960 --> 15:01.960]  Yeah, that did happen.
[15:01.960 --> 15:07.000]  But they are present in the machines, in some of them, probably all, but, you know, not
[15:07.000 --> 15:09.880]  all of them have been discovered, I suppose.
[15:09.880 --> 15:16.520]  But we actually, oh, gosh, there was a, you know, you read these reports and then you
[15:16.520 --> 15:22.120]  find out that, oh, I know what I was going to say, there's a whistleblower who has tried
[15:22.120 --> 15:28.880]  to get the attention of the Secretary of State of not only Texas, but Ohio, about the HART
[15:28.880 --> 15:29.880]  machines.
[15:29.880 --> 15:33.800]  And we use the HART inter-civic e-slates here in Travis County, and they're used in a lot
[15:33.800 --> 15:36.720]  of counties throughout Texas.
[15:36.720 --> 15:40.880]  And this guy said that on many occasions he was witness to...
[15:40.880 --> 15:51.000]  He was present at these examinations in both Texas and Ohio, where he knew that the salesmen
[15:51.000 --> 15:58.400]  from the machine companies would make up, you know, they would bring in like a dummy
[15:58.400 --> 16:04.600]  machine that was made to perform for that test, but he knew that the machines that would
[16:04.600 --> 16:10.040]  be delivered would not be able to perform what they were able to, you know, show during
[16:10.040 --> 16:11.040]  that test.
[16:11.040 --> 16:14.760]  So, I mean, it's a mess.
[16:14.760 --> 16:15.760]  It really is.
[16:15.760 --> 16:23.360]  So opening them up to public scrutiny again is certainly a good direction, but, you know,
[16:23.360 --> 16:24.360]  you just...
[16:24.360 --> 16:29.360]  Well, like you said, Deborah, these machines, they're counting them both secretly.
[16:29.360 --> 16:35.320]  The programs, you don't know whose program, you don't know what rogue code is in them.
[16:35.320 --> 16:36.320]  They're all...
[16:36.320 --> 16:42.960]  I mean, they can bury code in hundreds of thousands of lines of code, and that code,
[16:42.960 --> 16:47.640]  once it's, you know, been enacted, it can disappear.
[16:47.640 --> 16:49.040]  That's part of the theme program.
[16:49.040 --> 16:50.040]  Yeah.
[16:50.040 --> 16:52.040]  Can I interject here a moment, guys?
[16:52.040 --> 16:53.040]  Go ahead, Eddie.
[16:53.040 --> 16:57.480]  As an experienced computer programmer, there should not even be a requirement for thousands
[16:57.480 --> 17:03.320]  of lines of code in such a basic implementation of a program like this, and there's a thousand
[17:03.320 --> 17:07.320]  different ways to make it come out accurate each and every time and be able to verify
[17:07.320 --> 17:08.320]  it afterward.
[17:08.320 --> 17:13.840]  Obviously, none of them want to use that, but the fact of the matter is, I mean, if
[17:13.840 --> 17:18.520]  we're going to automate this, there should still be a solid checks and balances on the
[17:18.520 --> 17:19.520]  other end of it.
[17:19.520 --> 17:21.800]  We get a paper ballot out of the machine.
[17:21.800 --> 17:26.960]  That paper ballot has a matching barcode and scan code that goes to the person it represents.
[17:26.960 --> 17:33.040]  It's stuck into a box according to who it is it's being voted for and so on and so forth.
[17:33.040 --> 17:37.320]  There's a convenience to it, but I think what they're doing is they're being programmed
[17:37.320 --> 17:43.280]  this way, as we are guessing, intentionally to allow manipulation outside the eyes of
[17:43.280 --> 17:46.200]  the public way beyond what we're expecting here.
[17:46.200 --> 17:52.240]  Well, yes, and let me, okay, let me say something here, all right, because the point of view
[17:52.240 --> 18:01.760]  where Karen and I come from is that we should not have any machines doing any of the counting
[18:01.760 --> 18:05.880]  at all, period, period, end of story, okay?
[18:05.880 --> 18:10.040]  This is how Karen and I want to see things done with our elections.
[18:10.040 --> 18:17.920]  They can have all the machines they want to produce your ballot, okay, fancy touch screens,
[18:17.920 --> 18:25.760]  you know, GUI, you know, interfaces, go for it and have it print out your ballot of what
[18:25.760 --> 18:29.520]  you voted, you check and make sure.
[18:29.520 --> 18:37.800]  But that piece of paper has to be counted by a human being, not a machine.
[18:37.800 --> 18:43.280]  And this is what I want to see at the precinct, at the precinct, wait, let me finish, at the
[18:43.280 --> 18:44.960]  precinct level, all right?
[18:44.960 --> 18:51.920]  I want to sit there as a member of the public and I want to watch as those pieces of paper
[18:51.920 --> 18:58.160]  go in that box, I'm going to watch as they come out of the box, I'm going to watch and
[18:58.160 --> 19:04.760]  make sure that the person who is tallying the tick mark, that they put the tick mark
[19:04.760 --> 19:10.840]  in the right column, I'm going to add it up myself too to verify it, all right?
[19:10.840 --> 19:17.720]  These papers and boxes are not going to go to the Convention Center or any kind of crap
[19:17.720 --> 19:18.720]  like that.
[19:18.720 --> 19:22.960]  They're going to be counted at the precinct level where the cast and the results are going
[19:22.960 --> 19:27.440]  to be posted on the door period so that we can add them up.
[19:27.440 --> 19:33.440]  That is the only way we are ever going to have real elections and that's just it.
[19:33.440 --> 19:38.280]  We can't have, well, we could have software and it could be programmed and we could make
[19:38.280 --> 19:42.840]  sure that it's accurate and we could have the paper to verify it later, no, no, no,
[19:42.840 --> 19:48.760]  no verified paper trails, no verifying it later or having a backup to make sure, no,
[19:48.760 --> 19:52.400]  you count it right the first time and I'm going to watch every tick mark go in every
[19:52.400 --> 19:57.320]  column and that's just the, that is the only way that we are ever going to have real elections
[19:57.320 --> 19:59.040]  and that's just all there is to it.
[19:59.040 --> 20:05.600]  See, people are missing the point about these voter verified paper trails and all this stuff,
[20:05.600 --> 20:09.160]  they're scurrying the issue of the counting.
[20:09.160 --> 20:16.720]  We have to watch the counting and I mean every single ballot, every single tick to make sure
[20:16.720 --> 20:17.720]  that it's right.
[20:17.720 --> 20:18.720]  Right, Karen?
[20:18.720 --> 20:19.720]  Absolutely.
[20:19.720 --> 20:26.560]  And, you know, we know that the computers can be programmed so that it will record something
[20:26.560 --> 20:33.760]  inside the machine differently from what they could get printed out that a voter might verify
[20:33.760 --> 20:38.600]  but we also know from just watching human beings interface with these machines now for
[20:38.600 --> 20:44.680]  several years is that a very low percentage of people take the time or effort to even
[20:44.680 --> 20:48.000]  check this, you know, this printout.
[20:48.000 --> 20:52.240]  They're very difficult to check, you know, in the first place so that's one reason why
[20:52.240 --> 20:57.480]  people aren't doing it and sometimes they're even behind a closed window, an opaque window,
[20:57.480 --> 21:00.960]  they don't even know that there's, you know, a printout.
[21:00.960 --> 21:09.440]  So, you know, that is not the solution and most times you don't even get 100% printout
[21:09.440 --> 21:15.520]  from, you know, from the election because most of the time the printer's jam or it misprints
[21:15.520 --> 21:22.480]  or it doesn't print or whatever and so you can't rely on that as a backup and usually
[21:22.480 --> 21:27.960]  an audit or a recount is done days if not weeks after the election and you've just broken
[21:27.960 --> 21:29.560]  the chain of custody right there.
[21:29.560 --> 21:30.560]  Yes, yes.
[21:30.560 --> 21:39.200]  You can't rely on backup systems for later and using percentages and statistical surveys
[21:39.200 --> 21:48.840]  of yeah, we'll spot no, no, no period and in my opinion the Holt bill was one of the
[21:48.840 --> 21:56.480]  most dangerous things ever to our elections because it fools people.
[21:56.480 --> 22:01.240]  It's like a Trojan horse, it's like a wolf in sheep's clothing, it fools people into
[22:01.240 --> 22:06.000]  thinking oh well the paper, the paper, the paper ballots, the paper verified paper trail,
[22:06.000 --> 22:12.320]  yeah, but everyone is still missing the point about the counting and I have even heard some
[22:12.320 --> 22:17.000]  of these public officials say well the counting is in public, look the machine is sitting
[22:17.000 --> 22:22.760]  there right in the middle of the floor, give me a break.
[22:22.760 --> 22:29.360]  Everyone who's ever had a course in machine language will quickly understand that if it
[22:29.360 --> 22:40.000]  is in code it is impossible to verify because the code that the machine reads is different
[22:40.000 --> 22:42.620]  than what a human being can read.
[22:42.620 --> 22:50.640]  When I had a course in machine language the professor would give me a project, I would
[22:50.640 --> 22:59.000]  write the code and because the code is in a language a machine is designed to read I
[22:59.000 --> 23:04.840]  would have to explain to him what the code was intended to do because it's so alien to
[23:04.840 --> 23:09.280]  humans that we couldn't read the code and make sense of it.
[23:09.280 --> 23:15.560]  Well yeah and not only that, not only that the election code, speaking of code, our state
[23:15.560 --> 23:23.480]  law, our election code says that the vendors do not have to make their code public, they
[23:23.480 --> 23:31.200]  only have to reveal the source code to the Secretary of State and see the thing is even
[23:31.200 --> 23:41.000]  that is all just, that's still all a distraction because the point is the general public needs
[23:41.000 --> 23:49.560]  to be able to stand over those votes as they're taken out of the box and watched to make sure
[23:49.560 --> 23:54.760]  that whoever is counting is putting the tick mark in the right column and that they're
[23:54.760 --> 23:56.500]  added properly.
[23:56.500 --> 24:02.320]  Anybody and everybody needs to sit there and watch it and videotape it, that's the only
[24:02.320 --> 24:06.880]  way we're ever going to have real elections period.
[24:06.880 --> 24:12.600]  Probably the only way we can be sure because a programmer could look at that line of machine
[24:12.600 --> 24:17.240]  code and there could be bogus code in there and he could not tell it.
[24:17.240 --> 24:20.520]  So giving you the source code, that's not going to help you.
[24:20.520 --> 24:27.720]  Well and besides then people still can't sit there and watch the counting as they're being
[24:27.720 --> 24:28.720]  counted.
[24:28.720 --> 24:37.160]  You see, I am not going to buy into this line of thinking of we need to be able to verify.
[24:37.160 --> 24:41.440]  No, we do not need to be able to verify.
[24:41.440 --> 24:47.560]  We need to watch the counting as it's counted, period, in the story.
[24:47.560 --> 24:48.720]  Yes, that's the point.
[24:48.720 --> 24:52.000]  You cannot verify it, period, it's not ever going to happen.
[24:52.000 --> 24:53.000]  Right Karen?
[24:53.000 --> 24:55.240]  Absolutely, you guys have got it.
[24:55.240 --> 25:04.680]  We are not able to observe our elections and that is foremost and I just want to say too
[25:04.680 --> 25:11.600]  is that elections are not about trusting an expert or trusting your county clerk.
[25:11.600 --> 25:17.560]  When they say oh don't worry, these machines, I've tested them, they run great, you know,
[25:17.560 --> 25:24.520]  don't worry, machines are great, elections are about mistrust and it's about the people
[25:24.520 --> 25:30.680]  who have a stake in the game being able to watch the votes being counted to make sure
[25:30.680 --> 25:37.360]  the other side doesn't do something, you know, that might be a little shady and we are not
[25:37.360 --> 25:38.560]  able to do that.
[25:38.560 --> 25:45.520]  It's really whoever has got access to the machines or to the programs or, you know,
[25:45.520 --> 25:50.640]  it could be anybody and it could be put into the program months ago, years ago.
[25:50.640 --> 25:56.600]  I mean there are so many different ways but even despite the whole thing about the programs,
[25:56.600 --> 26:00.680]  the votes are still being counted secretly and that's not right.
[26:00.680 --> 26:06.000]  Somehow for the last couple of hundred years we managed to get through our elections without
[26:06.000 --> 26:07.000]  computers.
[26:07.000 --> 26:14.480]  We have and, you know, the elections, there is always going to be fraud, there is always
[26:14.480 --> 26:20.000]  going to be people trying to cheat because that's inherent in the nature of politics
[26:20.000 --> 26:26.100]  and wanting to win but what we are talking about here with these machines is the capability
[26:26.100 --> 26:33.680]  of changing, you know, elections on such a huge scale that's never been, you know, possible
[26:33.680 --> 26:41.000]  before and at least with the paper ballot and hand counting them at the precinct level,
[26:41.000 --> 26:44.880]  one you would have to involve a whole lot of people if you were going to try to upset
[26:44.880 --> 26:46.040]  a lot of elections.
[26:46.040 --> 26:55.960]  Yes, the fact that a switch to reverse the vote of minorities was in there should scare
[26:55.960 --> 26:57.680]  the crapola out of everybody.
[26:57.680 --> 27:03.080]  Yes, they found that in New Mexico, yes, those were Sequoia and we don't use Sequoia here
[27:03.080 --> 27:08.800]  but the other machines that we use, I mean, Giebold, that's another company whose machines
[27:08.800 --> 27:16.680]  have been approved here in Texas, they were just totally decertified finally in California
[27:16.680 --> 27:26.480]  because they've discovered and Giebold has even admitted that they're tabulating software,
[27:26.480 --> 27:33.920]  that's the software that counts the votes, loses votes and so they're finally, I think,
[27:33.920 --> 27:38.120]  going to kick Giebold out of the state of California, you know, finally.
[27:38.120 --> 27:45.080]  You know, counting was one of these most basic things I ever did in programming, that was
[27:45.080 --> 27:50.880]  the first day you write a program to count, I mean, it's not like it's rocket science.
[27:50.880 --> 27:55.760]  Well, obviously, they're programming, they're rigging the elections at the factory, that's
[27:55.760 --> 27:59.360]  just all there is to it, okay, period.
[27:59.360 --> 28:07.440]  I mean, the point is, yes, I mean, that's probably what's happening but we just, there's
[28:07.440 --> 28:12.640]  just no way of really knowing, of being able to take these programs.
[28:12.640 --> 28:21.200]  There have been studies done, fortunately, California and Ohio set up these red teams
[28:21.200 --> 28:26.080]  which are like hacking teams and they brought in computer experts from all over the country
[28:26.080 --> 28:35.840]  to take the programs and the machines of the, I think there were four vendors and they spent
[28:35.840 --> 28:41.440]  probably a month and a half just breaking these machines down, trying to hack into them
[28:41.440 --> 28:47.960]  and everything and the report that came back is incredibly scathing and just basically
[28:47.960 --> 28:55.640]  says these machines are so incredibly easy to tamper with and can be compromised, you
[28:55.640 --> 29:04.480]  know, anybody could do it and so in California, what they ended up doing was saying, okay,
[29:04.480 --> 29:10.320]  we've got to go to pay for ballots and we will leave one machine in each precinct to
[29:10.320 --> 29:15.920]  satisfy the Health America Vote Act requirement for the disabled to be able to get assistance
[29:15.920 --> 29:24.600]  in voting privately and independently but what people don't realize is that even by
[29:24.600 --> 29:30.400]  going to pay for ballots, those pay for ballots are still going to be counted by a machine
[29:30.400 --> 29:37.320]  because what they moved to was scanners and that's another myth and misunderstanding
[29:37.320 --> 29:38.320]  in this whole story.
[29:38.320 --> 29:39.320]  Yep.
[29:39.320 --> 29:40.320]  Geez.
[29:40.320 --> 29:41.320]  It's the same software.
[29:41.320 --> 29:42.320]  Yeah.
[29:42.320 --> 29:50.800]  The scanner scans it and reads it into the electronic system and turns it into electrons
[29:50.800 --> 29:54.280]  moving around and you say, duh.
[29:54.280 --> 30:00.280]  See, I, this whole thing, okay, Karen, and about the Health America Vote Act and, oh,
[30:00.280 --> 30:05.480]  we have to have machines and all this kind of setup for disabled people, okay, and they're
[30:05.480 --> 30:11.840]  using that as a red herring and I agree, we have to have some kind of setup for blind
[30:11.840 --> 30:16.840]  people or, you know, other people who are handicapped that maybe couldn't use a pen
[30:16.840 --> 30:17.840]  and a paper.
[30:17.840 --> 30:25.320]  So I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with the implementation of any kind of machine,
[30:25.320 --> 30:31.840]  mechanical or electronic for the casting of the ballots.
[30:31.840 --> 30:35.040]  It's the counting that is what matters.
[30:35.040 --> 30:39.140]  Well, what we're really talking about is let's say it's the marking of the ballot that they
[30:39.140 --> 30:43.120]  need assistance with because it's really three steps.
[30:43.120 --> 30:48.560]  You've got the marking of the ballot and then there's a step of casting it, you know, putting
[30:48.560 --> 30:55.080]  it somewhere to be counted whether it's put into a box if it's a piece of paper or whether
[30:55.080 --> 31:03.420]  it's a piece of paper that gets put into a scanner or it gets electronically casted inside
[31:03.420 --> 31:10.680]  one of these totally paperless machines and then you have the counting as your third step.
[31:10.680 --> 31:17.200]  But you're right, it's really the marking and they do have electronic machines out there
[31:17.200 --> 31:23.600]  that are only ballot markers and they are made to assist the disabled.
[31:23.600 --> 31:28.600]  They're not perfect and they've got a lot of flaws, you know, they're still not meeting
[31:28.600 --> 31:35.880]  the needs of the disabled community but they're better than nothing and at least they're not
[31:35.880 --> 31:40.480]  counting, you know, they're not involved in the counting process.
[31:40.480 --> 31:45.440]  And I just want to say a comment on something you said earlier Deborah about, you know,
[31:45.440 --> 31:50.920]  you were saying I don't care if we have machines that spit out a ballot.
[31:50.920 --> 31:57.360]  My only concern about still relying on machines for everybody is that the beauty of being
[31:57.360 --> 32:05.200]  able to physically mark a paper ballot yourself is that lots of people can vote at the same
[32:05.200 --> 32:06.200]  time.
[32:06.200 --> 32:13.120]  It's not tied to however many machines you have in a precinct, how many people can vote.
[32:13.120 --> 32:20.280]  And with a paper ballot you can get many more people, you know, through the polls a lot
[32:20.280 --> 32:26.160]  faster because you can set up, you know, voting stations that they can be very simple.
[32:26.160 --> 32:30.560]  It's not a machine that you have to give somebody, it's a pen and your ballot and then maybe
[32:30.560 --> 32:32.280]  a privacy screen.
[32:32.280 --> 32:39.520]  Yes, yes and let me also say because I'm going to somewhat retract that statement.
[32:39.520 --> 32:44.760]  They can also manipulate the election with the machines even if they're just used for
[32:44.760 --> 32:46.720]  marking or casting ballots.
[32:46.720 --> 32:55.280]  And I will give a example, a real-time example what happened a few years ago in the senatorial
[32:55.280 --> 33:06.120]  district race, senatorial district 14, our district here for the state legislature, okay.
[33:06.120 --> 33:13.160]  Kirk Watson was running as a Democrat, there was no Republican candidate, okay.
[33:13.160 --> 33:18.760]  Rock Howard, Robert Rock Howard was running as a Libertarian and he actually ended up
[33:18.760 --> 33:19.760]  doing very well.
[33:19.760 --> 33:22.520]  He got like 30% of the voters some such.
[33:22.520 --> 33:31.280]  So the way that they set up these machines, if you vote a straight party ticket, okay,
[33:31.280 --> 33:40.000]  if it's an quote uncontested race where they don't consider the Libertarians as a contestant,
[33:40.000 --> 33:41.920]  then that race doesn't appear on the ballot.
[33:41.920 --> 33:48.120]  So what ended up happening in that race is that anybody who voted straight Democrat,
[33:48.120 --> 33:52.720]  that race didn't show up on their ballot and so they weren't presented with the choice
[33:52.720 --> 33:57.680]  of either voting for Kirk Watson or Rock Howard, okay.
[33:57.680 --> 34:04.400]  And so I believe that was instrumental in getting Kirk Watson into office if you even
[34:04.400 --> 34:09.680]  want to consider that the votes were counted accurately, which I'm sure they weren't anyway,
[34:09.680 --> 34:10.680]  okay.
[34:10.680 --> 34:16.120]  But the point is I talked to a lot of people after that election and they were like, oh
[34:16.120 --> 34:18.920]  man, I didn't realize that.
[34:18.920 --> 34:20.480]  I can't stand Kirk Watson.
[34:20.480 --> 34:22.040]  I would have voted for Rock Howard.
[34:22.040 --> 34:27.920]  And how, if the votes had been counted, how much more of a chance do you think Rock Howard
[34:27.920 --> 34:31.880]  would have had of winning that senatorial race?
[34:31.880 --> 34:38.280]  Because now Kirk Watson is just, he's just devastating the place, okay.
[34:38.280 --> 34:40.480]  I'm an electrical engineer.
[34:40.480 --> 34:50.000]  I love technology, but when I design, the first thing I do is look for how little technology
[34:50.000 --> 34:53.360]  I need to accomplish my purpose.
[34:53.360 --> 34:58.360]  And when it comes to voting, zero.
[34:58.360 --> 35:01.920]  I simply do not need the electronic technology.
[35:01.920 --> 35:10.400]  If these guys want to be able to tabulate the votes quickly to do for the media so they
[35:10.400 --> 35:14.720]  can project how things are going, fine, let it do that.
[35:14.720 --> 35:18.560]  But create a physical hard copy document.
[35:18.560 --> 35:22.240]  You have voting judges there.
[35:22.240 --> 35:29.120]  You have all of the people there that are there anyway who can count these ballots and
[35:29.120 --> 35:37.360]  not cost the state or not cost the government any more time because those people have to
[35:37.360 --> 35:39.520]  be there to watch things anyway.
[35:39.520 --> 35:40.520]  They can count the ballots.
[35:40.520 --> 35:42.960]  It will cost nothing more.
[35:42.960 --> 35:46.320]  We don't need anything electronic.
[35:46.320 --> 35:50.360]  Let me interject something here, Randy, to comment on what you just said.
[35:50.360 --> 36:00.680]  One is that I think to accomplish an election using hand counting as the mechanism to count,
[36:00.680 --> 36:07.080]  I think we are, we really should bring in more people to help in that process.
[36:07.080 --> 36:14.080]  And the beautiful part of it is that obviously the counting starts after the polls close.
[36:14.080 --> 36:19.000]  And so, you know, the excuse that we have so few volunteers to help out at the polls
[36:19.000 --> 36:25.240]  is that most people work and they can't get off during the day to help with the polls.
[36:25.240 --> 36:29.840]  Now, if we had a national holiday for elections, then that would solve that.
[36:29.840 --> 36:36.440]  But even so, after 7 o'clock, everybody's available if you're not working the night shift.
[36:36.440 --> 36:41.360]  And we have a huge pool of people that could come in and be on a counting team.
[36:41.360 --> 36:43.040]  And they wouldn't have had to have been there all day.
[36:43.040 --> 36:47.520]  And the people who had been there all day, they can be released.
[36:47.520 --> 36:54.920]  It's obvious, for the last 200 years, we managed to get this done.
[36:54.920 --> 37:01.240]  Yeah, and then there's another tool we can use which has been totally discredited here
[37:01.240 --> 37:05.320]  in this country, and that is ExitPoll.
[37:05.320 --> 37:12.600]  Because they, for some peculiar reason, they work in other countries, but somehow ExitPoll
[37:12.600 --> 37:17.400]  is the United States, we've been told, should not be trusted.
[37:17.400 --> 37:25.560]  And it has been purely done so that, you know, to discredit ExitPoll so that, you know, we
[37:25.560 --> 37:31.240]  don't see the discrepancies between the ExitPolls and the machine results.
[37:31.240 --> 37:36.280]  But if people would wake up and say, yeah, ExitPolls, I mean, there's so many countries
[37:36.280 --> 37:43.080]  that use them as that, you know, to take as a gauge to see who's winning.
[37:43.080 --> 37:45.440]  And they're incredibly accurate.
[37:45.440 --> 37:47.920]  And then the ballots are counted.
[37:47.920 --> 37:51.960]  And when they're finished, the accurate results are then posted.
[37:51.960 --> 37:57.360]  But people could know, you know, the trend or what's happening if they had to know by
[37:57.360 --> 38:01.400]  the 10 o'clock news based on these ExitPolls.
[38:01.400 --> 38:05.440]  But I don't know, they've just been brainwashing everybody.
[38:05.440 --> 38:10.760]  Well, yeah, obviously, they want to try to fool everybody into thinking that the ExitPolls
[38:10.760 --> 38:12.160]  are unreliable.
[38:12.160 --> 38:16.720]  And the whole reason is because they don't want the ExitPolls because the ExitPolls would
[38:16.720 --> 38:19.680]  prove that the elections are totally rigged.
[38:19.680 --> 38:23.240]  Yeah, and they have, but they've just been poo-pooed.
[38:23.240 --> 38:24.840]  And people bought it.
[38:24.840 --> 38:26.560]  It is just amazing.
[38:26.560 --> 38:32.120]  They've done that in the last several elections where ExitPolls have predicted one thing and
[38:32.120 --> 38:34.560]  then total opposite happens.
[38:34.560 --> 38:42.280]  No, it's, people just need to sort of get their sense back and stop being, I call it,
[38:42.280 --> 38:46.760]  you know, they sprinkled fairy dust over everybody and everybody believes and loves these machines
[38:46.760 --> 38:50.400]  and thinks that that's the way to go.
[38:50.400 --> 38:54.000]  And like you, Randy, I mean, I love technology.
[38:54.000 --> 38:56.800]  I use it in my work.
[38:56.800 --> 39:00.880]  But it doesn't belong in voting in that process.
[39:00.880 --> 39:10.240]  Well, Karen, can you please speak to these bills that are going to be up for public input
[39:10.240 --> 39:12.480]  at these committee hearings on Monday?
[39:12.480 --> 39:13.480]  Yeah.
[39:13.480 --> 39:17.880]  You know, I was, I think I was telling you earlier today, Deborah, I was expecting that
[39:17.880 --> 39:23.840]  there were going to be a lot more bills relating to electronic voting machines.
[39:23.840 --> 39:32.600]  But surprisingly, there are actually very few, really there were only, really only two.
[39:32.600 --> 39:39.320]  And the one that probably should be paid the most attention to is a bill by Representative
[39:39.320 --> 39:42.120]  Van Chia.
[39:42.120 --> 39:48.960]  And he has been doing this for several years now where he's of the mind or his staff has
[39:48.960 --> 39:56.760]  convinced him that, you know, these machines, we need, you know, should keep the machines.
[39:56.760 --> 40:02.240]  But you know, the problems that people are perceiving or, you know, seem to be happening
[40:02.240 --> 40:09.600]  with them can all be fixed by simply tightening up, you know, certain security measures.
[40:09.600 --> 40:10.600]  Oh, boy.
[40:10.600 --> 40:16.600]  And for one, it just puts a whole another layer of protocol onto these election workers
[40:16.600 --> 40:27.880]  who are already just totally, you know, you know, they have to do so much already that
[40:27.880 --> 40:30.480]  they're, you know, just crazy.
[40:30.480 --> 40:35.960]  And the fact that what they're proposing in this bill, most of it has to do with storage
[40:35.960 --> 40:43.240]  and how long you store the election data and things like that.
[40:43.240 --> 40:48.160]  And it's just, I mean, I guess that you'd call it like lipstick on a pig.
[40:48.160 --> 40:54.320]  It just isn't going to do anything to improve the accuracy of the election.
[40:54.320 --> 41:00.240]  It's just adding more smoke and mirrors and more layers of confusion so that they can
[41:00.240 --> 41:02.400]  hide what they're doing.
[41:02.400 --> 41:09.360]  And I'm telling you right now, I am not going to quit until I can stand over that ballot
[41:09.360 --> 41:15.520]  box along with anybody else who wants to and watch them go in, watch them come out and
[41:15.520 --> 41:19.520]  watch the people who are putting the tick marks.
[41:19.520 --> 41:22.520]  And I'm going to make sure the tick marks go in the right column and I'm going to add
[41:22.520 --> 41:23.520]  them up too.
[41:23.520 --> 41:24.520]  All right?
[41:24.520 --> 41:25.520]  Yeah.
[41:25.520 --> 41:27.520]  I'm not going to be happy until that happens.
[41:27.520 --> 41:30.800]  That's just all there is to it.
[41:30.800 --> 41:31.800]  Me neither.
[41:31.800 --> 41:37.480]  And we're, you know, we've been going at this thing and, you know, just to finish up maybe
[41:37.480 --> 41:42.240]  on some of these bills and then I just want to throw in a couple of words about our successes
[41:42.240 --> 41:44.000]  here at the county level.
[41:44.000 --> 41:52.080]  So in Chief's bill, if anyone is in the Austin area and can make it down on Monday, the hearing
[41:52.080 --> 41:57.800]  is supposed to start at 2 o'clock or upon recess of the legislature.
[41:57.800 --> 42:02.680]  So it could either be 2 or later.
[42:02.680 --> 42:08.560]  And you could come down and speak, hopefully come down and speak against the passage of
[42:08.560 --> 42:14.000]  NCEA's bill because it's totally, you know, worthless and it's just giving people false
[42:14.000 --> 42:16.520]  sense of security.
[42:16.520 --> 42:23.840]  I think that Eddie's bill, Eddie Rodriguez's bill is a very good bill because it does open
[42:23.840 --> 42:30.080]  up the process that we're stuck with right now when these examiners get the vendors in
[42:30.080 --> 42:35.080]  to show them, you know, their wares.
[42:35.080 --> 42:40.160]  I think what our members are going to do and I suggest that anybody out there that would
[42:40.160 --> 42:47.120]  like to also chime in is that we'd like to also see something done in regards to the
[42:47.120 --> 42:55.240]  examiner reports and if there is a dissenting report that that machine should not be certified.
[42:55.240 --> 42:56.520]  It must be unanimous.
[42:56.520 --> 42:57.520]  I agree.
[42:57.520 --> 42:59.880]  By all the examiners.
[42:59.880 --> 43:05.800]  And I think by throwing it open, then there'll be less of a chance of something getting,
[43:05.800 --> 43:08.600]  you know, the certification when it really shouldn't.
[43:08.600 --> 43:14.120]  But we'd like to see something, you know, specifically addressing, you know, the reports
[43:14.120 --> 43:15.120]  that are submitted.
[43:15.120 --> 43:16.120]  Well, yes.
[43:16.120 --> 43:20.360]  And Karen, from my study of the election code, we're about to go to break.
[43:20.360 --> 43:22.840]  Karen, if you could just stay with us to the other side.
[43:22.840 --> 43:28.000]  I want to finish up with this and then we'll just start at the top of the hour with Eddie
[43:28.000 --> 43:30.280]  Craig with his presentation, the traffic code.
[43:30.280 --> 43:32.400]  We're going to break right now.
[43:32.400 --> 43:38.640]  So, Karen, hang on because I have some other comments about these voter ID bills and stuff
[43:38.640 --> 43:39.640]  like that.
[43:39.640 --> 43:40.640]  And I want you to comment on that as well.
[43:40.640 --> 43:41.640]  Okey dokey.
[43:41.640 --> 43:42.640]  Okay, great.
[43:42.640 --> 43:43.640]  All right.
[43:43.640 --> 43:44.640]  We're going to break.
[43:44.640 --> 43:45.640]  This is the rule of law.
[43:45.640 --> 43:46.640]  Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens.
[43:46.640 --> 43:53.160]  We're here with Karen Rennick from VoteRescue.org and Eddie Craig will be presenting his material.
[43:53.160 --> 43:54.160]  Coming right up.
[43:54.160 --> 44:02.760]  The stock markets are taking hit after hit.
[44:02.760 --> 44:05.960]  Corrupt bankers are choking on subprime debt.
[44:05.960 --> 44:11.480]  The Fed is busy printing dollars, dollars and more dollars to bail out Wall Street,
[44:11.480 --> 44:14.200]  banks and the U.S. car industry.
[44:14.200 --> 44:19.320]  As investors scramble for safety in the metals, in the face of a further devaluation of the
[44:19.320 --> 44:23.440]  dollar, the price of silver will only increase.
[44:23.440 --> 44:27.680]  Some of the world's leading financial analysts believe that silver is one of the world's
[44:27.680 --> 44:33.640]  most important commodities with unparalleled investment opportunity for the future.
[44:33.640 --> 44:40.960]  Now is the time to buy silver before it heads for $75 an ounce and the yellow metal roars
[44:40.960 --> 44:45.040]  back past $1,000 an ounce to new highs.
[44:45.040 --> 44:54.320]  Call Maximus Holdings now at 407-608-5430 to find out how you can turn your IRA and
[44:54.320 --> 45:00.520]  401K into a solid investment, silver, without any penalties for early withdrawal.
[45:00.520 --> 45:04.920]  Even if you don't have a retirement account yet, we have fantastic investment opportunities
[45:04.920 --> 45:06.080]  for you.
[45:06.080 --> 45:16.120]  Call Maximus Holdings at 407-608-5430 for more information.
[46:36.080 --> 47:00.840]  We're going to finish up the hour here with Karen Renwick from VoteRescue.org.
[47:00.840 --> 47:08.520]  And we've preempted our guest, Eddie, because there are these committee hearings on Monday.
[47:08.520 --> 47:15.600]  And Karen, it seems to me that a lot of these bills regarding voting that are going to be
[47:15.600 --> 47:20.480]  heard on Monday have to do with voter ID.
[47:20.480 --> 47:24.760]  And this just seems to me it's going to make the problem even worse.
[47:24.760 --> 47:28.480]  Well I have to admit I haven't read them all.
[47:28.480 --> 47:34.440]  They have a lot to do with registration, showing identification, and some of them could very
[47:34.440 --> 47:42.840]  well be voter ID, you know, sort of hidden in these smaller bills.
[47:42.840 --> 47:48.280]  You know, we've already had these two huge circuses, one in the Senate and one in the
[47:48.280 --> 47:53.400]  House, on specific voter ID bills.
[47:53.400 --> 47:58.760]  And people, I don't know if they know, the Senate one went all night, and I stayed up
[47:58.760 --> 48:03.000]  all night to finally give my testimony at 8.30 in the morning.
[48:03.000 --> 48:08.480]  And then the House, they were smart enough to at least divide the invited witnesses,
[48:08.480 --> 48:14.180]  who are the so-called experts, on Monday, and then the public got to have their say
[48:14.180 --> 48:18.560]  on Tuesday, and it still went until 12.30, one o'clock at night.
[48:18.560 --> 48:22.200]  And Vicki Karp was there late to give her testimony.
[48:22.200 --> 48:25.320]  But yeah, I am nervous about some of these.
[48:25.320 --> 48:29.400]  And so I guess I would just say, because I can't comment specifically, I would just tell
[48:29.400 --> 48:33.400]  people it's very easy to look up these bills.
[48:33.400 --> 48:36.200]  Let me tell people how to do that.
[48:36.200 --> 48:44.240]  If you can get to the Texas House, to their home page, and all I do is, well for one,
[48:44.240 --> 48:48.200]  I don't Google anymore, I use Ixquick.
[48:48.200 --> 48:52.560]  And I put in Texas House, it takes me to the page, and then on the right-hand side, it
[48:52.560 --> 48:56.520]  says upcoming hearings by committees.
[48:56.520 --> 49:01.520]  And you just find the elections committee, and it has, when you click on the elections
[49:01.520 --> 49:06.240]  committee, what it has is the list of every single bill that will be heard this coming
[49:06.240 --> 49:14.480]  Monday at the next committee hearing, and every bill number is a link to that bill.
[49:14.480 --> 49:18.880]  So you can just go down the line and pull up every single bill and read the text.
[49:18.880 --> 49:23.120]  Some of these are very short, but there are a ton of them.
[49:23.120 --> 49:26.560]  There must be at least 20 of these things, and most of them are very small.
[49:26.560 --> 49:32.320]  And she is probably is the longest one, and then Rodriguez is maybe the next.
[49:32.320 --> 49:39.920]  But yeah, there very well could be some provisions in here that are kind of sneak some voter
[49:39.920 --> 49:49.080]  ID restrictions in, you know, back way, so to speak.
[49:49.080 --> 49:52.080]  But let me mention something really quickly, if I could.
[49:52.080 --> 49:58.560]  I did find out today, Deborah, that we do have a bill for hand-counting paper ballots.
[49:58.560 --> 50:06.200]  Basically it's a bill that says throw out the machines, repeal everything in the election
[50:06.200 --> 50:10.600]  code that has to do with using voting machines to count our votes.
[50:10.600 --> 50:17.480]  And we enhance some of the security measures, because our code already is a wonderful code
[50:17.480 --> 50:22.120]  that tells you everything about counting paper ballots.
[50:22.120 --> 50:27.480]  And so I just found out that it will be heard a week from this Monday.
[50:27.480 --> 50:36.180]  So on the 27th of April, a Monday, our hand-counted paper ballot bill will be heard in the election
[50:36.180 --> 50:37.240]  committee.
[50:37.240 --> 50:44.040]  And we just want everybody to come to talk about how they support the hand-counted paper
[50:44.040 --> 50:45.040]  ballot.
[50:45.040 --> 50:49.400]  And we're going to try and, you know, really get the word out through email lists and,
[50:49.400 --> 50:53.600]  you know, speaking on your show is wonderful, because, you know, we can get this out to
[50:53.600 --> 50:55.480]  people who are listening now.
[50:55.480 --> 50:59.840]  And they can go to our Web site, because what we'll do is we'll put this up on our Web site
[50:59.840 --> 51:03.440]  probably this weekend that will alert people to this.
[51:03.440 --> 51:08.760]  And I just want to mention it's Donna Howard who filed the bill, and we just owe her so
[51:08.760 --> 51:13.800]  much for taking this step and getting us a hearing.
[51:13.800 --> 51:17.240]  Last session, we did get it filed, but we never got a hearing.
[51:17.240 --> 51:20.760]  But this session, we actually are getting a hearing, and that is a huge step.
[51:20.760 --> 51:23.320]  But you don't know what the date is yet?
[51:23.320 --> 51:24.320]  No, I do.
[51:24.320 --> 51:26.000]  It's a week from this Monday.
[51:26.000 --> 51:27.000]  Oh, good.
[51:27.000 --> 51:33.080]  It's April 27th, because this Monday is the 20th, so a week later would be the 27th.
[51:33.080 --> 51:37.760]  So if everybody marked their calendars, and it's the same thing where it should start
[51:37.760 --> 51:49.080]  either at 2 o'clock or as soon as they adjourn from the legislature, come on down and sign
[51:49.080 --> 51:57.780]  up, make a statement, or at the least if you sign a card when you go in showing your support.
[51:57.780 --> 51:58.780]  Everything helps.
[51:58.780 --> 52:04.040]  We just got to show this elections committee that there are a lot of people who are really
[52:04.040 --> 52:09.480]  concerned, and that to them, the only way that we can take back our elections is by
[52:09.480 --> 52:14.780]  this method of hand-counted paper ballots, because it's the only transparent way of running
[52:14.780 --> 52:16.800]  our elections and knowing who won.
[52:16.800 --> 52:22.300]  It really is, and Karen, I wanted to address something that you said a little while ago
[52:22.300 --> 52:29.760]  in the previous segment about the unanimous issue of these examiners.
[52:29.760 --> 52:30.760]  Okay.
[52:30.760 --> 52:39.480]  According to my study of the election code, these examiners don't really have any say
[52:39.480 --> 52:41.360]  as far as the certification.
[52:41.360 --> 52:49.880]  The way that I've read the code is that the examiners do their little examination, and
[52:49.880 --> 52:56.680]  they write a report with a recommendation to the secretary of state, but it seems to
[52:56.680 --> 53:04.540]  me at least that it is very clear in the code that the secretary of state has sole authority
[53:04.540 --> 53:09.400]  and responsibility over the certification.
[53:09.400 --> 53:17.760]  The secretary of state can either accept the recommendations of these examiners or not,
[53:17.760 --> 53:23.640]  and it looks to me like the way the whole code is structured is that they have very
[53:23.640 --> 53:33.560]  purposely set up the secretary of state to be this umbrella over all other election officials
[53:33.560 --> 53:39.320]  or public servants or anything, including county clerks, so that everything goes back
[53:39.320 --> 53:43.240]  to the secretary of state, and that's it.
[53:43.240 --> 53:50.040]  Nobody else can be held responsible at all, including these examiners.
[53:50.040 --> 53:55.400]  I wanted to ask Randy what his take on this is.
[53:55.400 --> 54:04.280]  Can we still try to hold these examiners criminally culpable for their actions?
[54:04.280 --> 54:11.520]  What kind of changes do we need to make in the election code to disperse the umbrella,
[54:11.520 --> 54:15.960]  in other words, because they set it up so that the secretary of state is the only one
[54:15.960 --> 54:20.360]  left holding the bag, and he's so hard to get to, and I know they did that on purpose.
[54:20.360 --> 54:22.640]  So Randy, what were your comments on that?
[54:22.640 --> 54:34.800]  Well, you have the investigators or the examiners, they have a duty to do a fair examination,
[54:34.800 --> 54:37.520]  and I'm certain they get paid for it.
[54:37.520 --> 54:39.520]  Yeah, they do.
[54:39.520 --> 54:50.480]  If they do a flawed examination, didn't we get to go under 18 U.S. Code 1346?
[54:50.480 --> 54:57.720]  We have a right to expect fair services from our officials that we pay to perform a duty.
[54:57.720 --> 55:02.080]  Well, Randy, check it out.
[55:02.080 --> 55:08.200]  These reports, the ones I studied at least, they're not flawed exams, they're not flawed
[55:08.200 --> 55:09.200]  reports.
[55:09.200 --> 55:16.560]  See, these examiners admit straight up all the errors and all the security vulnerabilities
[55:16.560 --> 55:20.880]  and everything, and they admit straight up, well, we had to pre-program in all the data
[55:20.880 --> 55:25.440]  and the results in order to get the software to work, and yeah, they didn't add right,
[55:25.440 --> 55:30.680]  and they admit the whole thing, but then at the end of the report, they say, however,
[55:30.680 --> 55:35.320]  the vendor sent us an email and told us all that would be straightened out, so we recommend
[55:35.320 --> 55:38.160]  that these be implemented in use.
[55:38.160 --> 55:43.720]  Okay, so what do you do about that when the code says that the Secretary of State is the
[55:43.720 --> 55:48.360]  one who's responsible for making the decision?
[55:48.360 --> 55:54.600]  We shouldn't really predetermine whether that's fraud or not.
[55:54.600 --> 56:00.400]  We should let a grand jury determine whether that's fraud or not.
[56:00.400 --> 56:06.960]  So you know, attorneys think in terms of what they can actually win.
[56:06.960 --> 56:12.600]  I'm not thinking in those terms, I'm thinking in terms of political pressure.
[56:12.600 --> 56:20.840]  If I go after these examiners for defrauding the Secretary of State by recommending machines
[56:20.840 --> 56:30.160]  that they absolutely knew did not come up to the requirements of the code, that's fraud.
[56:30.160 --> 56:35.720]  The fact that they told us that they didn't come up to the standards doesn't make any
[56:35.720 --> 56:40.920]  difference, they still made the recommendation that we use those machines that don't meet
[56:40.920 --> 56:42.960]  the standards.
[56:42.960 --> 56:51.800]  So we go after them and wind their clocks, use that to poison the Secretary of State's
[56:51.800 --> 56:59.520]  well, if they can use those tools, we can use those tools.
[56:59.520 --> 57:05.400]  So I would go after the examiners and accuse them of fraud, accusing them of accepting
[57:05.400 --> 57:07.240]  their pay under fraudulent circumstances.
[57:07.240 --> 57:08.800]  What about the county clerks?
[57:08.800 --> 57:12.000]  Can we go after them too?
[57:12.000 --> 57:15.200]  They don't have any say in what's used.
[57:15.200 --> 57:16.200]  Well that's not true.
[57:16.200 --> 57:21.000]  They get to pick from a list that's been approved by the Secretary of State.
[57:21.000 --> 57:22.000]  That's correct.
[57:22.000 --> 57:23.720]  No, you can't go after them.
[57:23.720 --> 57:31.840]  If they're approved by the Secretary of State, the clerk can claim good faith reliance on
[57:31.840 --> 57:32.840]  confidence.
[57:32.840 --> 57:38.040]  I don't understand why Dana de Beauvoir, however you want to pronounce her name, I don't understand
[57:38.040 --> 57:41.880]  why she's so much in the limelight in this issue because the county clerks really have
[57:41.880 --> 57:43.560]  nothing to do with this.
[57:43.560 --> 57:44.560]  Right.
[57:44.560 --> 57:47.720]  If they give her trash, she has trash to pick from.
[57:47.720 --> 57:57.160]  Yeah, but she has carved out a wonderful spot for herself by casting her office and the
[57:57.160 --> 58:05.000]  election division under her as being sort of on the top of the heap of election offices
[58:05.000 --> 58:09.960]  of the state because of their protocols.
[58:09.960 --> 58:17.760]  They're wonderful people here in Travis County, but it's the system that they've chosen and
[58:17.760 --> 58:24.480]  that they continue to use despite everything we have said to them of how these machines
[58:24.480 --> 58:28.120]  are flawed and how our votes are not being counted accurately.
[58:28.120 --> 58:30.280]  Yeah, and she's not stupid either.
[58:30.280 --> 58:34.000]  No, they're all very smart people.
[58:34.000 --> 58:40.360]  We have a study going on right now that we helped get started reviewing how we vote here
[58:40.360 --> 58:41.360]  in Travis County.
[58:41.360 --> 58:46.120]  It's a huge, one of these huge committees, of course Dana picked most of the people on
[58:46.120 --> 58:47.120]  it.
[58:47.120 --> 58:53.920]  Okay, well listen Karen, we're going to break, please go to Karen's website, voterescue.org.
[58:53.920 --> 58:55.760]  Thank you very much for joining us tonight Karen.
[58:55.760 --> 58:56.760]  Oh, thanks so much.
[58:56.760 --> 58:57.760]  I always enjoy it.
[58:57.760 --> 59:27.400]  Thank you very much for joining us tonight, and we'll see you next time.
[59:27.400 --> 59:48.660]  Have a great night.
[59:48.660 --> 01:00:06.740]  This April will mark 14 years since the Oklahoma City bombing claimed 169 lives.
[01:00:06.740 --> 01:00:12.540]  Monday, April 20th at 7 p.m. Brave New Books in Austin, Texas is presenting a discussion
[01:00:12.540 --> 01:00:17.940]  by the hosts of Radio Free Oklahoma addressing many unanswered questions about that tragedy.
[01:00:17.940 --> 01:00:21.940]  Did you know that there was more than one bomb involved in this tragedy?
[01:00:21.940 --> 01:00:25.460]  Did you know that there are many concrete links between the Oklahoma City bombing and
[01:00:25.460 --> 01:00:26.460]  9-11?
[01:00:26.460 --> 01:00:31.580]  Did you know that current Attorney General Eric Holder was directly involved with a cover-up
[01:00:31.580 --> 01:00:33.500]  following the Oklahoma City bombing?
[01:00:33.500 --> 01:00:38.420]  Monday, April 20th at 7 p.m. at Brave New Books, Chris Emory, Andrew Griffin, and Holland
[01:00:38.420 --> 01:00:42.740]  VandenNoeloff will be discussing the results of their investigation into the Oklahoma City
[01:00:42.740 --> 01:00:43.740]  bombing.
[01:00:43.740 --> 01:00:47.920]  This event will also be broadcast on the Rule of Law radio program hosted by Deborah Steven
[01:00:47.920 --> 01:00:49.460]  Adams and Randy Kelton.
[01:00:49.460 --> 01:00:55.980]  For more information, go to BraveNewBookstore.com or RuleOfLawRadio.com, the Oklahoma City
[01:00:55.980 --> 01:00:59.500]  bombing, 14 years later, still seeking the truth.
[01:00:59.500 --> 01:01:08.260]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com, live free
[01:01:08.260 --> 01:01:36.340]  speech talk radio at its best.
[01:01:36.340 --> 01:01:42.380]  Okay, we are back, the Rule of Law, Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens, and we are here
[01:01:42.380 --> 01:01:51.460]  with our special guest, Eddie Craig, and he is going to present to us the Texas Transportation
[01:01:51.460 --> 01:01:53.460]  Code and explain terminology.
[01:01:53.460 --> 01:02:00.260]  We're going to turn the phones off for this next hour while Eddie presents his material,
[01:02:00.260 --> 01:02:03.820]  and then we will take calls and questions after that.
[01:02:03.820 --> 01:02:07.100]  Okay, Eddie, so explain it all to us.
[01:02:07.100 --> 01:02:12.100]  Okay, I'm going to suggest that before Eddie starts, if you're wearing tube socks and
[01:02:12.100 --> 01:02:16.340]  they're sneaking down around your ankles, pull them up good and tight, get your shirt
[01:02:16.340 --> 01:02:21.740]  buttoned up good, get your pencils out, this should be pretty intense.
[01:02:21.740 --> 01:02:24.940]  Okay, Eddie, you're on.
[01:02:24.940 --> 01:02:25.940]  All right.
[01:02:25.940 --> 01:02:30.180]  Well, when we talked about this on the Monday night show that I did, we covered some of
[01:02:30.180 --> 01:02:31.460]  the basic terminology.
[01:02:31.460 --> 01:02:35.300]  What I'd like to do is a quick refresher of some of that for folks.
[01:02:35.300 --> 01:02:40.420]  Basically, we know that Chapter 311 of the Government Code contains the common definition
[01:02:40.420 --> 01:02:45.980]  of the word person as it's used in most of the statutes, including a great portion of
[01:02:45.980 --> 01:02:47.940]  the Transportation Code.
[01:02:47.940 --> 01:02:54.980]  So if we go along with that definition, the term person, 90.9% of the time means only
[01:02:54.980 --> 01:02:59.540]  a legal entity such as a corporation or a governmental entity.
[01:02:59.540 --> 01:03:01.620]  So let's keep that fact in mind.
[01:03:01.620 --> 01:03:05.740]  Now let's also deal with something else that is very common in every offense they try to
[01:03:05.740 --> 01:03:09.260]  hit us with, and that is the term motor vehicle.
[01:03:09.260 --> 01:03:13.620]  In almost every case in the Transportation Code, the term motor vehicle comes up when
[01:03:13.620 --> 01:03:16.740]  they accuse you of doing something.
[01:03:16.740 --> 01:03:21.220]  Gary Locke sent me an Attorney General opinion, I've seen before, but I could not find my
[01:03:21.220 --> 01:03:23.740]  copy and I'm glad he sent this to me.
[01:03:23.740 --> 01:03:25.580]  But this will be very interesting to you.
[01:03:25.580 --> 01:03:27.620]  This is an excerpt from it.
[01:03:27.620 --> 01:03:33.540]  The Texas Supreme Court has held that in common usage, the terms automobile and motor vehicle
[01:03:33.540 --> 01:03:35.580]  are not synonymous.
[01:03:35.580 --> 01:03:40.060]  The courts have held the term motor vehicle to be different from and broader than the
[01:03:40.060 --> 01:03:42.260]  term automobile.
[01:03:42.260 --> 01:03:48.420]  Common usage has made the phrase motor vehicle a generic term for all classes of self-propelled
[01:03:48.420 --> 01:03:52.740]  vehicles not operating on stationary rails or tracks.
[01:03:52.740 --> 01:03:58.860]  And therefore, as a result, all automobiles are motor vehicles, but the current area proposition
[01:03:58.860 --> 01:04:00.380]  is not true.
[01:04:00.380 --> 01:04:05.620]  The term motor vehicle is much broader than the word automobile and includes various vehicles
[01:04:05.620 --> 01:04:08.900]  which cannot be classified as automobiles.
[01:04:08.900 --> 01:04:14.220]  Now when we go down a little further, some of the definitions we have is for the purpose
[01:04:14.220 --> 01:04:18.860]  of Motor Vehicle Safety Responsibility Act, a motor vehicle is a self-propelled vehicle
[01:04:18.860 --> 01:04:24.380]  designed for use on a highway such as a trailer or semi-trailer for use with a self-propelled
[01:04:24.380 --> 01:04:29.220]  vehicle or a vehicle propelled by electric power from overhead wires and not operated
[01:04:29.220 --> 01:04:30.460]  on rails.
[01:04:30.460 --> 01:04:36.100]  Basically, there is no set definition of motor vehicle throughout the transportation code.
[01:04:36.100 --> 01:04:39.700]  It will vary from place to place, bit by bit.
[01:04:39.700 --> 01:04:46.340]  There will be very similar ways, but they won't all be exactly the same.
[01:04:46.340 --> 01:04:51.380]  And what they're telling us here is that the term motor vehicle is used in section 8.6
[01:04:51.380 --> 01:04:56.180]  of the statute that it's talking about here is more inclusive term than that of automobile,
[01:04:56.180 --> 01:05:01.060]  but that it should be restricted to motor vehicles that are intended for use on a highway.
[01:05:01.060 --> 01:05:03.460]  Use here is also a very subjective term.
[01:05:03.460 --> 01:05:08.340]  Normally the word use is applicable to how it's used in commerce, not necessarily in
[01:05:08.340 --> 01:05:10.500]  private enterprise.
[01:05:10.500 --> 01:05:14.380]  So let's see what we can deal with to make that a little bit more clear.
[01:05:14.380 --> 01:05:17.060]  Let's take, for instance, the definition of the word traffic.
[01:05:17.060 --> 01:05:21.300]  Randy, I'm sure you've probably heard this before.
[01:05:21.300 --> 01:05:28.440]  The word traffic, according to Black's Law sixth edition, commerce, trade, sale, or exchange
[01:05:28.440 --> 01:05:34.580]  of merchandise, bills, money, and the like, the passing or exchange of goods or commodities
[01:05:34.580 --> 01:05:40.780]  from one person to another for an equivalent in goods or money, the subject of transportation
[01:05:40.780 --> 01:05:43.460]  on a route as persons or goods.
[01:05:43.460 --> 01:05:49.520]  The passing to and fro of persons, animals, vehicles, or vessels along a route of transportation
[01:05:49.520 --> 01:05:57.380]  as along a street, highway, et cetera, and it refers you to commerce.
[01:05:57.380 --> 01:06:01.720]  Now we know commerce, of course, is operation of a business.
[01:06:01.720 --> 01:06:04.420]  It's a commercial use.
[01:06:04.420 --> 01:06:07.220]  Now let's look at the term transportation.
[01:06:07.220 --> 01:06:14.820]  The movement of goods or persons from one place to another by a carrier.
[01:06:14.820 --> 01:06:17.140]  Well what is a carrier?
[01:06:17.140 --> 01:06:20.660]  Let's go back over here in Black's Law and take a look at that.
[01:06:20.660 --> 01:06:30.700]  All right, give me just one second here, carrier.
[01:06:30.700 --> 01:06:40.140]  All right, carrier, individual or organization engaged in transporting passengers or goods
[01:06:40.140 --> 01:06:42.260]  for hire.
[01:06:42.260 --> 01:06:48.140]  Carrier means any person engaged in the transportation of passengers or property by land as a common
[01:06:48.140 --> 01:06:55.020]  contract or private carrier or freight forwarder as those terms are used in the Interstate
[01:06:55.020 --> 01:06:57.340]  Commerce Act.
[01:06:57.340 --> 01:07:01.300]  So as we can see, the more we delve into the definition of the specific words they use
[01:07:01.300 --> 01:07:05.580]  in each of these statutes, the more clear it becomes that we are dealing with a commercial
[01:07:05.580 --> 01:07:06.580]  entity.
[01:07:06.580 --> 01:07:09.780]  The word transportation, the title of the transportation code alone should have told
[01:07:09.780 --> 01:07:11.140]  us that, right?
[01:07:11.140 --> 01:07:13.740]  But they love to argue these things.
[01:07:13.740 --> 01:07:18.020]  Now let's also take a look at something else they commonly use in these statutes and that's
[01:07:18.020 --> 01:07:22.060]  that you were operating a passenger vehicle.
[01:07:22.060 --> 01:07:27.740]  The word or the term passenger vehicle is not defined anywhere in any code in Texas
[01:07:27.740 --> 01:07:30.540]  nor is the term passenger.
[01:07:30.540 --> 01:07:34.500]  So let's go out and see what Black's Law says.
[01:07:34.500 --> 01:07:41.020]  Passenger in general, a person who gives compensation to another for transportation.
[01:07:41.020 --> 01:07:46.660]  The word passenger has however various meanings depending upon the circumstances under which
[01:07:46.660 --> 01:07:50.460]  and the context in which the word is used.
[01:07:50.460 --> 01:07:54.460]  Sometimes it is construed in a restricted legal sense as referring to one who is being
[01:07:54.460 --> 01:08:00.740]  carried by another for hire or other occasions the word is interpreted as meaning any occupant
[01:08:00.740 --> 01:08:04.500]  of a vehicle other than the person operating it.
[01:08:04.500 --> 01:08:09.660]  The essential elements of passenger as opposed to guest under guest statute are that driver
[01:08:09.660 --> 01:08:16.140]  must receive some benefits sufficiently real, tangible and substantial to serve as the inducing
[01:08:16.140 --> 01:08:22.140]  cause of the transportation so as to completely overshadow mere hospitality or friendship.
[01:08:22.140 --> 01:08:27.580]  It may be easier to find compensation where the trip has commercial or business flavor.
[01:08:27.580 --> 01:08:33.740]  A person whom a common carrier has contracted to carry from one place to another and has
[01:08:33.740 --> 01:08:39.180]  in the course of the performance of that contract received under his care either upon the means
[01:08:39.180 --> 01:08:42.460]  of conveyance or at the point of departure that means of conveyance.
[01:08:42.460 --> 01:08:48.460]  In other words you paid me money to get you from point A to point B in some form or fashion.
[01:08:48.460 --> 01:08:52.140]  That is what a passenger is in law.
[01:08:52.140 --> 01:08:57.360]  Now we have also talked about some of the other things that deal with registration of
[01:08:57.360 --> 01:08:59.720]  vehicles and so on and so forth.
[01:08:59.720 --> 01:09:05.900]  We looked at several sections that deal with the certificate of title and we know that
[01:09:05.900 --> 01:09:13.780]  according to the transportation code a certificate of title is needed only in 501.004.
[01:09:13.780 --> 01:09:20.300]  It applies only to a vehicle that is owned by the state or political subdivision of the
[01:09:20.300 --> 01:09:21.300]  state.
[01:09:21.300 --> 01:09:27.320]  Therefore in that particular chapter according to that definition any vehicle or motor vehicle
[01:09:27.320 --> 01:09:32.820]  reference that is made within that chapter can only be one that is owned by the state
[01:09:32.820 --> 01:09:35.620]  or political subdivision of the state.
[01:09:35.620 --> 01:09:41.980]  We know this because the definition in that chapter says in this chapter.
[01:09:41.980 --> 01:09:47.500]  So given all that we need to get real soon to a point where we can start putting all
[01:09:47.500 --> 01:09:51.840]  this together and using it in ways to fight back which is what we are going to be discussing
[01:09:51.840 --> 01:09:56.660]  on the show and letting people call in about here in a little while.
[01:09:56.660 --> 01:10:01.940]  And while we are going over this stuff I would appreciate if everyone out there would think
[01:10:01.940 --> 01:10:06.340]  of what they need to be asking about in their particular situation and do remember that
[01:10:06.340 --> 01:10:12.260]  most of the transportation codes in all of the states have similar worded statutes though
[01:10:12.260 --> 01:10:16.820]  they organize them completely differently thus making them much harder to research in
[01:10:16.820 --> 01:10:17.820]  some states.
[01:10:17.820 --> 01:10:23.060]  A good example would be a lady by the name of Gail that I have been talking to this evening.
[01:10:23.060 --> 01:10:28.740]  She got a speeding ticket in Wisconsin and unlike the Texas statutes locating the specifics
[01:10:28.740 --> 01:10:36.260]  of speed signs in a Wisconsin statute is a needle in a haystack type event.
[01:10:36.260 --> 01:10:40.660]  All right now several of the things that we are always having to deal with let's talk
[01:10:40.660 --> 01:10:44.020]  for a minute about the way they come after us when we are out on the roads.
[01:10:44.020 --> 01:10:47.300]  There are numerous things they like to come after us for.
[01:10:47.300 --> 01:10:52.940]  Expired registration, expired inspection, your license plate is the wrong color or it
[01:10:52.940 --> 01:10:55.340]  is too dirty for them to read.
[01:10:55.340 --> 01:11:00.020]  No driver's license or you were speeding.
[01:11:00.020 --> 01:11:04.180]  These things we can use to our own advantage especially when they start writing up their
[01:11:04.180 --> 01:11:08.380]  citations and I will tell you exactly why that is.
[01:11:08.380 --> 01:11:13.140]  In my case this is some of the things that the officers that have pulled me over have
[01:11:13.140 --> 01:11:14.940]  written up.
[01:11:14.940 --> 01:11:22.140]  In section 502.404 of the transportation code the offense in the complaint is operate motor
[01:11:22.140 --> 01:11:25.660]  vehicle without license plates or with one license plate.
[01:11:25.660 --> 01:11:29.300]  Congratulations officer Watson you are probably one of the few people that actually gave the
[01:11:29.300 --> 01:11:32.140]  right title for that section.
[01:11:32.140 --> 01:11:36.700]  Also 502.407 display expired registration.
[01:11:36.700 --> 01:11:40.180]  Well here is where they run into one severe problem.
[01:11:40.180 --> 01:11:43.620]  The title specifically says display.
[01:11:43.620 --> 01:11:44.620]  Well guess what?
[01:11:44.620 --> 01:11:48.960]  My car doesn't display these things because the day I bought it I scraped them off.
[01:11:48.960 --> 01:11:55.300]  So by saying that I displayed an expired registration the complaint is now a case of aggravated
[01:11:55.300 --> 01:12:00.180]  perjury because it contains false statements and the officer would have to know that they
[01:12:00.180 --> 01:12:04.320]  were false statements as he was standing there looking at my car knowing full well there
[01:12:04.320 --> 01:12:07.100]  was no inspection on it.
[01:12:07.100 --> 01:12:11.500]  The reason for this most likely is they wanted to run up the charges as much as possible
[01:12:11.500 --> 01:12:17.820]  but there is actually no section of the transportation code that deals with no registration on a
[01:12:17.820 --> 01:12:19.380]  vehicle.
[01:12:19.380 --> 01:12:24.820]  It only talks about if it's expired when it's on display.
[01:12:24.820 --> 01:12:30.180]  Of course we know they like to hit you with 521.021 no driver's license.
[01:12:30.180 --> 01:12:34.980]  Unfortunately for them that section specifically states that we are dealing with a temporary
[01:12:34.980 --> 01:12:40.580]  license or temporary permit or permit for an occupational license.
[01:12:40.580 --> 01:12:46.260]  That is what the definition of driver's license means is an occupational license a temporary
[01:12:46.260 --> 01:12:53.420]  permit or a permit prior to getting your occupational license.
[01:12:53.420 --> 01:12:57.980]  So with that in mind there is going to be several ways we can come up with to fight
[01:12:57.980 --> 01:13:03.460]  a no license statement and speeding is probably one of the easiest ones of all.
[01:13:03.460 --> 01:13:07.220]  Let's talk for a minute about where they like to go in the transportation code to hit you
[01:13:07.220 --> 01:13:09.260]  up with speeding.
[01:13:09.260 --> 01:13:16.580]  If we actually go to chapter 545.351 and we look at maximum speed requirement here are
[01:13:16.580 --> 01:13:19.580]  some key words to pay attention to.
[01:13:19.580 --> 01:13:21.660]  See if you can pick them out.
[01:13:21.660 --> 01:13:28.660]  An operator may not drive at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the circumstances
[01:13:28.660 --> 01:13:30.380]  then existing.
[01:13:30.380 --> 01:13:36.340]  An operator may not drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under
[01:13:36.340 --> 01:13:42.380]  the conditions and having regard for actual potential hazards then existing.
[01:13:42.380 --> 01:13:47.380]  Anybody there can guess that operator is one of the key words we need to be worried about?
[01:13:47.380 --> 01:13:51.680]  Now if we go and we look at operator the way the code defines it an operator is basically
[01:13:51.680 --> 01:13:56.740]  whoever is in control of a motor vehicle.
[01:13:56.740 --> 01:14:02.080]  Now if we go back to what the attorney general letter said a motor vehicle is not synonymous
[01:14:02.080 --> 01:14:03.540]  with an automobile.
[01:14:03.540 --> 01:14:06.220]  They're not one and the same thing.
[01:14:06.220 --> 01:14:14.220]  A motor vehicle according to many, many, many court cases is determined strictly by the
[01:14:14.220 --> 01:14:16.220]  use of that vehicle.
[01:14:16.220 --> 01:14:23.020]  In other words if it's being used in commerce then it can be considered a motor vehicle.
[01:14:23.020 --> 01:14:29.500]  If it is not being used in commerce it is to be considered household goods.
[01:14:29.500 --> 01:14:34.220]  That's where most people come up with their UCC argument because most of these cases cite
[01:14:34.220 --> 01:14:40.060]  UCC law that if the vehicle is not being used in commerce then it is the equivalent of household
[01:14:40.060 --> 01:14:45.140]  goods because it is not a commercial motor vehicle.
[01:14:45.140 --> 01:14:49.180]  And Randy we'll sit down one day and we'll go through a lot of the case law on this and
[01:14:49.180 --> 01:14:53.180]  we'll try to verify that as much as possible if that's all right with you.
[01:14:53.180 --> 01:14:59.740]  That is absolutely all right with me because verification is certainly what I want the
[01:14:59.740 --> 01:15:00.740]  most.
[01:15:00.740 --> 01:15:01.740]  Yes, most certainly.
[01:15:01.740 --> 01:15:05.260]  And some of these I've researched and I can't find any overturning cases.
[01:15:05.260 --> 01:15:12.060]  The nice thing about this town I live in here in Texas is SFA State University here is a
[01:15:12.060 --> 01:15:13.940]  federal book repository.
[01:15:13.940 --> 01:15:18.620]  We have every law book ever made in our library here.
[01:15:18.620 --> 01:15:22.480]  So I can get to it and research it directly if I need to.
[01:15:22.480 --> 01:15:32.460]  Now terminology when they accuse you of something under a transportation code offense is everything.
[01:15:32.460 --> 01:15:36.500]  No matter what the complaint is, and I'll give you some advice that I have learned over
[01:15:36.500 --> 01:15:42.940]  what I've done with mine, any time you are given a charge immediately take your citation
[01:15:42.940 --> 01:15:48.100]  down and try to get clarification on the complaint.
[01:15:48.100 --> 01:15:54.620]  Now if they do you like they did me it was almost a year before the complaint ever got
[01:15:54.620 --> 01:15:58.420]  filed that was associated with the ticket.
[01:15:58.420 --> 01:16:02.980]  There's a couple of things to pay attention to in that regard as well.
[01:16:02.980 --> 01:16:08.820]  First thing is did the court send you any type of paperwork before the date that's on
[01:16:08.820 --> 01:16:11.140]  the complaint from the officer?
[01:16:11.140 --> 01:16:18.060]  If they did then you have a possible problem with the court being biased because the court
[01:16:18.060 --> 01:16:24.340]  is initiating prosecution on their own without the benefit of a prosecuting attorney.
[01:16:24.340 --> 01:16:28.220]  That is problematic because it shows a bias on the part of the court.
[01:16:28.220 --> 01:16:36.940]  You also have the court acting in impersonation of a public official as absent a verified
[01:16:36.940 --> 01:16:45.380]  criminal affidavit the court is without subject matter jurisdiction and is has no more authority
[01:16:45.380 --> 01:16:50.580]  than I would have if I ran down and rented a uniform and put a bubble on my car and pulled
[01:16:50.580 --> 01:16:51.580]  you over.
[01:16:51.580 --> 01:16:52.580]  Exactly.
[01:16:52.580 --> 01:16:57.140]  Now Randy and I have talked about this a couple of times and we've agreed to disagree until
[01:16:57.140 --> 01:17:00.820]  we can come up with a better thing for it because I cannot find it and that is dealing
[01:17:00.820 --> 01:17:06.420]  with the requirements for prosecution in such a case.
[01:17:06.420 --> 01:17:10.740]  We've talked about where he believes that there is a location in the transportation
[01:17:10.740 --> 01:17:14.140]  code where they can charge you on citation only.
[01:17:14.140 --> 01:17:15.180]  I cannot find it.
[01:17:15.180 --> 01:17:20.780]  The word citation nor charging document or anything of that type even appears in the
[01:17:20.780 --> 01:17:24.340]  transportation code as I can find it anywhere.
[01:17:24.340 --> 01:17:29.180]  The only thing I can find where it even deals with charging you with complaint alone is
[01:17:29.180 --> 01:17:34.940]  2.05 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and they can only go against you on complaint
[01:17:34.940 --> 01:17:41.580]  alone if and only if there is no county attorney in the county in which you are charged.
[01:17:41.580 --> 01:17:45.620]  That's the only time they can proceed on complaint alone.
[01:17:45.620 --> 01:17:52.140]  After that if you are in a county where there is a criminal district court one or more in
[01:17:52.140 --> 01:17:59.540]  a misdemeanor case, any misdemeanor case, they must file an information.
[01:17:59.540 --> 01:18:01.900]  The prosecuting attorney must do so.
[01:18:01.900 --> 01:18:05.340]  Wait wait you said criminal district court.
[01:18:05.340 --> 01:18:06.640]  Right.
[01:18:06.640 --> 01:18:09.060]  Not criminal county court.
[01:18:09.060 --> 01:18:10.060]  Correct.
[01:18:10.060 --> 01:18:20.780]  As I understood that statute, if there is no criminal county court, then the district
[01:18:20.780 --> 01:18:27.420]  could pursue prosecution on information alone.
[01:18:27.420 --> 01:18:31.420]  But if there is a county court, where do I have that backwards?
[01:18:31.420 --> 01:18:33.620]  It's a county attorney.
[01:18:33.620 --> 01:18:35.220]  It's a county attorney.
[01:18:35.220 --> 01:18:37.200]  This is 2.05 verbatim.
[01:18:37.200 --> 01:18:41.380]  If the offense be a misdemeanor, now go ahead.
[01:18:41.380 --> 01:18:47.300]  I'm thinking that, okay, this is where Craig and I had the disagreement.
[01:18:47.300 --> 01:19:01.460]  It is in my memory, very clear, just not where, that where there is no county attorney, prosecution
[01:19:01.460 --> 01:19:10.500]  can commence in the justice and municipal court on the citation alone.
[01:19:10.500 --> 01:19:15.860]  But if there is a county attorney, he must file an information.
[01:19:15.860 --> 01:19:16.860]  Is that right?
[01:19:16.860 --> 01:19:17.860]  Is that the way you read it?
[01:19:17.860 --> 01:19:21.900]  I haven't read that recently and it is possible I'm wrong.
[01:19:21.900 --> 01:19:23.540]  I was wrong.
[01:19:23.540 --> 01:19:26.340]  This is exactly what it says, you're partially correct.
[01:19:26.340 --> 01:19:30.800]  If the offense be a misdemeanor, the attorney shall forthwith prepare an information based
[01:19:30.800 --> 01:19:36.260]  upon such complaint and file the same in the court having jurisdiction, provided that in
[01:19:36.260 --> 01:19:43.140]  counties having no county attorney, misdemeanor cases may be tried upon complaint alone without
[01:19:43.140 --> 01:19:48.900]  an information, provided, however, in counties having one or more criminal district courts
[01:19:48.900 --> 01:19:54.580]  and information must be filed in each misdemeanor case.
[01:19:54.580 --> 01:19:56.460]  Now that's 2.05 verbatim.
[01:19:56.460 --> 01:20:05.220]  Yeah, okay, that goes to every county then because every county in Texas is in a criminal
[01:20:05.220 --> 01:20:06.220]  district.
[01:20:06.220 --> 01:20:11.420]  Yeah, but it specifically states a criminal district court.
[01:20:11.420 --> 01:20:16.780]  For instance, here in Nacogdoches County, we've got two criminal district courts here.
[01:20:16.780 --> 01:20:22.260]  Yeah, in Jack County, they don't have a criminal district court in the county.
[01:20:22.260 --> 01:20:26.620]  It's not physically positioned in the county.
[01:20:26.620 --> 01:20:33.340]  It's physically positioned in Wise County, but it has jurisdiction over Jack County.
[01:20:33.340 --> 01:20:37.820]  So they have a criminal district court.
[01:20:37.820 --> 01:20:44.380]  Yeah, according to the exact wording of the statute, though, it says in counties.
[01:20:44.380 --> 01:20:46.220]  It doesn't stipulate crossing lines.
[01:20:46.220 --> 01:20:47.860]  It doesn't say in districts.
[01:20:47.860 --> 01:20:49.980]  It specifically says in county.
[01:20:49.980 --> 01:20:50.980]  Okay.
[01:20:50.980 --> 01:20:57.060]  So if, say, in Jack County, Texas, where the district court for Jack County and Montague
[01:20:57.060 --> 01:21:05.620]  County are seats in Wise County, those two counties could proceed on information alone.
[01:21:05.620 --> 01:21:06.620]  On complaint alone.
[01:21:06.620 --> 01:21:07.620]  Complaint alone.
[01:21:07.620 --> 01:21:08.620]  Okay.
[01:21:08.620 --> 01:21:13.100]  And the complaint alone is simply what the police officer files with the court regarding
[01:21:13.100 --> 01:21:15.700]  the citation that he issued you.
[01:21:15.700 --> 01:21:20.500]  Basically, what that means is the prosecuting attorney doesn't have to do any further prep
[01:21:20.500 --> 01:21:23.500]  work than take the complaint from the police officer.
[01:21:23.500 --> 01:21:24.500]  Okay.
[01:21:24.500 --> 01:21:27.700]  And that doesn't hurt anybody.
[01:21:27.700 --> 01:21:31.620]  That'll give you opportunity to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint because...
[01:21:31.620 --> 01:21:32.620]  Exactly.
[01:21:32.620 --> 01:21:34.460]  Also, screw it up every time.
[01:21:34.460 --> 01:21:35.460]  Yes.
[01:21:35.460 --> 01:21:41.260]  And that's one of the major things that I've noticed is most of the time, the officer or
[01:21:41.260 --> 01:21:47.220]  the court clerk is the one that does up the complaint, and they almost always get the
[01:21:47.220 --> 01:21:52.420]  section that they're charging you under wrong.
[01:21:52.420 --> 01:21:53.420]  Almost always.
[01:21:53.420 --> 01:21:58.900]  For instance, I've got one of these officers, he charged me with a section that is nothing
[01:21:58.900 --> 01:22:03.300]  but a description of the short title of the statute.
[01:22:03.300 --> 01:22:04.660]  That's a defective complaint.
[01:22:04.660 --> 01:22:11.900]  It doesn't charge you with any area dealing with the actual offense committed in any way,
[01:22:11.900 --> 01:22:12.900]  shape, or form.
[01:22:12.900 --> 01:22:15.660]  He charged you with a description of the short title.
[01:22:15.660 --> 01:22:21.380]  Well, you can't possibly be in violation of a description of a short title.
[01:22:21.380 --> 01:22:28.100]  So the first rule is any complaint against you, get a copy of it and read it carefully.
[01:22:28.100 --> 01:22:33.060]  Research it carefully according to the sections that are listed there for the statutory offenses
[01:22:33.060 --> 01:22:37.940]  you allegedly committed, you know?
[01:22:37.940 --> 01:22:47.420]  In this area, let me make a suggestion, do not decide that you know what this statute
[01:22:47.420 --> 01:22:50.820]  means based on the title of the statute.
[01:22:50.820 --> 01:22:53.100]  Oh, please don't do that.
[01:22:53.100 --> 01:22:57.940]  A perfect example, and I've used it before, I had a fellow call me who also does legal
[01:22:57.940 --> 01:23:04.100]  research wanting me to help him with the citation for failure to yield right of way.
[01:23:04.100 --> 01:23:08.820]  So my first question, what are the elements?
[01:23:08.820 --> 01:23:12.060]  Long pregnant pause.
[01:23:12.060 --> 01:23:13.300]  You don't know what the elements are.
[01:23:13.300 --> 01:23:14.620]  Have you read the statute?
[01:23:14.620 --> 01:23:15.620]  No.
[01:23:15.620 --> 01:23:17.020]  Look it up.
[01:23:17.020 --> 01:23:20.060]  He calls me back laughing.
[01:23:20.060 --> 01:23:21.860]  He's pretty happy.
[01:23:21.860 --> 01:23:23.660]  He reads me the statute.
[01:23:23.660 --> 01:23:25.860]  It is a violation.
[01:23:25.860 --> 01:23:33.860]  It is a class A misdemeanor to fail to yield right of way while exiting an alley.
[01:23:33.860 --> 01:23:37.860]  I said, okay, what's the next paragraph?
[01:23:37.860 --> 01:23:41.820]  There is no next paragraph.
[01:23:41.820 --> 01:23:46.940]  We all thought we knew what failed to yield right of way was.
[01:23:46.940 --> 01:23:47.940]  Read the code.
[01:23:47.940 --> 01:23:52.980]  I happened to be in court one day on a ticket and the hearing before me was on that very
[01:23:52.980 --> 01:23:53.980]  issue.
[01:23:53.980 --> 01:23:59.860]  I asked the guy's attorney, have you read the statute lately?
[01:23:59.860 --> 01:24:01.980]  He said, well, not lately.
[01:24:01.980 --> 01:24:04.900]  I said, go get it, read it.
[01:24:04.900 --> 01:24:09.900]  So while I'm kind of jerking the judge around and he had went to get a copy of the transportation
[01:24:09.900 --> 01:24:14.500]  code and I got through jerking the judge around and he's sitting there with his coat open
[01:24:14.500 --> 01:24:18.460]  looking up at me, grinning from ear to ear.
[01:24:18.460 --> 01:24:24.940]  He was an attorney and because he heard failure to yield right of way, he thought he knew
[01:24:24.940 --> 01:24:28.180]  what that meant.
[01:24:28.180 --> 01:24:31.140]  Never assume you know what it means.
[01:24:31.140 --> 01:24:37.180]  Read the code, find out what the elements of the offense are.
[01:24:37.180 --> 01:24:40.700]  You will often be very surprised.
[01:24:40.700 --> 01:24:47.540]  I beat a speeding ticket because I demanded to hear to be advised of the charge against
[01:24:47.540 --> 01:24:55.660]  me and this is when the speed limit was 55 and the judge had the officer read the statute.
[01:24:55.660 --> 01:24:59.740]  It said the speed limits on streets and highways state of Texas shall not exceed 70 mile per
[01:24:59.740 --> 01:25:05.580]  hour day and he kind of leaned into the text and I said, yeah, go ahead.
[01:25:05.580 --> 01:25:06.580]  Go ahead.
[01:25:06.580 --> 01:25:07.580]  That's what I read.
[01:25:07.580 --> 01:25:10.100]  65 mile per hour night.
[01:25:10.100 --> 01:25:12.740]  He had charged me with 65 in a 55.
[01:25:12.740 --> 01:25:14.940]  I said, that's the one I read.
[01:25:14.940 --> 01:25:17.260]  Which one did you read?
[01:25:17.260 --> 01:25:21.260]  Back when they lowered the speed limit to 55, Texas never changed it in the statute
[01:25:21.260 --> 01:25:22.260]  books.
[01:25:22.260 --> 01:25:25.660]  It existed, but not there.
[01:25:25.660 --> 01:25:28.700]  He just didn't know where it was at and this was a DPS officer.
[01:25:28.700 --> 01:25:30.900]  That's all he did.
[01:25:30.900 --> 01:25:36.980]  You would think he would know where it was and that's the only one I beat because he
[01:25:36.980 --> 01:25:38.980]  couldn't find the right statute.
[01:25:38.980 --> 01:25:42.460]  I've wasted enough of your time, I'm sorry.
[01:25:42.460 --> 01:25:43.460]  Always read the statute.
[01:25:43.460 --> 01:25:49.140]  Yeah, like for instance, one of the other charges they've tried to hit me with is section
[01:25:49.140 --> 01:25:53.900]  502.407, operational vehicle with expired license plate.
[01:25:53.900 --> 01:25:58.860]  Well once again, I took the state license plates off of my vehicle the day that I got
[01:25:58.860 --> 01:25:59.860]  it.
[01:25:59.860 --> 01:26:04.020]  I put on handmade plates and purple letters that says private vehicle.
[01:26:04.020 --> 01:26:07.940]  There's no mistaking the fact that this is not a vehicle for hire, just as they used
[01:26:07.940 --> 01:26:09.340]  to have on the old farm trucks.
[01:26:09.340 --> 01:26:12.700]  You remember Randy when he used to say not for hire painted on the door?
[01:26:12.700 --> 01:26:13.700]  Yes.
[01:26:13.700 --> 01:26:15.060]  You didn't have to have a license.
[01:26:15.060 --> 01:26:16.060]  You didn't have to have plates.
[01:26:16.060 --> 01:26:19.180]  You didn't have to have anything on a farm vehicle like that.
[01:26:19.180 --> 01:26:27.740]  To this day, if you have a trailer that's used on the farm, you can pull it on the highway
[01:26:27.740 --> 01:26:30.180]  without registration.
[01:26:30.180 --> 01:26:34.180]  You can do the same with the actual vehicle itself as long as you're using it within 150
[01:26:34.180 --> 01:26:38.660]  miles of your farm.
[01:26:38.660 --> 01:26:44.180]  But anyway, on that section 407, again, let's pay attention to some key words here.
[01:26:44.180 --> 01:26:49.780]  A person commits an offense if after the fifth working day, after the date the registration
[01:26:49.780 --> 01:26:55.860]  for the vehicle expires, the person operates on a public highway during a registration
[01:26:55.860 --> 01:27:02.900]  period a motor vehicle, trailer or semi-trailer that has attached to it a license plate for
[01:27:02.900 --> 01:27:06.820]  the preceding period.
[01:27:06.820 --> 01:27:08.420]  That's pretty clear.
[01:27:08.420 --> 01:27:09.420]  Yes.
[01:27:09.420 --> 01:27:12.340]  Not only that, it has and after that.
[01:27:12.340 --> 01:27:17.060]  The license plate has not been validated by the attachment of a registration insignia for
[01:27:17.060 --> 01:27:20.700]  the registration period in effect.
[01:27:20.700 --> 01:27:26.260]  So basically speaking, if you don't already have a license plate on there, they can't
[01:27:26.260 --> 01:27:29.020]  hit you with an expired license plate.
[01:27:29.020 --> 01:27:33.380]  Yet, that is the exact section they've tried to charge me under.
[01:27:33.380 --> 01:27:41.340]  So once again, we now have a faulty complaint and that results in aggravated perjury because
[01:27:41.340 --> 01:27:45.420]  the intent of the complaint is to get you into court, get you charged and to get a fine
[01:27:45.420 --> 01:27:46.780]  out of you.
[01:27:46.780 --> 01:27:50.660]  To extract money from you against your will is, of course, it's harm.
[01:27:50.660 --> 01:27:52.300]  It's financial harm.
[01:27:52.300 --> 01:27:58.580]  That makes it aggravated according to the definition of aggravated perjury, correct Randy?
[01:27:58.580 --> 01:28:00.500]  I can't say for certain.
[01:28:00.500 --> 01:28:09.940]  Aggravated perjury goes to a false statement of a material fact.
[01:28:09.940 --> 01:28:18.180]  If the statement that is misstated is material, if you ask me how much I weigh when I was
[01:28:18.180 --> 01:28:24.840]  stopped for speeding and I lied to you about my weight, that's not a material fact that
[01:28:24.840 --> 01:28:26.120]  goes to speeding.
[01:28:26.120 --> 01:28:27.780]  So it's not perjury.
[01:28:27.780 --> 01:28:28.780]  Right.
[01:28:28.780 --> 01:28:35.300]  But if I accused you of having the expired registration when in fact you had no registration,
[01:28:35.300 --> 01:28:38.140]  that is material to the charge I'm making against you.
[01:28:38.140 --> 01:28:44.260]  The allegation of expired registration is absolutely material.
[01:28:44.260 --> 01:28:47.180]  So absolutely that would go to aggravated perjury.
[01:28:47.180 --> 01:28:51.260]  As you can see folks, oh I'm sorry, go ahead Randy.
[01:28:51.260 --> 01:28:53.540]  And tampering with the government document.
[01:28:53.540 --> 01:28:58.580]  If you put a false statement on a government document that you know is false and you intended
[01:28:58.580 --> 01:29:03.340]  it be taken as true, that's a felony in Texas.
[01:29:03.340 --> 01:29:07.860]  So it was aggravated perjury actually.
[01:29:07.860 --> 01:29:18.300]  Well, putting the false statement on the document was the criminal act of tampering with a
[01:29:18.300 --> 01:29:21.020]  government document.
[01:29:21.020 --> 01:29:29.180]  Surrendering or submitting the document to the court under oath is a separate offense
[01:29:29.180 --> 01:29:32.260]  of aggravated perjury.
[01:29:32.260 --> 01:29:34.900]  So he could tamper with the government document.
[01:29:34.900 --> 01:29:37.740]  Well that's an interesting question.
[01:29:37.740 --> 01:29:41.820]  Can you tamper with the government document if you don't ever turn it into the court?
[01:29:41.820 --> 01:29:43.980]  The ticket is a government document.
[01:29:43.980 --> 01:29:48.020]  Okay listen, listen guys, we're going to break.
[01:29:48.020 --> 01:29:49.020]  All right.
[01:29:49.020 --> 01:29:50.660]  All right, we'll be right back.
[01:29:50.660 --> 01:29:52.420]  We'll hash this out on the break.
[01:29:52.420 --> 01:29:53.420]  Okay.
[01:29:53.420 --> 01:29:55.420]  We'll be right back.
[01:29:55.420 --> 01:30:00.060]  Yeah, what I was thinking.
[01:30:00.060 --> 01:30:04.060]  Gold prices are at historic highs and with the recent pullback, this is a great time
[01:30:04.060 --> 01:30:05.060]  to buy.
[01:30:05.060 --> 01:30:09.580]  With the value of the dollar, risks of inflation, geopolitical uncertainties and instability
[01:30:09.580 --> 01:30:13.180]  in world financial systems, I see gold going up much higher.
[01:30:13.180 --> 01:30:16.420]  Hi, I'm Tim Fry at Roberts and Roberts Brokerage.
[01:30:16.420 --> 01:30:20.140]  Everybody should have some of their assets in investment grade precious metals.
[01:30:20.140 --> 01:30:24.100]  At Roberts and Roberts brokerage, you can buy gold, silver and platinum with confidence
[01:30:24.100 --> 01:30:29.100]  from a brokerage that specialized in the precious metals market since 1977.
[01:30:29.100 --> 01:30:32.860]  If you are new to precious metals, we will happily provide you with the information you
[01:30:32.860 --> 01:30:37.300]  need to make an informed decision whether or not you choose to purchase from us.
[01:30:37.300 --> 01:30:41.580]  Also, Roberts and Roberts brokerage values your privacy and will always advise you in
[01:30:41.580 --> 01:30:44.980]  the event that we would be required to report any transaction.
[01:30:44.980 --> 01:30:49.100]  If you have gold, silver or platinum you'd like to sell, we can convert it for immediate
[01:30:49.100 --> 01:30:50.100]  payment.
[01:30:50.100 --> 01:30:53.860]  Call us at 800-874-9760.
[01:30:53.860 --> 01:31:21.500]  Here are Roberts and Roberts brokerage, 800-874-9760.
[01:31:24.700 --> 01:31:49.700]  I got the flow down, must get red tonight Been running for miles on the track, till we ran
[01:31:49.700 --> 01:31:50.700]  out of light The lawyers court, the money all be damned
[01:31:50.700 --> 01:32:09.780]  The motive of my rain The rain has brokered
[01:32:09.780 --> 01:32:15.780]  I'm awake now, cause I'm sleeping in the jungle
[01:32:17.780 --> 01:32:21.780]  Sleeping in the jungle
[01:32:23.780 --> 01:32:27.780]  So tired in the jungle
[01:32:27.780 --> 01:32:37.780]  Sleeping in the jungle
[01:32:58.780 --> 01:33:03.780]  Miss them or you're really with them, it makes me so blue
[01:33:04.780 --> 01:33:09.780]  To protect us from ourselves, is that the best we can do?
[01:33:10.780 --> 01:33:15.780]  The cities are your business, keep them in yourself
[01:33:16.780 --> 01:33:21.780]  They ought to hold the keys, but they're still under your spell
[01:33:21.780 --> 01:33:26.780]  Your rain has soaked up, all the way to the bottom
[01:33:51.780 --> 01:33:57.780]  I've actually read several attorney general opinions and appellate court opinions on why that is
[01:33:58.780 --> 01:34:02.780]  The first thing is, is the ticket is not signed under oath
[01:34:03.780 --> 01:34:08.780]  The second thing is, is the ticket normally does not give you an accurate description of the charges
[01:34:09.780 --> 01:34:13.780]  It just simply gives an abbreviated version of what the police officer thinks you did wrong
[01:34:13.780 --> 01:34:21.780]  The third part of the problem is, is the police officer is not allowed to draw conclusions of law
[01:34:22.780 --> 01:34:27.780]  Which is why he's got to attest to this complaint in front of an attorney that is allowed to give the oath
[01:34:28.780 --> 01:34:30.780]  And to attest to the conclusions and so on and so forth
[01:34:31.780 --> 01:34:35.780]  Which is exactly where you can screw the officer up during testimony if you do have to go to court with him as well
[01:34:35.780 --> 01:34:44.780]  Because he's got to try to come up with a way to explain how he made a conclusion of law that you were operating a motor vehicle
[01:34:45.780 --> 01:34:50.780]  He's got to explain how he came up with a conclusion of law that you were in violation of such and such statute
[01:34:51.780 --> 01:34:56.780]  All of these things require conclusions of law, which he is not qualified to make
[01:34:57.780 --> 01:35:02.780]  And if you don't believe that, just try asking him a question along that line in court
[01:35:02.780 --> 01:35:06.780]  Officer, you say that I violated statute such and such by doing this
[01:35:07.780 --> 01:35:10.780]  And I guarantee you the prosecuting attorney is going to come up right out of the chair
[01:35:11.780 --> 01:35:12.780]  Objection requires a conclusion of law
[01:35:13.780 --> 01:35:19.780]  And right then and there you're going to say, well now wait a minute, what are we doing here if that's not what he did to begin with
[01:35:20.780 --> 01:35:23.780]  He had to make a conclusion of law for us to even get through the door
[01:35:23.780 --> 01:35:32.780]  So along those lines, that's the basic grounds why the citation itself cannot be a charging instrument
[01:35:33.780 --> 01:35:38.780]  Because it does not contain enough information for you to verify what you're being charged with
[01:35:39.780 --> 01:35:41.780]  And it is not made under penalty of perjury and oath
[01:35:42.780 --> 01:35:50.780]  So given some of the basics on that, I'm sure Randy would have some commentary along that line as well
[01:35:50.780 --> 01:35:53.780]  Anything to go with that, Randy?
[01:35:54.780 --> 01:36:05.780]  Well, as I understand, the courts have held that a traffic citation is considered signed by the officer under oath
[01:36:06.780 --> 01:36:12.780]  But I was wrong once before, that I recall
[01:36:12.780 --> 01:36:21.780]  And the reason for that is so that the officer doesn't have to go to a magistrate in order to get each traffic citation verified
[01:36:22.780 --> 01:36:35.780]  Because that would render moot or without purpose 543.005
[01:36:35.780 --> 01:36:42.780]  Which authorizes the officer to release you on your own recognizance if you sign the citation
[01:36:43.780 --> 01:36:49.780]  So in order for him to be able to do that, when he signs the citation, it has to be under oath
[01:36:50.780 --> 01:36:52.780]  Right, but that goes, I'm sorry, go ahead
[01:36:53.780 --> 01:36:56.780]  Because otherwise he would have to take you directly to a magistrate
[01:36:56.780 --> 01:37:09.780]  So if he had to go to a magistrate to get his signature verified, then there would be no purpose in passing an ordinance or statute that allows him to release you on your own recognizance
[01:37:10.780 --> 01:37:18.780]  But it's either case law or statutory law that the citation is considered filed under oath
[01:37:19.780 --> 01:37:23.780]  But the other part is the one that really comes up in almost every citation
[01:37:23.780 --> 01:37:34.780]  It seems that the officers are trained and directed not to put the statute on the citation
[01:37:35.780 --> 01:37:43.780]  They use a common language description of the criminal act
[01:37:43.780 --> 01:37:53.780]  And I'm sure they have a reason for doing that. I suspect it gives them more leeway when they get to court
[01:37:54.780 --> 01:38:04.780]  So if the officer put a specific statute and the same actions he describes could be assigned to two different statutes
[01:38:04.780 --> 01:38:15.780]  And if you put the one statute, they might get out from under it, but if you word it in so that it's more artfully vague, they could claim either one of them
[01:38:16.780 --> 01:38:31.780]  But what you and I should do, if it's not in the verbiage of a specific statute, we should claim that the complaint is insufficient on its face as it charges no criminal act
[01:38:31.780 --> 01:38:46.780]  Well, that's one approach to it, most certainly. Let's see. Now the other thing though is what gives the court jurisdiction to even hear the case
[01:38:47.780 --> 01:38:53.780]  When we go back to the fact that we're looking for a charging instrument based upon the case law that I've read
[01:38:53.780 --> 01:39:03.780]  It is specifically stated in the state constitution that it is the information or the indictment that grants jurisdiction to the court
[01:39:04.780 --> 01:39:15.780]  So if you go by what the constitution itself states here in Texas, if only an indictment or information can grant jurisdiction to the court
[01:39:15.780 --> 01:39:24.780]  And statutorily speaking, we've got an unconstitutional statute when it says they can proceed upon complaint alone because that is not an information and it is not an indictment
[01:39:25.780 --> 01:39:29.780]  So there's a possible conflict there that can be addressed within the courts also
[01:39:29.780 --> 01:39:45.780]  That is a good point because it sounds very reasonable to state that the court can pursue on the allegation itself, I mean it sounds reasonable
[01:39:46.780 --> 01:39:51.780]  But it does appear to clearly be in direct violation of the constitution
[01:39:51.780 --> 01:39:58.780]  Yeah, the Article 5, Section 12 where it says judges to be conservatives of the peace, indictments and information, the very last sentence
[01:39:59.780 --> 01:40:06.780]  The presentment of an indictment or information to a court invests the court with jurisdiction of the cause
[01:40:07.780 --> 01:40:12.780]  There's no gray area there. It doesn't say may, might, could, should, would. It says it is what does it
[01:40:13.780 --> 01:40:17.780]  Those two things are the only thing that grants the court jurisdiction of the cause
[01:40:17.780 --> 01:40:28.780]  Which takes us right back to why I would insist that 2.05 says that is the reason an information is mandatory in all misdemeanor cases
[01:40:29.780 --> 01:40:35.780]  And that certainly comes up reasonable. That would be a very good argument to bring
[01:40:36.780 --> 01:40:43.780]  And believe me, I've done it here in the court in Nacogdoches and I have had both the judge and the prosecutor say, well that's not the way we do things
[01:40:43.780 --> 01:40:47.780]  We go strictly upon the complaint. I'm going, you go strictly upon whatever you want to
[01:40:48.780 --> 01:40:55.780]  But the moment you proceed against me in this court acting without jurisdiction, you're going to have a whole can of worms you wasn't counting on
[01:40:56.780 --> 01:41:03.780]  Yeah, you can tell them what I do is I sue your behind when you act without subject matter jurisdiction
[01:41:04.780 --> 01:41:06.780]  So you do what you do and I'll do what I do
[01:41:06.780 --> 01:41:15.780]  Exactly. Which brings us back down to another part about researching your complaint when you get one
[01:41:16.780 --> 01:41:24.780]  It can take them a while but I would advise you do not, under any circumstances, waive your right to a speedy trial
[01:41:25.780 --> 01:41:30.780]  If you do that by motion in order to get them to delay prosecution for whatever reason
[01:41:30.780 --> 01:41:38.780]  They can take up to the full two years that they have to prosecute a misdemeanor to get a complaint in, find an attorney to prosecute you, and so on and so forth
[01:41:39.780 --> 01:41:45.780]  Actually, no. Oh, I'm sorry, yeah, if you waive your right to speedy trial
[01:41:45.780 --> 01:42:02.780]  Exactly. Now you can request a continuance and the speedy trial clock stops from the point the cause is continued to the point that it begins again
[01:42:03.780 --> 01:42:10.780]  That counts against you, but once it begins again, the clock starts from that point and continues
[01:42:10.780 --> 01:42:18.780]  Right, and I had to, go ahead. Here's an argument that hasn't been raised yet that I would like to see raised
[01:42:19.780 --> 01:42:25.780]  3202A, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been overturned by the legislature
[01:42:26.780 --> 01:42:29.780]  3202A was the speedy trial act
[01:42:29.780 --> 01:42:45.780]  It said that if a court doesn't bring you to trial within 30 days after a Class C misdemeanor, 90 days Class B, 120 days Class A, 180 days felony
[01:42:45.780 --> 01:42:59.780]  Then a ruling, then the court, I forgot exactly how I put it, but it ordered the court to rule that it was dismissed with prejudice
[01:43:00.780 --> 01:43:07.780]  And the court said that the legislature may not dictate a judicial decision, so they overturned it
[01:43:07.780 --> 01:43:17.780]  So it is my position that the speedy trial act did not grant you and I a right
[01:43:18.780 --> 01:43:32.780]  What it did was restrict our right by giving the court 30, 60, 90, 120, 180 days in which time to delay without having to show cause for the delay
[01:43:32.780 --> 01:43:42.780]  Right. Since the act has been overturned, they don't have 30, 60, 90, 120, they got 10 days
[01:43:43.780 --> 01:43:45.780]  Okay listen, hold on guys, we're going to break
[01:43:46.780 --> 01:43:48.780]  Okay, real quick, I've got time
[01:43:49.780 --> 01:43:50.780]  Go ahead
[01:43:51.780 --> 01:43:54.780]  Yeah, we got like 5 seconds left, we'll be right back
[01:43:54.780 --> 01:44:00.780]  Stock markets are taking hit after hit, corrupt bankers are choking on subprime debt
[01:44:01.780 --> 01:44:08.780]  The Fed is busy printing dollars, dollars and more dollars to bail out Wall Street, banks and the US car industry
[01:44:09.780 --> 01:44:17.780]  As investors scramble for safety in the metals, in the face of a further devaluation of the dollar, the price of silver will only increase
[01:44:17.780 --> 01:44:27.780]  Some of the world's leading financial analysts believe that silver is one of the world's most important commodities with unparalleled investment opportunity for the future
[01:44:28.780 --> 01:44:38.780]  Now is the time to buy silver before it heads for $75 an ounce and the yellow metal roars back past $1,000 an ounce to new highs
[01:44:38.780 --> 01:44:53.780]  Call Maximus Holdings now at 407-608-5430 to find out how you can turn your IRA and 401k into a solid investment, silver, without any penalties for early withdrawal
[01:44:54.780 --> 01:44:59.780]  Even if you don't have a retirement account yet, we have fantastic investment opportunities for you
[01:44:59.780 --> 01:45:08.780]  Call Maximus Holdings at 407-608-5430 for more information
[01:45:29.780 --> 01:45:44.780]  Some things in this world I will never understand, some things I realize foolish
[01:45:45.780 --> 01:45:52.780]  Somebody's gonna police that policeman, somebody's gonna police the police
[01:45:52.780 --> 01:46:01.780]  There's always a room at the top of the hill, I hear through the grapevine and it's lonely left too
[01:46:01.780 --> 01:46:22.780]  They're wishing it was more than opposition, they know that it is
[01:46:22.780 --> 01:46:32.780]  There was one little piece I was trying to finish before the break, you have 10 days as a matter of law
[01:46:33.780 --> 01:46:42.780]  27.11 gives you 10 days in which to file motions in your defense, after that the prosecution has to bring you to trial
[01:46:42.780 --> 01:46:53.780]  Any delay beyond that he must show cause for, since he no longer has a speedy trial act giving him 30, 60, 90 days, he's got 10 and that's it
[01:46:54.780 --> 01:46:57.780]  That's my argument, I'm sorry, I'll stop, go ahead
[01:46:58.780 --> 01:47:04.780]  No, that's good actually because I've had a couple of people say, they've sent me emails since the first show that I did
[01:47:04.780 --> 01:47:11.780]  And one of them was saying that it took 15 months for the complaint to be filed and signed by the police officer from the day he got the ticket
[01:47:12.780 --> 01:47:24.780]  And then he got the complaint notice in the mail after that, if that's the case then they've already blown it in his regard because they don't have any leeway in that time limit anymore
[01:47:24.780 --> 01:47:46.780]  Exactly, 543.005, the statute that authorizes the police officer to release a person if they sign the citation very clearly states after the arrest the officer may release the person
[01:47:46.780 --> 01:48:00.780]  And the case law says a prosecution commences when a person is arrested or when a complaint is presented to a magistrate
[01:48:01.780 --> 01:48:09.780]  Well there's our caveat then Randy, if they did not arrest you and the officer took 15 months to file the actual complaint
[01:48:09.780 --> 01:48:20.780]  No wait, you missed it, if he had you sign the ticket, he can only have you sign the ticket after arrest
[01:48:21.780 --> 01:48:30.780]  Statute says after arrest the officer may release the person arrested if they sign a promise to appear
[01:48:30.780 --> 01:48:38.780]  So it very clearly states that once they write the ticket you are under arrest
[01:48:39.780 --> 01:48:52.780]  Okay, that synopsis however is just up into the whole bunch of case law because we've actually got the Supreme Court saying that you're not under arrest just because you've been stopped and given a citation or so on and so forth
[01:48:52.780 --> 01:49:01.780]  Which is one of the reasons why one of the things I discuss with people is the very first thing you do when a police officer pulls you over
[01:49:02.780 --> 01:49:14.780]  The very first two questions that I would ask is how officer am I under arrest? No. Well then am I free to go? No. Now you are in custody
[01:49:15.780 --> 01:49:19.780]  You are under detention is what they're calling it
[01:49:19.780 --> 01:49:23.780]  Right, it's a custodial stop at that point
[01:49:24.780 --> 01:49:31.780]  The problem here is they didn't ask the right question for the purposes of 543.005
[01:49:32.780 --> 01:49:43.780]  Clearly, it very clearly states that the officer can only release you on your signature after arrest
[01:49:43.780 --> 01:49:56.780]  It very clearly states arrest in the statute and if we have court cases where the courts have ruled otherwise whoever asked the question asked the wrong question
[01:49:57.780 --> 01:49:58.780]  They need to quote this statute
[01:49:59.780 --> 01:50:08.780]  So I understand your position you're talking about a, what's the name of the stop? Cherry Stop?
[01:50:09.780 --> 01:50:10.780]  Right
[01:50:10.780 --> 01:50:20.780]  Yeah, I completely agree. Now let's talk real quick about where some of the hidden gold in this research comes from
[01:50:21.780 --> 01:50:30.780]  You would think that in Texas the individual codes themselves is where they would draw their relevant information about what they do and why they do it
[01:50:30.780 --> 01:50:39.780]  Guess what? Almost every state agency in Texas fails to read the actual statutory code
[01:50:40.780 --> 01:50:46.780]  They trust their entire livelihood upon what is written in the Texas administrative code
[01:50:47.780 --> 01:50:55.780]  And believe me when I tell you there is a wealth of information there that tells you exactly what these people are supposed to be doing
[01:50:55.780 --> 01:51:04.780]  And yet that's the only thing they read and then they try to apply that to the statutes in question in an enforcement manner
[01:51:05.780 --> 01:51:13.780]  And they've got it completely wrong because the administrative code is nothing more than a synopsis of the actual codes
[01:51:14.780 --> 01:51:19.780]  Therefore the details are lacking and so is their ability to do it correctly
[01:51:19.780 --> 01:51:30.780]  Let me give you an example. Texas Administrative Code, Title 37, Part 1, Chapter 1, Subchapter B, Rule 1.11
[01:51:31.780 --> 01:51:42.780]  This deals with Public Safety and Corrections, Texas Department of Public Safety, Organization and Administration, Basic Doctrine and their Basic Doctrines Rule
[01:51:42.780 --> 01:51:55.780]  The Department of Public Safety accepts its responsibility as a public trust. It is our policy to discharge with dispatch any responsibility to the fullest extent with maximum benefit for the public
[01:51:56.780 --> 01:52:03.780]  It is the policy of the Department to afford maximum courtesy, service and protection to all citizens and visitors in this state
[01:52:04.780 --> 01:52:09.780]  The Department recognizes that government exists for the benefit of the governed, the people
[01:52:09.780 --> 01:52:15.780]  Well, I don't know about you but I don't know many of the DPS guys that actually understand that concept
[01:52:16.780 --> 01:52:22.780]  Enforcement and regulatory actions against persons are carried out for the benefit of society as a whole
[01:52:23.780 --> 01:52:29.780]  The Department does not act to adjudicate or rectify injustices, inequities or wrongs between individuals
[01:52:30.780 --> 01:52:34.780]  But acts only to maintain order for the preservation and protection of society as a whole
[01:52:34.780 --> 01:52:46.780]  I'm going to skip down a little here. It is the policy of the Department to assume primary responsibility for traffic supervision on the rural highways of this state
[01:52:47.780 --> 01:52:52.780]  Including, there's that magic word from before, the regulation of commercial traffic
[01:52:53.780 --> 01:52:59.780]  Now if traffic in and of itself means commerce, guess what that means? The DPS is there to regulate
[01:52:59.780 --> 01:53:08.780]  They assume the responsibility for the supervision of traffic, commercial activity upon the roads and highways of the state
[01:53:09.780 --> 01:53:17.780]  So any time a DPS officer acts upon a vehicle that's not involved in a traffic anything, he's acting outside of his jurisdiction
[01:53:18.780 --> 01:53:24.780]  Unless of course that vehicle is in the act of committing harm against someone else or their property
[01:53:24.780 --> 01:53:28.780]  Or otherwise placing in imminent danger some other part of the public
[01:53:29.780 --> 01:53:37.780]  But basically right here, that's what it's telling us. Their responsibility is traffic supervision and regulation of commercial traffic
[01:53:38.780 --> 01:53:44.780]  Yes, that second circumstance you mentioned would come under penal code and not transportation code
[01:53:45.780 --> 01:53:47.780]  Correct. Now let's take a look at some of the other things
[01:53:47.780 --> 01:53:55.780]  The mission of the Texas Department of Public Safety is to supervise traffic on a rural highway
[01:53:56.780 --> 01:54:00.780]  To supervise and regulate commercial and for-hire traffic
[01:54:01.780 --> 01:54:06.780]  To preserve the peace, to investigate crimes and to arrest criminals
[01:54:06.780 --> 01:54:16.780]  To administer regulatory programs in driver licensing, which we know now in 521.021 does not have a thing to do with traveling in your car
[01:54:17.780 --> 01:54:21.780]  It has to do with an occupational endeavor upon the road
[01:54:22.780 --> 01:54:30.780]  Motor vehicle inspection and safety responsibility and to execute programs supplementing and supporting the proceeding activities
[01:54:30.780 --> 01:54:38.780]  All right, now let's take a look at enforcement action, speed law enforcement by the Texas Highway Patrol
[01:54:39.780 --> 01:54:47.780]  Construction of prima facie limits, the prima facie maximum speed limits fixed by the legislature or established by zoning authority
[01:54:48.780 --> 01:54:56.780]  Will be construed to be the maximum principal speeds under normal conditions and speeds in excess of such limits will be considered illegal
[01:54:56.780 --> 01:55:02.780]  Interpretation of Texas transportation code 545.363A
[01:55:03.780 --> 01:55:09.780]  Now whenever you run across a code reference inside of a statute dealing with an offense you've been charged with
[01:55:10.780 --> 01:55:18.780]  Go look it up. Do not assume it's irrelevant. If it references another code section, go see what it says
[01:55:18.780 --> 01:55:26.780]  If that one rabbit trails you somewhere else, look at it too, because there's a good chance that when you start stringing these sections together
[01:55:27.780 --> 01:55:32.780]  Instead of getting confusing, you could wind up with a pearl necklace that will save your behind
[01:55:33.780 --> 01:55:40.780]  Because each one will take you to a new set of information that could have a great impact on your defense against such an accusation
[01:55:40.780 --> 01:55:50.780]  The exception, except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, will not apply when it is practicable for the offending driver to drive onto the shoulder
[01:55:51.780 --> 01:55:53.780]  And allow the impeded traffic to pass
[01:55:54.780 --> 01:56:03.780]  And another exception again, which doesn't really matter, but the basic gist of it here is the Department of Public Safety and the DPS folks
[01:56:03.780 --> 01:56:16.780]  Are there for the majority of keeping the public safe, but their regulatory efforts are directed toward everything commercial, not private
[01:56:17.780 --> 01:56:22.780]  And the administrative code is full of little nuggets like this that will help you dig this stuff out
[01:56:23.780 --> 01:56:28.780]  If you'll remember in the first show we talked about a manufacturer's certificate of origin and what it was actually for
[01:56:28.780 --> 01:56:39.780]  Well, right here in the Texas Administrative Code in Title 43, Part 1, Chapter 17, Subchapter A, Rule 17.2
[01:56:40.780 --> 01:56:47.780]  If we go down to Item 20, manufacturer's certificate of origin, this is what it says this thing means
[01:56:47.780 --> 01:56:58.780]  A form prescribed by the department showing the original transfer of a new motor vehicle from the manufacturer to the original purchaser
[01:56:59.780 --> 01:57:02.780]  Whether importer, distributor, dealer, or owner
[01:57:02.780 --> 01:57:18.780]  And when presented with an application for certificate of title showing on appropriate forms prescribed by the department each subsequent transfer between distributor and dealer, dealer and dealer, and dealer and owner
[01:57:19.780 --> 01:57:28.780]  Guess what? The MSO or the MCO as it's called here doesn't do this anymore. This is not what it's used for. How do we know this?
[01:57:28.780 --> 01:57:44.780]  Because upon the first time it is sold to an actual individual or to an actual company, at that point the MCO is transferred straight to Austin, it is microfished, and the original is burned
[01:57:45.780 --> 01:57:50.780]  Now they're not addending any transfers of this vehicle to the microfiche
[01:57:50.780 --> 01:58:04.780]  So the MCO is no longer being used to track the transfers from person to person. They have instead, in violation of the statutes, started using the certificate of title strictly for this purpose
[01:58:05.780 --> 01:58:14.780]  What happens every time you sell a vehicle to someone else? You have to take the certificate of title, they have to sign the back of it, you take it down, you get a new one issued in your name
[01:58:14.780 --> 01:58:30.780]  They have actually replaced the MCO with a certificate of title. The occupations code says certificate of title is nothing more than an issuance of legal title to show who is the actual lien holder on the vehicle
[01:58:31.780 --> 01:58:39.780]  Now, let's take a break. Okay, Eddie, Eddie, hold on, hold on. We're going to break. Alright. Let's pick this up on the other side. Okay.
[01:58:39.780 --> 01:58:49.780]  Alright, this is Will of Law, Randy Kelton and Deborah Stevens with Eddie Craig on the Texas Transportation Code. Here's a tone twister for you.
[01:59:09.780 --> 01:59:11.780]  From the kitchen.
[01:59:12.780 --> 01:59:15.780]  He from the kitchen.
[01:59:24.780 --> 01:59:26.780]  He from the kitchen.
[01:59:26.780 --> 01:59:44.340]  He's from the kitchen Mr. Hoppin' Limer and Mr. Einstein
[01:59:44.340 --> 01:59:49.140]  They're requiring my soul and mind There's a pencil in my back and a light on
[01:59:49.140 --> 01:59:52.340]  a mission I'd like to see if it doesn't do the mission
[01:59:52.340 --> 01:59:57.980]  Sometime I come, she's outside Mr. Hoppin' Limer and Mr. Einstein