ROL_2009-08-28_16k_Hr1-2.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:05.240]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[00:05.240 --> 00:09.640]  James Davis, the chief financial officer of the investment company owned by flamboyant
[00:09.640 --> 00:15.720]  billionaire Alan Stanford, pleaded guilty Thursday to charges stemming from a $7 billion
[00:15.720 --> 00:16.720]  fraud.
[00:16.720 --> 00:22.920]  Stanford pleaded not guilty in June to charges of fraud, money laundering and obstruction.
[00:22.920 --> 00:28.280]  Last spring, the media trumpeted Dick Cheney's challenge to release the CIA's torture memos,
[00:28.280 --> 00:33.080]  saying they would show the Bush administration's torture program operated within the law and
[00:33.080 --> 00:35.880]  provided indispensable information.
[00:35.880 --> 00:40.180]  Since Monday when the CIA released most of the documents, there has been hardly a mention
[00:40.180 --> 00:46.520]  in the mainstream media that the CIA report largely contradicted what Cheney said.
[00:46.520 --> 00:51.000]  Scientists have just completed an unprecedented journey into the vast and little explored
[00:51.000 --> 01:04.480]  Great Pacific Ocean garbage patch, estimated to be twice the size of Texas.
[01:04.480 --> 01:10.200]  The website Refreshing News says forests of fake trees should be planted across the country
[01:10.200 --> 01:13.200]  to reduce the impact of climate change.
[01:13.200 --> 01:18.000]  According to a study by Britain's Institution of Mechanical Engineers, a single synthetic
[01:18.000 --> 01:23.800]  tree could capture 10 tons of carbon dioxide from the air every day.
[01:23.800 --> 01:29.160]  Experts claim 100,000 of them would remove the carbon emissions of every car, truck and
[01:29.160 --> 01:30.760]  bus in Britain.
[01:30.760 --> 01:35.200]  The scientists argue that a single synthetic tree is thousands of times more efficient
[01:35.200 --> 01:38.840]  at absorbing CO2 than a real tree.
[01:38.840 --> 01:44.360]  The trees, which would each cost $25,000, would be coated with synthetic materials that
[01:44.360 --> 01:50.480]  absorbed CO2, which would then be removed and stored underground in depleted oil and
[01:50.480 --> 01:52.680]  natural gas reservoirs.
[01:52.680 --> 01:58.500]  This study also called for pots of algae that absorbed CO2 from the atmosphere to be used
[01:58.500 --> 02:00.000]  to line buildings.
[02:00.000 --> 02:09.880]  The algae could then be used as green biofuels for cars.
[02:09.880 --> 02:14.580]  Scientists have warned that breast cancer patients, given Tamoxifen, are four times
[02:14.580 --> 02:20.200]  more likely to develop a more aggressive tumor than those not prescribed the drug.
[02:20.200 --> 02:27.080]  A study over 1,000 patients found the estrogen-blocking drug reduced the risk of the most common easy-to-treat
[02:27.080 --> 02:33.040]  cancer recurring by 60 percent, but the chances of a rarotype not sensitive to the female
[02:33.040 --> 02:40.000]  hormone appearing in the opposite breast increased by an alarming 440 percent.
[02:40.000 --> 02:45.320]  Tamoxifen has been used to treat breast cancer for more than 20 years and has saved the lives
[02:45.320 --> 02:47.960]  of hundreds of thousands of women worldwide.
[02:47.960 --> 03:03.360]  The study confirms preliminary research published by the same team in 2001.
[03:03.360 --> 03:06.360]  I've got to tell you one thing right now, Texas is a terrible place to be.
[03:06.360 --> 03:07.360]  Oh, I can't think.
[03:07.360 --> 03:08.360]  No, it's a terrible state.
[03:08.360 --> 03:09.360]  I mean, it looks like a tumor.
[03:09.360 --> 03:10.360]  Yeah.
[03:10.360 --> 03:11.360]  Well, it has nothing to do with Texas.
[03:11.360 --> 03:14.360]  It's people in the organizations, like the Looney Libertarians, what are they called?
[03:14.360 --> 03:15.360]  Oh, Texas for cerebral insanity.
[03:15.360 --> 03:16.360]  No, no, Texas for cerebral insanity.
[03:16.360 --> 03:18.360]  No, no, Texas for accountable schmooze.
[03:18.360 --> 03:19.360]  No, Texas for accountable government.
[03:19.360 --> 03:20.360]  There you go.
[03:20.360 --> 03:24.360]  We would never do anything to promote them in any way, never do any radio public service
[03:24.360 --> 03:27.360]  announcements, especially when they got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[03:27.360 --> 03:29.360]  Oh, oh, oh, yeah, with Jimmy, Jimmy Vaughn.
[03:29.360 --> 03:30.360]  Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part.
[03:30.360 --> 03:31.360]  Yeah, I don't know.
[03:31.360 --> 03:32.360]  It's sexy blue stuff.
[03:32.360 --> 03:33.360]  I mean.
[03:33.360 --> 03:34.360]  Give me like Billy Joel.
[03:34.360 --> 03:35.360]  Find Joby if you like the hot stuff.
[03:35.360 --> 03:36.360]  Now you're talking.
[03:36.360 --> 03:37.360]  Now you're talking.
[03:37.360 --> 03:40.360]  So, whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority's Spider House
[03:40.360 --> 03:42.360]  Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[03:42.360 --> 03:44.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there.
[03:44.360 --> 03:47.360]  It's 510 West 29th and Fruit.
[03:47.360 --> 03:48.360]  Fruit?
[03:48.360 --> 03:49.360]  Fruit.
[03:49.360 --> 03:50.360]  Well, I'm going to tell you something.
[03:50.360 --> 03:51.360]  They want 20 bucks at the door.
[03:51.360 --> 03:54.360]  If I get their fruit ten times fast, they should let me in for free.
[03:54.360 --> 03:55.360]  Oh, those cheap skates.
[03:55.360 --> 03:58.360]  Whatever you do, don't go to TechHexas.org for more info.
[03:58.360 --> 03:59.360]  I'll definitely.
[03:59.360 --> 04:08.360]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com.
[04:08.360 --> 04:16.360]  Live free speech talk radio at its best.
[04:16.360 --> 04:44.360]  Thank you.
[04:44.360 --> 05:03.360]  Thank you.
[05:03.360 --> 05:21.360]  Okay, this is Randy Kelton, Rule of Law Radio.
[05:21.360 --> 05:23.360]  I'm running the board tonight.
[05:23.360 --> 05:27.360]  And the first thing I did is hit the wrong button.
[05:27.360 --> 05:31.360]  So, I am in the command chair.
[05:31.360 --> 05:37.360]  So, if anything goes wrong tonight, it's Deborah's fault.
[05:37.360 --> 05:42.360]  Okay.
[05:42.360 --> 05:44.360]  Okay, fade the music off.
[05:44.360 --> 05:47.360]  I'll get it about the time the show is over.
[05:47.360 --> 05:52.360]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law.
[05:52.360 --> 05:55.360]  Deborah's going to be at a meeting tonight.
[05:55.360 --> 05:58.360]  And Eddie's in transit.
[05:58.360 --> 06:02.360]  So, Eddie may be here for the second or third hour.
[06:02.360 --> 06:04.360]  We're not sure which.
[06:04.360 --> 06:07.360]  Up until then, you're stuck with me.
[06:07.360 --> 06:13.360]  And I'm going to start by going through some research that I was working on today.
[06:13.360 --> 06:17.360]  I was working on a brief for someone.
[06:17.360 --> 06:28.360]  And talked to Tony Davis and got some very good case law on right to counsel.
[06:28.360 --> 06:38.360]  On your right to have counsel, counsel of choice, and right to represent yourself.
[06:38.360 --> 06:47.360]  And where I want to start with is primarily right to counsel.
[06:47.360 --> 06:49.360]  Okay.
[06:49.360 --> 07:02.360]  The right to counsel, including counsel of choice, at critical stages of the proceedings before and at trial on appeal, including the right.
[07:02.360 --> 07:03.360]  Oh, I'm sorry.
[07:03.360 --> 07:05.360]  Let me give you the opening to that.
[07:05.360 --> 07:10.360]  Opinions of the court designate the rights listed below as structural.
[07:10.360 --> 07:14.360]  And the part leading up to this talks about structural errors.
[07:14.360 --> 07:28.360]  Structural errors are those errors that are constitutional violations or violations of the procedures of the court that are of such a serious nature
[07:28.360 --> 07:39.360]  that they call for dismissal of the case or overturning a ruling.
[07:39.360 --> 07:40.360]  Let me start at the beginning.
[07:40.360 --> 07:42.360]  Per se, judicial errors.
[07:42.360 --> 07:49.360]  In conducting harmless error analysis of constitutional violations in direct appeal on habeas corpus cases,
[07:49.360 --> 07:59.360]  the court repeatedly has reaffirmed that some constitutional violations, by their very nature, cast so much doubt on the fairness of the trial process
[07:59.360 --> 08:04.360]  that as a matter of law, they can never be considered harmless.
[08:04.360 --> 08:07.360]  Arizona fulminate.
[08:07.360 --> 08:17.360]  A five justice majority of the court elucidated this rule of per se prejudice, sometimes called the rule of automatic reversal.
[08:17.360 --> 08:29.360]  By distinguishing between the concepts of structural and trial error, structural defects in the constitution of the trial mechanism are per se prejudicial.
[08:29.360 --> 08:32.360]  That means you don't have to show prejudice.
[08:32.360 --> 08:40.360]  Trial errors occurring during the presentation of the case to the jury are subject to harmless error analysis.
[08:40.360 --> 08:48.360]  Later on in here, they mentioned that it's essentially impossible to get through a case without some kind of trial error.
[08:48.360 --> 08:52.360]  But most of them are harmless in their nature.
[08:52.360 --> 09:06.360]  In Breck versus Abrahamson, the court changed the standard that applies in habeas corpus cases for addressing the harmlessness of constitutional trial errors.
[09:06.360 --> 09:22.360]  The court did not, however, change and in fact reaffirmed its longstanding doctrine treating structural error as not subject to harmless error analysis and accordingly as prejudicial, hence reversible.
[09:22.360 --> 09:26.360]  And what they're saying is you do certain things.
[09:26.360 --> 09:35.360]  And the abused person, the person is done against, doesn't have to show that there was error.
[09:35.360 --> 09:38.360]  It's error essentially is a matter of law.
[09:38.360 --> 09:56.360]  Trial error occurs during the presentation of the case to the jury and is amenable to harmless error analysis because it may be quantitatively addressed in the context of other evidence presented in order to determine the effect it had on the trial.
[09:56.360 --> 10:11.360]  At the other end of the spectrum of constitutional error lie structural defects in the constitution of the trial mechanism, which defy analysis by harmless error standards.
[10:11.360 --> 10:25.360]  The existence of such defects, deprivation of the right to counsel, for example, requires automatic reversal of the conviction because they infect the entire process.
[10:25.360 --> 10:43.360]  For the foregoing reasons then, we hold that Cauticos, that's another case, harmless error standard applies in determining whether habeas relief must be granted because of constitutional error of the trial type.
[10:43.360 --> 10:46.360]  The trial type, not structural type.
[10:46.360 --> 11:00.360]  Thus, even in habeas corpus proceedings adjudicated under BRAC, structural errors as opposed to errors of the trial type are always considered prejudicial and accordingly are reversible per se.
[11:00.360 --> 11:11.360]  Even more recently, the court seems to have divided the universe of constitutional errors into three rather than two categories for purposes of harmless error analysis.
[11:11.360 --> 11:17.360]  Or perhaps the court has divided the category of automatically reversible errors into two subcategories.
[11:17.360 --> 11:36.360]  According to this taximony, structural error must be corrected regardless of their effect on the trial because they violate basic protections without which a criminal trial cannot reliably serve its function as a vehicle for determination of guilt or innocence.
[11:36.360 --> 11:41.360]  And no criminal punishment may be regarded as fundamentally fair.
[11:41.360 --> 11:56.360]  As to such errors, denial of an attorney or a jury or other failures to complete the proceeding, for example, prejudice is not presumed but rather is irrelevant.
[11:56.360 --> 12:06.360]  A second, oh here's where I have missed the page, but the point is there are certain errors that are structural.
[12:06.360 --> 12:10.360]  And the thing I was looking for is right to counsel.
[12:10.360 --> 12:16.360]  And this goes very strongly to right to counsel.
[12:16.360 --> 12:22.360]  I'm just going to go through some case law and the reason for this, you don't need to remember the case law.
[12:22.360 --> 12:29.360]  I will be posting this in a folder on my jurisprudence site.
[12:29.360 --> 12:40.360]  If you go to jurisprudence and pop frog on the right, documents and research, it will open to a bunch of folders and you pick the research folder.
[12:40.360 --> 12:45.360]  That research folder has all my research in it.
[12:45.360 --> 12:57.360]  When I research an issue, if I come across, when you do research, you come across all sorts of issues, the one you're looking for if you're lucky.
[12:57.360 --> 13:07.360]  But a lot of times you find all sorts of other issues when you go to a case because when someone appeals a case, they appeal on every issue they can think of.
[13:07.360 --> 13:14.360]  And they might get their client off, so each case will deal with more than one issue at a time.
[13:14.360 --> 13:17.360]  When you're looking for your primary issue, you may find others.
[13:17.360 --> 13:22.360]  And when I find those, I drop them in a folder within the research folder.
[13:22.360 --> 13:39.360]  Like I was doing DUIs and went to my DUI folder and found a section I had put in there from the Texas Litigation Guide.
[13:39.360 --> 13:43.360]  And it was dead on.
[13:43.360 --> 13:52.360]  You'll find most issues you come across, you'll find some cases in these research folders.
[13:52.360 --> 13:55.360]  If you're doing legal research, that's a real good place to start.
[13:55.360 --> 14:05.360]  The hardest thing in doing legal research is getting the first hit, getting the first case on point.
[14:05.360 --> 14:13.360]  Once you hit a case on point, then you look through the case and it will address other cases.
[14:13.360 --> 14:19.360]  So you can move out from that case to other cases on point, and those cases give you other cases.
[14:19.360 --> 14:26.360]  And you'll tend to find the very case that you're looking for or the very issue.
[14:26.360 --> 14:31.360]  But that first case on point is sometimes a real trick.
[14:31.360 --> 14:36.360]  And that's why every time I'm doing legal research, if I find something that addresses another issue,
[14:36.360 --> 14:47.360]  which today I found lots, and I'm going to get to the main one that I found that was an aside from what I was looking for.
[14:47.360 --> 14:52.360]  I'm looking at right to counsel.
[14:52.360 --> 15:01.360]  We had a guy, went to court, fired his attorney because he had filed a bunch of motions in the court.
[15:01.360 --> 15:07.360]  And Rule 152 says, if you have an attorney, a motion must be signed by the attorney.
[15:07.360 --> 15:14.360]  Well, the attorney refused to address the motions, and they're my standard due process motions.
[15:14.360 --> 15:19.360]  He told his client he didn't understand them.
[15:19.360 --> 15:29.360]  So we fired the attorney and went into court on a contempt hearing.
[15:29.360 --> 15:37.360]  The judge granted a continuance because he was without counsel.
[15:37.360 --> 15:42.360]  He accepted the attorney's withdrawal.
[15:42.360 --> 15:49.360]  So the guy's left without counsel, and he grants a continuance to give him time to secure counsel.
[15:49.360 --> 15:59.360]  And then the prosecutor asked the judge to hear a motion that wasn't on the docket that had been filed a long time ago and hadn't had a hearing on it.
[15:59.360 --> 16:06.360]  It was a motion to revoke his bond because he didn't take a psychological evaluation.
[16:06.360 --> 16:10.360]  And the judge agreed to hear it.
[16:10.360 --> 16:16.360]  The guy objected. The judge refused to hear the objection.
[16:16.360 --> 16:22.360]  Granted the motion, threw him in jail, and held him at the court while he appointed counsel.
[16:22.360 --> 16:25.360]  The guy didn't ask for counsel.
[16:25.360 --> 16:36.360]  But the judge appointed him counsel anyway because he did not want those motions that he had filed coming before the court.
[16:36.360 --> 16:42.360]  So he appointed counsel to keep the guy from filing a motion without counsel.
[16:42.360 --> 16:48.360]  Okay. We're going to go to break, and I'll get into some more of this case law when we come back.
[16:48.360 --> 16:50.360]  You're going to find this really interesting.
[16:50.360 --> 17:00.360]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, rule of law. We'll be right back.
[17:00.360 --> 17:07.360]  I got to tell you one thing right now. Texas is a terrible place to be. It's a terrible state. It looks like a tumor.
[17:07.360 --> 17:12.360]  We have nothing to do with Texas. It's people in the organizations, like the loony libertarians, what are they called?
[17:12.360 --> 17:14.360]  Texas for cerebral insanity.
[17:14.360 --> 17:16.360]  No, Texas for accountable schmooze.
[17:16.360 --> 17:17.360]  Texas for accountable government.
[17:17.360 --> 17:25.360]  There you go. We would never do anything to promote them in any way, never do any radio public service announcements, especially when they got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[17:25.360 --> 17:27.360]  Oh, yeah, with Jimmy Vaughn?
[17:27.360 --> 17:28.360]  Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part.
[17:28.360 --> 17:33.360]  I don't know, it's sexy blue stuff, I mean. You can be like Billy Joel or Bon Jovi if you like the hot stuff.
[17:33.360 --> 17:40.360]  Now you're talking, now you're talking. So whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority at Spider House Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[17:40.360 --> 17:42.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there.
[17:42.360 --> 17:45.360]  It's 510 West 29th and Spruce.
[17:45.360 --> 17:46.360]  Spruce?
[17:46.360 --> 17:47.360]  Spruce.
[17:47.360 --> 17:52.360]  Well, I'm going to tell you something. If they want 20 bucks at the door, if I can say Spruce 10 times fast, they should let me in for free.
[17:52.360 --> 17:55.360]  Oh, those cheap skates. Whatever you do, don't go to tagtex and saddle up for more info.
[17:55.360 --> 17:58.360]  I'll definitely not.
[18:25.360 --> 18:47.360]  Okay, we're back. Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, Rule of Law.
[18:47.360 --> 18:52.360]  And we were talking about right to counsel.
[18:52.360 --> 18:59.360]  And in going through this, right to counsel is absolutely fundamental.
[18:59.360 --> 19:11.360]  And as I go through the cases, you'll see not only is right, you have a right to counsel, you have a right to competent counsel.
[19:11.360 --> 19:19.360]  That because counsel is not competent according to these cases is the same as no counsel.
[19:19.360 --> 19:25.360]  Okay, under right to counsel, I'm going to go through some of the case law here.
[19:25.360 --> 19:50.360]  Chapter 22, Chapman v. California, that's a seminal case for compilations of prior cases holding errors to be per se prejudicial.
[19:50.360 --> 19:58.360]  It is presumed where the accused is denied the presence of counsel at a critical stage,
[19:58.360 --> 20:08.360]  if counsel entirely fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing.
[20:08.360 --> 20:17.360]  Now anyone who listens to this program and has heard people talk about their counsel,
[20:17.360 --> 20:33.360]  have yet to have anyone call in and tell me they had an attorney who subjected the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing.
[20:33.360 --> 20:39.360]  And according to this, if they don't, that is a structural error.
[20:39.360 --> 20:51.360]  It is fundamental and automatic reversal where counsel is called upon to render assistance under circumstances where competent counsel very likely could not.
[20:51.360 --> 21:00.360]  And some of these cases address that where counsel is appointed and 30 minutes later he has to go to trial with the guy.
[21:00.360 --> 21:04.360]  And I've heard this, you know, people talk to me about this happening.
[21:04.360 --> 21:12.360]  According to the case law, the federal case law, that is structural error and absolute reversal.
[21:12.360 --> 21:24.360]  But the one that really caught my eye was this first one, where the accused is denied the presence of counsel at a critical stage.
[21:24.360 --> 21:30.360]  Now in Texas this is, it's kind of complex how we get here.
[21:30.360 --> 21:43.360]  If you get arrested in Texas, they're going to take you to jail and they're going to do a little song and dance and then they're going to bring you before this person.
[21:43.360 --> 21:58.360]  And he will represent himself as a magistrate and he will advise you of the charges against you, advise you of your rights, and then advise you of the bail that's been set in your case.
[21:58.360 --> 22:01.360]  Now this is generally called a magistration.
[22:01.360 --> 22:03.360]  Sometimes it's called an arraignment.
[22:03.360 --> 22:05.360]  That's not what an arraignment is.
[22:05.360 --> 22:11.360]  An arraignment is hearing hell for the purpose of determining the identity of the accused and taking a plea.
[22:11.360 --> 22:13.360]  It's not an arraignment.
[22:13.360 --> 22:15.360]  Magistration is not defined anywhere.
[22:15.360 --> 22:18.360]  They made that one up.
[22:18.360 --> 22:24.360]  They had to have a name to call this thing because what they do is not in law anywhere.
[22:24.360 --> 22:28.360]  What is in law is an examining trial.
[22:28.360 --> 22:42.360]  Now if the magistrate notifies you of the amount of bail set in the case, there is only one way that a magistrate can set bail.
[22:42.360 --> 22:58.360]  According to the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, 17.05 tells a magistrate when he can set bail or 17.05 speaks to when bail is taken.
[22:58.360 --> 23:18.360]  This is entered into before a magistrate after an examining trial, before a judge in habeas corpus, or before a police officer into 17.20, 21, 22, and those are cases where bail is preset by statute.
[23:18.360 --> 23:28.360]  If the magistrate notified you of bail set in the case, there is only one way that can be done and that's an examining trial.
[23:28.360 --> 23:36.360]  In Rothgarry v. County of Gillespie, it's an October 2008 case.
[23:36.360 --> 23:52.360]  The Supreme Court just vilified Texas for being one of eight states that don't treat an examining trial as a critical stage in the prosecution.
[23:52.360 --> 24:03.360]  And they absolutely asserted it most certainly is a critical stage for the purpose of the Sixth Amendment.
[24:03.360 --> 24:18.360]  The right to counsel and what they very clearly stated in that case is that the right to counsel attaches at an examining trial.
[24:18.360 --> 24:24.360]  So they're holding an examining trial somewhere.
[24:24.360 --> 24:42.360]  And the only place I can figure is when the magistrate comes to the jail, someone gives him a folder with your name in it, with a criminal complaint, and a statement of probable cause.
[24:42.360 --> 24:55.360]  Well, under the rules of evidence, I think it's 16.04, Code of Criminal Procedure says the rules of evidence apply in an examining trial.
[24:55.360 --> 25:06.360]  Under the rules of evidence, you can't enter evidence into the court, ex parte.
[25:06.360 --> 25:16.360]  Evidence has to be entered into the court in a proper hearing. So the first thing you have to do is establish foundation for the evidence.
[25:16.360 --> 25:25.360]  And if you don't establish foundation, opposing counsel or opposing the accused can object.
[25:25.360 --> 25:30.360]  Once you've established a foundation for the evidence, then you present the evidence.
[25:30.360 --> 25:40.360]  He can still object to it even if you've established foundation. And he has an opportunity to rebut the evidence.
[25:40.360 --> 25:56.360]  Somehow, that judge got a folder in his hand with information in it about the accused while the accused was being held in jail, that constructed gunpoint.
[25:56.360 --> 26:04.360]  He didn't attend that hearing. Now he would have if he could have got out of jail and knew the hearing was happening.
[26:04.360 --> 26:13.360]  But it was held somewhere in secret between the jailer and the judge. And the judge set bail.
[26:13.360 --> 26:25.360]  Well, according to this, prejudice is presumed where the accused is denied the presence of counsel at a critical stage.
[26:25.360 --> 26:40.360]  This is Bill V. Cohn, 535 U.S. 685. That's 695 and 96. For those of you who don't know what that means, it's the U.S.
[26:40.360 --> 26:50.360]  The U.S. is the set of books. If you ever go to the legal library or you go to your lawyer's office, you'll see all these books, lines of books, all of them just alike.
[26:50.360 --> 27:06.360]  It'll either be the Southwest Reporter, the U.S., I think West's publishes it, or Federal Reporter. And the first number, 514, that's the book.
[27:06.360 --> 27:21.360]  The second number, 435, that's the page in the book. And then if it has a comma or a dash, like I'm looking at one, 514 U.S. 435 at 436.
[27:21.360 --> 27:25.360]  That means you look on the second page, it's where this reference they're talking about is.
[27:25.360 --> 27:39.360]  Anyway, this is Bill V. Cohn, 535 U.S. 685 at 695 and 696. It lays out what constitutes prejudice.
[27:39.360 --> 27:57.360]  And with Rothgarry v. County of Gillespie, a Texas case, that case very clearly establishes that the preliminary hearing, where the person is first brought before a magistrate,
[27:57.360 --> 28:18.360]  is a critical part of the prosecution for purposes of the Sixth Amendment, the right to counsel. And it is in Texas law that the magistrate who holds the examining trial has authority to appoint counsel for the purpose of that hearing and that hearing alone.
[28:18.360 --> 28:28.360]  And in that case, you don't have to be indigent. They can appoint counsel because you can't go find counsel because they got you locked up.
[28:28.360 --> 28:37.360]  So they appoint you counsel so you can have it at this hearing. Anyone here who remembers Night Court?
[28:37.360 --> 29:02.360]  It was a comedy program about a court at night in New York and people be brought in and you had a prosecutor and you had a defense counsel appointed to represent them and the person would be held long enough to consult with their counsel.
[29:02.360 --> 29:14.360]  And when the counsel advised the court they were ready, the person was brought before the court, the prosecutor came before the court with the police officer and told his side.
[29:14.360 --> 29:26.360]  The other person with counsel present told his side and the magistrate decided whether or not the person had to stand trial or went home.
[29:26.360 --> 29:32.360]  Now that was a comedy but constitutionally it was dead on.
[29:32.360 --> 29:41.360]  And when we get back, I'll go through a little more of this and then I'm going to get to the book that I just got back, Malpractice.
[29:41.360 --> 30:00.360]  And we'll leave those two together. This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, who's going to be a little late. We'll be back shortly.
[30:00.360 --> 30:12.360]  I've got to tell you one thing right now, Texas is a terrible place to be. It's a terrible state. It looks like a tumor. We have nothing to do with Texas, it's people and organizations like the Looney Libertarians, what are they called?
[30:12.360 --> 30:25.360]  Texas is a terrible insanity. No, no, Texans were accountable. We would never do anything to promote them in any way, never do any radio public service announcements, especially when they've got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[30:25.360 --> 30:33.360]  Oh, yeah, well Jimmy, Jimmy Vaughn. Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part. Yeah, I don't know, sexy blue stuff by me. Give me like Billy Joel, Bon Jovi if you like the hot stuff.
[30:33.360 --> 30:40.360]  Now you're talking, now you're talking. So whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority at Spider House Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[30:40.360 --> 30:48.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there. It's 510 West 29th and Fruits. Fruits? Fruits. For a while I'm going to tell you something.
[30:48.360 --> 30:56.360]  They want 20 bucks for the door. If I get the Fruits 10 times fast, they should let me in for free. On those cheap skates. Whatever you do, don't go to TagTexas.org for more info. I'll definitely.
[31:18.360 --> 31:43.360]  Okay, we're back.
[31:43.360 --> 31:51.360]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law. And we were talking about right to counsel.
[31:51.360 --> 32:04.360]  And anybody who's listened to the show much is well aware of my tendency to talk about that preliminary hearing and the problems associated with it.
[32:04.360 --> 32:13.360]  There are a great number. And one of which gets us a felony to go after the magistrate with.
[32:13.360 --> 32:26.360]  But this case law on your right to counsel very strongly supports the requirement of the magistrate to hold an examining trial.
[32:26.360 --> 32:48.360]  Magistrates don't understand that. I just had a magistrate refuse to hold an examining trial because a prosecutor told him that a magistrate may only hold an examining trial for a claim in the county in which the offense was committed.
[32:48.360 --> 32:59.360]  He lied to the magistrate. And he's going to get himself a lot of fun with me for lying to the magistrate.
[32:59.360 --> 33:08.360]  But for the most part, the magistrates think what they're doing is right. They're trained to do it this way. And it is horrendously illegal.
[33:08.360 --> 33:20.360]  And this case law is going to help in going after them. I'm just going to run through a bit of this case law. Oh, by the way, the phones are open if you've got any questions or comments.
[33:20.360 --> 33:27.360]  Call in. I'm not going to be able to screen the calls. So they'll just come up to the call bridge.
[33:27.360 --> 33:39.360]  So if you're a first time caller, I may not know who you are because our call screen comes up and it gives us a first name and a state. That's all we get.
[33:39.360 --> 33:48.360]  That's all we want to know, actually. But if it's not been screened, I won't get a first name or a state.
[33:48.360 --> 34:00.360]  So if I get some calls that are new calls or if you're on a different number that you haven't called before and the system doesn't recognize it, then when I go to you,
[34:00.360 --> 34:09.360]  I will give you the area code of wherever the call is from. So you'll know if I've got two or three, then you'll know who I'm talking to.
[34:09.360 --> 34:19.360]  So anyway, so if you want to call in, go right ahead. Don't worry about that. Not hitting the call screen or it'll just bump right up to my screen and I'll see it.
[34:19.360 --> 34:26.360]  We've got one already. I will go to the caller and.
[34:26.360 --> 34:36.360]  Okay. Hello, Kathy from Texas. You there? Oh, hello. Okay. I'm sorry. I have to apologize. I didn't hear all of it.
[34:36.360 --> 34:47.360]  But I had one quick question. All right. I know. I don't know. I know we are. We still have the motion in place.
[34:47.360 --> 34:57.360]  No, a magisterial hearing or. Wait a minute, Kathy. You're breaking up. Can you hear it? Yeah, I can hear you, but something's clicking you on and off.
[34:57.360 --> 35:01.360]  Is that better? Yes, that's better. Okay.
[35:01.360 --> 35:14.360]  Okay, go ahead. Okay, we have our motions in place for just what you were talking about. No proper due process, no magistration, if you will.
[35:14.360 --> 35:28.360]  And I'm not sure we have the attorney saying that none of the motions we filed are legal because she didn't sign them and file them. Yes.
[35:28.360 --> 35:33.360]  Okay. Have you looked into that? I did not have an opportunity to look it up.
[35:33.360 --> 35:40.360]  This is precisely what we're dealing with at the moment, and that's precisely what I'm looking into.
[35:40.360 --> 35:45.360]  Right. And that's what I thought. And I missed the first few minutes, so I apologize for that.
[35:45.360 --> 35:52.360]  Okay. We would need to show the attorney Belle V. Cohn, 535 U.S. 685.
[35:52.360 --> 35:54.360]  Yes.
[35:54.360 --> 35:58.360]  Prejudice is presumed where? I'm sorry.
[35:58.360 --> 36:09.360]  Prejudice is presumed if counsel entirely fails to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing.
[36:09.360 --> 36:12.360]  Right. Is that what that means?
[36:12.360 --> 36:19.360]  That's exactly what that means. So tell me, how many motions has this attorney filed in the case?
[36:19.360 --> 36:21.360]  Zero.
[36:21.360 --> 36:24.360]  Zero. That does not-
[36:24.360 --> 36:25.360]  We filed.
[36:25.360 --> 36:26.360]  Right.
[36:26.360 --> 36:27.360]  Yeah.
[36:27.360 --> 36:37.360]  Okay. That does not sound like subjecting prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing.
[36:37.360 --> 36:57.360]  And we may want to present this to the attorney along with, I got my book back on malpractice, on what it constitutes, the breach that it constitutes that is a cause for malpractice.
[36:57.360 --> 37:05.360]  And anything that's a cause for malpractice is also a cause for bar grievance.
[37:05.360 --> 37:15.360]  And we had already discussed bar grievances and even the demand that we had prepared to put her in second seat.
[37:15.360 --> 37:37.360]  And I think where we are right now is the plan was on Monday morning to present ourselves at the attorney's office with a new copy of the same complaints or the motions that we had filed before and have her sign them and refile them.
[37:37.360 --> 37:38.360]  Can't you do that?
[37:38.360 --> 37:39.360]  Yes, absolutely.
[37:39.360 --> 37:47.360]  Sign them and refile the same ones again. We're going to give her that opportunity before we then nail her with a bar group.
[37:47.360 --> 37:51.360]  And you might want to get her a tort letter as well.
[37:51.360 --> 37:52.360]  Okay, tort letter.
[37:52.360 --> 37:56.360]  And we can use this case law to support your position.
[37:56.360 --> 37:58.360]  Okay.
[37:58.360 --> 38:23.360]  That if she adjudicates this case and if she fails to adequately adjudicate each of these due process violations, then she is defrauding the court because the court will have to go through all of this process again as this becomes mandatory.
[38:23.360 --> 38:29.360]  That whatever the decision is, if it rules against her, be overturned and it's start all over again.
[38:29.360 --> 38:30.360]  Right.
[38:30.360 --> 38:42.360]  And one of the questions that has come up to me on this is she has said that we can't file motions.
[38:42.360 --> 38:52.360]  And with the statute, and I don't have the number in front of me, that says the attorney needs to file if you have an attorney of record.
[38:52.360 --> 38:57.360]  It's 152, 1.52 code of criminal procedure.
[38:57.360 --> 38:58.360]  Right.
[38:58.360 --> 39:02.360]  However, there's a problem with that.
[39:02.360 --> 39:05.360]  It violates federal constitution.
[39:05.360 --> 39:06.360]  Okay.
[39:06.360 --> 39:08.360]  On its face.
[39:08.360 --> 39:21.360]  But the other problem I have with that is just assuming that doesn't even exist, we filed a motion and were set for a court date to hear those motions.
[39:21.360 --> 39:29.360]  And when we got there, of course, you know, the judge whose court it was in was dying and whatever.
[39:29.360 --> 39:39.360]  So the judge who took those cases on for that day told us or told the attorney, we never spoke with her,
[39:39.360 --> 39:51.360]  but we were told the reason that we couldn't have the hearing was because of the motions that were filed that would be redundant at a trial.
[39:51.360 --> 39:56.360]  So that tells me the judge accepted those filings.
[39:56.360 --> 40:01.360]  Somebody in there is admitting that there are motions filed.
[40:01.360 --> 40:03.360]  We have them stamped from the court.
[40:03.360 --> 40:14.360]  So your attorney told you that a challenge to the jurisdiction would be redundant at trial?
[40:14.360 --> 40:18.360]  That's what she said the judge or the district attorney said.
[40:18.360 --> 40:24.360]  If we never thought to talk to anybody but the attorney.
[40:24.360 --> 40:28.360]  Do you know if she said judge or district attorney?
[40:28.360 --> 40:35.360]  I could find out for sure, but it was my understanding that the judge said she couldn't rule on them.
[40:35.360 --> 40:40.360]  Move to disqualify the judge for incompetence.
[40:40.360 --> 40:41.360]  Okay.
[40:41.360 --> 40:44.360]  That would be great.
[40:44.360 --> 41:04.360]  Because the Rules of Civil Procedure 120A very clearly establishes that a challenge to the jurisdiction is heard before anything else.
[41:04.360 --> 41:14.360]  And what was interesting to me is that the motions that we filed were challenged to jurisdiction. They were due process.
[41:14.360 --> 41:19.360]  They were the issues you just talked about, not getting to the magistrate in time and going to the jail first.
[41:19.360 --> 41:21.360]  Those are the motions we filed.
[41:21.360 --> 41:24.360]  We did not file to try and get criminal charges.
[41:24.360 --> 41:28.360]  We simply filed for points of order.
[41:28.360 --> 41:35.360]  And the question I have is what in the world does any of that have to do with a trial?
[41:35.360 --> 41:40.360]  The trial is having to do with the charges against the defendant, is it not?
[41:40.360 --> 41:43.360]  This is typical BS.
[41:43.360 --> 41:47.360]  They think because you're pro se, you know nothing.
[41:47.360 --> 41:48.360]  But we're not pro se.
[41:48.360 --> 41:50.360]  We have an attorney.
[41:50.360 --> 41:54.360]  Well, they consider the motions filed pro se.
[41:54.360 --> 42:00.360]  Why? Because the attorney didn't sign. But then they accepted them pro se.
[42:00.360 --> 42:03.360]  Essentially they have.
[42:03.360 --> 42:08.360]  So the attorney is telling us that they can't be filed because she has to file them.
[42:08.360 --> 42:16.360]  And the judge is acknowledging that they're filed because we have them stamped and we have every right to file them.
[42:16.360 --> 42:18.360]  I don't think you'll be able to hold the judge to that.
[42:18.360 --> 42:25.360]  If you give her another set and demand that she sign them and file them, when she refuses,
[42:25.360 --> 42:35.360]  then stack the bar grievances on her, give her a tort letter.
[42:35.360 --> 42:38.360]  And put her in second state.
[42:38.360 --> 42:42.360]  Yeah, and when she tries to be removed from the case, object to it.
[42:42.360 --> 42:45.360]  Right.
[42:45.360 --> 42:49.360]  And once you've crucified the first attorney,
[42:49.360 --> 42:56.360]  then the judge is going to have to look at appointing a second one and he's not going to be happy about that.
[42:56.360 --> 43:04.360]  Or what you might want to do is fire this attorney.
[43:04.360 --> 43:14.360]  After she refuses to adjudicate the case, you fire the attorney, file the motions.
[43:14.360 --> 43:16.360]  Ah, good.
[43:16.360 --> 43:21.360]  And that shouldn't matter that we already have a court date set?
[43:21.360 --> 43:22.360]  No.
[43:22.360 --> 43:24.360]  You fire the attorney the court date stops.
[43:24.360 --> 43:27.360]  Ah.
[43:27.360 --> 43:29.360]  Then you file the motions.
[43:29.360 --> 43:30.360]  You force them before the court.
[43:30.360 --> 43:31.360]  Right.
[43:31.360 --> 43:32.360]  Okay.
[43:32.360 --> 43:33.360]  Okay, new plan.
[43:33.360 --> 43:34.360]  Thanks so much.
[43:34.360 --> 43:36.360]  You are most welcome.
[43:36.360 --> 43:37.360]  Okay.
[43:37.360 --> 43:38.360]  Talk to you later.
[43:38.360 --> 43:39.360]  Okay.
[43:39.360 --> 43:40.360]  Bye.
[43:40.360 --> 43:42.360]  It's Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, rule of law.
[43:42.360 --> 43:44.360]  We're going to break.
[43:44.360 --> 44:00.360]  We'll be back on the other side.
[44:00.360 --> 44:03.360]  I got to tell you one thing right now, Texas is a terrible place to be.
[44:03.360 --> 44:04.360]  Oh, I can't stand it.
[44:04.360 --> 44:05.360]  Now, it's a terrible state.
[44:05.360 --> 44:07.360]  I mean, it looks like a tumor.
[44:07.360 --> 44:08.360]  Yeah, we have nothing to do with Texas.
[44:08.360 --> 44:12.360]  It's people in the organizations, like the loony libertarians, what are they called?
[44:12.360 --> 44:14.360]  Oh, uh, Detectives for Cerebral Insanity.
[44:14.360 --> 44:16.360]  No, no, Texans for Accountable Schmootery.
[44:16.360 --> 44:17.360]  Texans for Accountable Government.
[44:17.360 --> 44:18.360]  There you go.
[44:18.360 --> 44:19.360]  We would never do anything to promote them in any way.
[44:19.360 --> 44:21.360]  Never do any radio public service announcements.
[44:21.360 --> 44:25.360]  Especially when they got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[44:25.360 --> 44:26.360]  Oh, yeah, with Jimmy Vaughn.
[44:26.360 --> 44:28.360]  Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part.
[44:28.360 --> 44:29.360]  Yeah, I don't know, it's sexy blue stuff by me.
[44:29.360 --> 44:32.360]  Give me like Billy Joel, you find Joby if you like the hard stuff.
[44:32.360 --> 44:34.360]  Now you're talking, now you're talking.
[44:34.360 --> 44:39.360]  So whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority at Spider House Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[44:39.360 --> 44:41.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there.
[44:41.360 --> 44:45.360]  It's 510 West 29th and Fruits.
[44:45.360 --> 44:46.360]  Fruits?
[44:46.360 --> 44:47.360]  Fruits.
[44:47.360 --> 44:48.360]  For a while I'm going to tell you something.
[44:48.360 --> 44:49.360]  They want 20 bucks at the door?
[44:49.360 --> 44:51.360]  If I can say Fruits 10 times faster, they should let me in for free.
[44:51.360 --> 44:52.360]  Oh, those cheap skates.
[44:52.360 --> 44:55.360]  Whatever you do, don't go to Tag Tech Custado for more info.
[44:55.360 --> 45:23.360]  I'll get Fruits.
[45:23.360 --> 45:33.360]  Okay, this is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law.
[45:33.360 --> 45:34.360]  We're back.
[45:34.360 --> 45:36.360]  We've got another caller on the line.
[45:36.360 --> 45:44.360]  We're talking about right to counsel and how to handle your attorney.
[45:44.360 --> 45:49.360]  Okay, we have, this is apparently a new caller.
[45:49.360 --> 45:52.360]  They're on a different line.
[45:52.360 --> 45:55.360]  956 Area Code, you're on.
[45:55.360 --> 46:02.360]  Do you have a comment or a question?
[46:02.360 --> 46:05.360]  Hello, are you there?
[46:05.360 --> 46:07.360]  I guess he doesn't have a comment or question.
[46:07.360 --> 46:09.360]  Sometimes this happens to me a lot.
[46:09.360 --> 46:12.360]  I'll probably put him to sleep.
[46:12.360 --> 46:16.360]  Okay, we will proceed.
[46:16.360 --> 46:20.360]  I was talking about, I'm going through some case law.
[46:20.360 --> 46:29.360]  I'm going to go through it the way it's in the book so you get a kind of idea how it's presented
[46:29.360 --> 46:33.360]  and you'll find it's pretty interesting when we go through it.
[46:33.360 --> 46:41.360]  Okay, we were talking about Bill V. Cohn where the accused has denied the presence of counsel
[46:41.360 --> 46:44.360]  at a critical stage of the, critical stage.
[46:44.360 --> 46:48.360]  If counsel entirely fails to subject prosecution case to meaningful
[46:48.360 --> 46:52.360]  or adversarial testing or where counsel is called upon to render assistance
[46:52.360 --> 46:57.360]  under circumstances where competent counsel is very likely could not.
[46:57.360 --> 47:01.360]  Those are prejudice on their face.
[47:01.360 --> 47:03.360]  It's presumed prejudice.
[47:03.360 --> 47:05.360]  You don't have to show prejudice.
[47:05.360 --> 47:09.360]  If those facts occur, they're prejudiced as a matter of law.
[47:09.360 --> 47:12.360]  And then now we go down to Mickens v. Taylor.
[47:12.360 --> 47:18.360]  We have spared the defendant the need of showing probable effect upon the outcome
[47:18.360 --> 47:24.360]  and have simply presumed such effect where assistance of counsel has been denied entirely
[47:24.360 --> 47:28.360]  or during a critical stage of the proceedings.
[47:28.360 --> 47:33.360]  When that has occurred, the likelihood that the verdict is unreliable is so high
[47:33.360 --> 47:38.360]  that a case by case inquiry is unnecessary.
[47:38.360 --> 47:43.360]  And then now we go to Roe v. Flores Ortega.
[47:43.360 --> 47:48.360]  In some cases, the defendant alleges not that counsel made specific errors
[47:48.360 --> 47:52.360]  in the course of representation, but rather that,
[47:52.360 --> 47:57.360]  rather that during the judicial proceedings he was either actually
[47:57.360 --> 48:01.360]  or constructively denied the assistance of counsel altogether.
[48:01.360 --> 48:06.360]  Under such circumstances, no specific showing of prejudice is required
[48:06.360 --> 48:12.360]  because the adversary process itself is presumed unreliable.
[48:12.360 --> 48:18.360]  Now, in reading through this, this comes up really powerful.
[48:18.360 --> 48:23.360]  And this is the very thing everybody complains about with their attorney.
[48:23.360 --> 48:27.360]  And it will go here into not being able to communicate with your attorney
[48:27.360 --> 48:35.360]  as one of the things that causes fundamental error or structural error.
[48:35.360 --> 48:36.360]  Where are we at?
[48:36.360 --> 48:42.360]  The United States v. Chronic, and that's appropriate because this problem is,
[48:42.360 --> 48:47.360]  we presume prejudice when a defendant has suffered an actual
[48:47.360 --> 48:53.360]  or constructive denial of the assistance of counsel altogether.
[48:53.360 --> 48:58.360]  Denial of counsel altogether on appeal warrants a presumption of prejudice.
[48:58.360 --> 49:06.360]  We had one guy a while back in Dallas that went to trial.
[49:06.360 --> 49:11.360]  His attorney came in and asked to withdraw.
[49:11.360 --> 49:15.360]  The guy objected to the attorney withdrawing.
[49:15.360 --> 49:20.360]  The judge allowed the guy to withdraw and then forced this person
[49:20.360 --> 49:25.360]  on a moment's notice to defend himself on a felony charge.
[49:25.360 --> 49:30.360]  The judge should have been put in prison, not the individual.
[49:30.360 --> 49:35.360]  Okay, native of the United States, complete denial of counsel is structural error
[49:35.360 --> 49:39.360]  and thus is subject to automatic reversal.
[49:39.360 --> 49:47.360]  Total deprivation of the right to counsel constitutes structural error.
[49:47.360 --> 49:55.360]  Actions of counsel effectively leaving defendant without appellate representation
[49:55.360 --> 49:58.360]  can never be harmless error.
[49:58.360 --> 50:02.360]  Because of the fundamental importance of the right to counsel,
[50:02.360 --> 50:10.360]  Robinson need not prove prejudice and a harmless error analysis is not required.
[50:10.360 --> 50:13.360]  I'm just kind of going down through the cases.
[50:13.360 --> 50:18.360]  Absence during re-instruction of jury constituted denial of counsel during
[50:18.360 --> 50:21.360]  critical stage of criminal proceeding.
[50:21.360 --> 50:27.360]  Therefore, activated USV Chronics presumption of prejudice.
[50:27.360 --> 50:33.360]  Defective waiver of right to counsel is accused assertion of right to
[50:33.360 --> 50:37.360]  self-representation was per se prejudicial.
[50:37.360 --> 50:41.360]  I'm sorry, that was defective waiver of right to counsel in accused
[50:41.360 --> 50:46.360]  assertion of right to self-representation was per se prejudicial.
[50:46.360 --> 50:51.360]  Denial of right to counsel requires automatic reversal on the conviction
[50:51.360 --> 50:54.360]  regardless of the reason for the denial.
[50:54.360 --> 50:57.360]  Whether it be on oversight or on the part of the court,
[50:57.360 --> 51:03.360]  a failure to give proper warning or some other reason.
[51:03.360 --> 51:08.360]  Amount of time that trial counsel spent with Mitchell prior to jury selection
[51:08.360 --> 51:11.360]  and the start of trial approximately six minutes,
[51:11.360 --> 51:15.360]  spanning three separate meetings in the bullpen when viewed in light of
[51:15.360 --> 51:20.360]  counsel's month-long suspension from practice immediately prior,
[51:20.360 --> 51:25.360]  constituted a complete denial of counsel at a critical stage of the proceeding
[51:25.360 --> 51:30.360]  which triggered Chronics presumption of prejudice analysis.
[51:30.360 --> 51:34.360]  Prejudice is presumed because trial court actually and constructively
[51:34.360 --> 51:40.360]  denied petitioners right to counsel by denying adjournment to permit defense
[51:40.360 --> 51:45.360]  counsel to consult with accused who had been removed from courtroom for
[51:45.360 --> 51:50.360]  disruptive behavior during voir dire.
[51:50.360 --> 51:56.360]  Though Ken will get me for pronouncing voir dire wrong, it's voir dire.
[51:56.360 --> 52:01.360]  And by communicating with accused through court officer rather than counsel
[52:01.360 --> 52:07.360]  about accused return to courtroom.
[52:07.360 --> 52:13.360]  Counsel's constitutionally imposed duty to investigate the case, okay.
[52:13.360 --> 52:16.360]  Critical here between appointment of counsel and the start of trial
[52:16.360 --> 52:21.360]  which constitutes, I'm trying to skip down, I skipped down too far.
[52:21.360 --> 52:24.360]  Okay, Hunt Mitchell.
[52:24.360 --> 52:28.360]  Presumption of prejudice is appropriate because trial court forced counsel
[52:28.360 --> 52:33.360]  to go to trial immediately after appointment and denied pre-trial opportunity
[52:33.360 --> 52:37.360]  to confer with client, doing so deprived petitioner of counsel during critical
[52:37.360 --> 52:42.360]  period between appointment of counsel and start of trial which encompasses
[52:42.360 --> 52:48.360]  counsel's constitutionally imposed duty to investigate the case.
[52:48.360 --> 52:53.360]  That's the first time I've seen that.
[52:53.360 --> 52:59.360]  In this case I haven't had time to read yet, Hunt v. Mitchell addresses
[52:59.360 --> 53:06.360]  counsel's constitutionally imposed duty to investigate the case.
[53:06.360 --> 53:12.360]  I don't know how many times I've had people tell me that they, first time
[53:12.360 --> 53:17.360]  they see the counsel attorney, the attorney tells them, okay, here's the
[53:17.360 --> 53:23.360]  deal, take it, spend up a year in jail waiting for trial, and that's all.
[53:23.360 --> 53:27.360]  Counsel does not want to hear about the case, doesn't care about the case.
[53:27.360 --> 53:33.360]  I hear this same thing over and over and over.
[53:33.360 --> 53:38.360]  Harris v. Day, violation of procedures for filing no merits appellate brief
[53:38.360 --> 53:43.360]  under Anderson v. California amounts to constructive denial of counsel
[53:43.360 --> 53:45.360]  on appeal.
[53:45.360 --> 53:51.360]  Now, if you don't know what that means, bummer, because I wanted you to call
[53:51.360 --> 53:56.360]  me and tell me, I have no idea what that means, constructive denial of,
[53:56.360 --> 54:02.360]  let me see, a no merits appellate brief under Anderson v. California.
[54:02.360 --> 54:06.360]  Another, one of those little issues I haven't had time to look up.
[54:06.360 --> 54:14.360]  Okay, going down to Henderson v. Frank, deprivation of Henderson's right to
[54:14.360 --> 54:19.360]  counsel at the suppression hearing resulting from judge's failure to assure
[54:19.360 --> 54:24.360]  that accused waiver of counsel and assertion of right to proceed pro se
[54:24.360 --> 54:26.360]  were voluntary.
[54:26.360 --> 54:36.360]  Knowing and intelligent was prejudicial per se.
[54:36.360 --> 54:41.360]  When judge forced accused to choose between incompetent lawyer or appearing
[54:41.360 --> 54:47.360]  pro se was per se prejudicial, that a defendant cannot be forced to choose
[54:47.360 --> 54:51.360]  between incompetent counsel and no counsel at all implies the fundamental
[54:51.360 --> 54:57.360]  fairness and accuracy of the criminal proceeding and a showing of prejudice is
[54:57.360 --> 55:01.360]  therefore not required.
[55:01.360 --> 55:07.360]  And now we go to right of self-representation.
[55:07.360 --> 55:13.360]  Okay, denial of self-representation at trial is structural error and thus is
[55:13.360 --> 55:17.360]  subject to automatic reversal.
[55:17.360 --> 55:25.360]  This statute, Code of Criminal Procedure 152, that frankly I needed to read it
[55:25.360 --> 55:35.360]  just before I went on the air, I know it says that a filing must be signed by
[55:35.360 --> 55:43.360]  the attorney or the defendant, but I don't have in my head the exact wording.
[55:43.360 --> 55:47.360]  I've read it before, but I don't have the exact wording.
[55:47.360 --> 55:52.360]  I don't know if it says or if the person is not represented by counsel by the
[55:52.360 --> 56:01.360]  defendant, but it doesn't say that it must be signed by the attorney if they
[56:01.360 --> 56:04.360]  have an attorney.
[56:04.360 --> 56:08.360]  Anyway, I will look at that and we'll address that in the next show.
[56:08.360 --> 56:16.360]  But back to self-representation at trial.
[56:16.360 --> 56:20.360]  Netter v. United States, 527 U.S. 8.
[56:20.360 --> 56:26.360]  Denial of self-representation at trial is structural error and thus is subject
[56:26.360 --> 56:29.360]  to automatic reversal.
[56:29.360 --> 56:34.360]  Netter v. United States, 520 U.S. at 469.
[56:34.360 --> 56:40.360]  Majority opinion on this point of Rehnquist.
[56:40.360 --> 56:44.360]  Sorry, sometimes I have these jumbled up.
[56:44.360 --> 56:50.360]  Per se, prejudice rule applies to denials of self-representation on appeal as
[56:50.360 --> 56:52.360]  well as at trial.
[56:52.360 --> 56:57.360]  Improper denials of the right to self-representation are not subject to
[56:57.360 --> 57:03.360]  continuous error analysis.
[57:03.360 --> 57:06.360]  Right to self-representation established in Ferretta v.
[57:06.360 --> 57:15.360]  California does not extend to direct appeal stage of criminal case.
[57:15.360 --> 57:17.360]  That didn't make sense.
[57:17.360 --> 57:20.360]  Anyway, okay.
[57:20.360 --> 57:26.360]  I hope I'm not putting everybody to sleep out there.
[57:26.360 --> 57:32.360]  In addition to Bagley, which addresses claims of prosecutorial suppression of
[57:32.360 --> 57:36.360]  evidence and decisions listed below.
[57:36.360 --> 57:37.360]  Oh, I'm sorry.
[57:37.360 --> 57:40.360]  I'm into another section.
[57:40.360 --> 57:46.360]  That's about where the prosecutor suppresses evidence or doesn't produce
[57:46.360 --> 57:48.360]  culpatory evidence.
[57:48.360 --> 57:53.360]  I primarily wanted to get to the right to self-representation.
[57:53.360 --> 57:59.360]  Judges really don't want you representing yourself.
[57:59.360 --> 58:00.360]  Okay.
[58:00.360 --> 58:03.360]  Well, we're going to break and we have another caller.
[58:03.360 --> 58:05.360]  We have Freeman on the line.
[58:05.360 --> 58:10.360]  And we will take Freeman when we come back from break.
[58:10.360 --> 58:11.360]  Okay.
[58:11.360 --> 58:14.360]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens.
[58:14.360 --> 58:18.360]  Eddie Craig should be here sometime soon.
[58:18.360 --> 58:21.360]  He said 45 minutes to an hour and a half.
[58:21.360 --> 58:24.360]  So he may be showing up pretty soon.
[58:51.360 --> 59:01.360]  I got to tell you one thing right now.
[59:01.360 --> 59:03.360]  Texas is a terrible place.
[59:03.360 --> 59:04.360]  Oh, I see.
[59:04.360 --> 59:05.360]  It's a terrible state.
[59:05.360 --> 59:06.360]  I mean, it looks like a tumor.
[59:06.360 --> 59:07.360]  Yeah.
[59:07.360 --> 59:08.360]  We have nothing to do with Texas.
[59:08.360 --> 59:11.360]  It's people and organizations like the Looney Libertarians.
[59:11.360 --> 59:12.360]  What are they called?
[59:12.360 --> 59:14.360]  Oh, Texas for cerebral insanity.
[59:14.360 --> 59:15.360]  No, no.
[59:15.360 --> 59:16.360]  Texas for accountable government.
[59:16.360 --> 59:17.360]  There you go.
[59:17.360 --> 59:19.360]  We would never do anything to promote them in any way.
[59:19.360 --> 59:21.360]  Never do any radio public service announcements,
[59:21.360 --> 59:24.360]  especially when they got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[59:24.360 --> 59:26.360]  Oh, yeah, with Jimmy Vaughn.
[59:26.360 --> 59:28.360]  Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part.
[59:28.360 --> 59:29.360]  Yeah, I don't know.
[59:29.360 --> 59:30.360]  It's sexy blue stuff on me.
[59:30.360 --> 59:32.360]  You mean like Billy Joel, Bon Jovi if you like the hot stuff.
[59:32.360 --> 59:33.360]  Now you're talking.
[59:33.360 --> 59:34.360]  Now you're talking.
[59:34.360 --> 59:36.360]  So whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority
[59:36.360 --> 59:39.360]  at Spider House Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[59:39.360 --> 59:41.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there.
[59:41.360 --> 59:44.360]  It's 510 West 29th and Fruits.
[59:44.360 --> 59:45.360]  Fruits?
[59:45.360 --> 59:46.360]  Fruits.
[59:46.360 --> 59:47.360]  Well, I'm going to tell you something.
[59:47.360 --> 59:49.360]  If they want 20 bucks at the door,
[59:49.360 --> 59:51.360]  if I can say Fruits 10 times fast, they should let me in for free.
[59:51.360 --> 59:52.360]  Oh, those cheap skates.
[59:52.360 --> 59:55.360]  Whatever you do, don't go to TagTexas.org for more info.
[59:55.360 --> 59:56.360]  I'll tell you what.
[59:59.360 --> 01:00:05.360]  You are listening to the Rule of Law Radio Network at RuleOfLawRadio.com.
[01:00:05.360 --> 01:00:28.360]  Live free speech talk radio at its best.
[01:00:28.360 --> 01:00:35.360]  It sounds good.
[01:00:35.360 --> 01:00:37.360]  Forget.
[01:00:37.360 --> 01:00:41.360]  I'm not sure I could.
[01:00:41.360 --> 01:00:47.360]  They say time heals everything.
[01:00:47.360 --> 01:00:53.360]  But I'm still waiting.
[01:00:53.360 --> 01:00:59.360]  Truth with doubt.
[01:00:59.360 --> 01:01:04.360]  Nothing left for me to figure out.
[01:01:04.360 --> 01:01:10.360]  I've paid a price.
[01:01:10.360 --> 01:01:16.360]  And I'll keep paying.
[01:01:16.360 --> 01:01:19.360]  I'm not ready to ignite.
[01:01:19.360 --> 01:01:22.360]  I'm not ready to crack down.
[01:01:22.360 --> 01:01:23.360]  That is hell.
[01:01:23.360 --> 01:01:27.360]  And I don't have time to go round and round and round.
[01:01:27.360 --> 01:01:30.360]  It's too late to make it right.
[01:01:30.360 --> 01:01:31.360]  Okay.
[01:01:31.360 --> 01:01:32.360]  We're back.
[01:01:32.360 --> 01:01:35.360]  We're into Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Rule of Law.
[01:01:35.360 --> 01:01:41.360]  We have Freeman from Minnesota.
[01:01:41.360 --> 01:01:43.360]  As soon as I can find the mouse.
[01:01:43.360 --> 01:01:44.360]  Okay.
[01:01:44.360 --> 01:01:45.360]  Can you hear me?
[01:01:45.360 --> 01:01:46.360]  I can hear you.
[01:01:46.360 --> 01:01:47.360]  All right.
[01:01:47.360 --> 01:01:53.360]  Well, I have been doing quite a bit of thinking about the filing bar grievances thing,
[01:01:53.360 --> 01:01:57.360]  and I really wanted to pursue the matter because I had a pretty high-button issue
[01:01:57.360 --> 01:02:04.360]  that I encountered with a particular counsel that I engaged who didn't do anything
[01:02:04.360 --> 01:02:07.360]  that they said they'd do and lied through their teeth the whole time
[01:02:07.360 --> 01:02:12.360]  and pretended later they didn't remember, ex-conversation, et cetera.
[01:02:12.360 --> 01:02:21.360]  Then I called the main insurance provider for malpractice insurance for lawyers,
[01:02:21.360 --> 01:02:25.360]  which I believe is what the bar grievance gets at.
[01:02:25.360 --> 01:02:26.360]  Is that right?
[01:02:26.360 --> 01:02:28.360]  Yes, that's exactly what it gets to.
[01:02:28.360 --> 01:02:29.360]  Okay.
[01:02:29.360 --> 01:02:37.360]  Now, I can provide you with a copy of the, which I recorded, conversation, if you like.
[01:02:37.360 --> 01:02:41.360]  It went on for probably nearly an hour.
[01:02:41.360 --> 01:02:43.360]  This person was, in fact, a lawyer.
[01:02:43.360 --> 01:02:50.360]  He worked for the company, and he was in a position to be basically recruiting new clients.
[01:02:50.360 --> 01:02:56.360]  So he may have been holding back a little bit because maybe he wanted to make it look like a better deal
[01:02:56.360 --> 01:03:00.360]  than it really was, but I kept on asking him, and he assumed that I was a lawyer,
[01:03:00.360 --> 01:03:04.360]  the only reason he gave me as much of his time that he did.
[01:03:04.360 --> 01:03:12.360]  He kept on basically insinuating and saying directly that, from what I heard from him,
[01:03:12.360 --> 01:03:23.360]  that bar grievances here in Minnesota against a lawyer would be discretionary in effect,
[01:03:23.360 --> 01:03:30.360]  in other words, have no guaranteed effects and outcome.
[01:03:30.360 --> 01:03:39.360]  Yeah, well, that's true, but what he's talking about is effect through the bar.
[01:03:39.360 --> 01:03:50.360]  I just sent a 30-page complaint against a prosecutor here in Texas who took a complaint
[01:03:50.360 --> 01:03:56.360]  that had no facts whatsoever in support, and then he prepared an information
[01:03:56.360 --> 01:04:02.360]  based on that complaint that was invalid on its face.
[01:04:02.360 --> 01:04:07.360]  And the complaint accused me of operating an investigating company
[01:04:07.360 --> 01:04:15.360]  because I filed criminal charges against that prosecutor with the grand jury.
[01:04:15.360 --> 01:04:18.360]  This was outrageous.
[01:04:18.360 --> 01:04:23.360]  I filed it with the state bar, and this investigator sent me back this letter
[01:04:23.360 --> 01:04:28.360]  saying that my allegation did not rise to the level of misconduct,
[01:04:28.360 --> 01:04:31.360]  and I could appeal if I wanted to.
[01:04:31.360 --> 01:04:39.360]  Well, what I'm going to do instead is I'm going to sue the investigator
[01:04:39.360 --> 01:04:48.360]  for acting in concert and collusion, and that's not the power of the bar grievance.
[01:04:48.360 --> 01:04:53.360]  What this guy didn't tell you and what no attorney will tell you
[01:04:53.360 --> 01:05:01.360]  is what the bar grievance really does is goes to his malpractice insurance.
[01:05:01.360 --> 01:05:05.360]  One bar grievance first year of practice, no malpractice insurance.
[01:05:05.360 --> 01:05:08.360]  They'll cancel you immediately.
[01:05:08.360 --> 01:05:14.360]  Two bar grievances any one year of practice, they cancel your malpractice insurance.
[01:05:14.360 --> 01:05:18.360]  Three bar grievances, they'll cancel your law firm's malpractice insurance.
[01:05:18.360 --> 01:05:20.360]  That's where the harm is.
[01:05:20.360 --> 01:05:24.360]  Well, that's what I kept asking him about and kept trying to draw out of him,
[01:05:24.360 --> 01:05:31.360]  and he kept on saying that it was basically a discretionary matter, threw it out.
[01:05:31.360 --> 01:05:36.360]  Well, it is, with the insurance companies, absolutely discretionary.
[01:05:36.360 --> 01:05:42.360]  Well, not insurance, but maybe I shouldn't have said insurance.
[01:05:42.360 --> 01:05:47.360]  But with the bar itself, yeah, they can do whatever they want to.
[01:05:47.360 --> 01:05:48.360]  That's what he's telling you.
[01:05:48.360 --> 01:05:51.360]  Well, okay, and maybe I should have said insurance
[01:05:51.360 --> 01:05:54.360]  because you're talking malpractice insurance,
[01:05:54.360 --> 01:06:01.360]  and that's what I was talking to was the major malpractice insurer,
[01:06:01.360 --> 01:06:04.360]  and they just kept on telling me because I kept asking them,
[01:06:04.360 --> 01:06:10.360]  well, how many bar grievances can I have in a year, in two years, in three years?
[01:06:10.360 --> 01:06:14.360]  They kept on telling me that it was all discretionary.
[01:06:14.360 --> 01:06:18.360]  Yeah, they don't want to say one bar grievance is your history
[01:06:18.360 --> 01:06:21.360]  because you're not going to give them the money.
[01:06:21.360 --> 01:06:23.360]  Yeah, they're not going to sell me a policy if they tell me that.
[01:06:23.360 --> 01:06:25.360]  Exactly.
[01:06:25.360 --> 01:06:28.360]  So they're not going to tell you.
[01:06:28.360 --> 01:06:33.360]  Well, if I was a prospective client and I ended up going with them
[01:06:33.360 --> 01:06:36.360]  and I had that conversation recorded, which I do,
[01:06:36.360 --> 01:06:40.360]  I'm a prospective client and I'm not going to go with them therefore,
[01:06:40.360 --> 01:06:46.360]  then if I did get a sufficient grievances against me that they automatically suspended my coverage,
[01:06:46.360 --> 01:06:50.360]  then I'd have recourse because I'd have a recorded conversation where I had been lied to.
[01:06:50.360 --> 01:06:51.360]  Is that right?
[01:06:51.360 --> 01:06:52.360]  No, they didn't lie to you.
[01:06:52.360 --> 01:06:54.360]  They said it's discretionary.
[01:06:54.360 --> 01:06:58.360]  They're telling you we can do whatever we want to.
[01:06:58.360 --> 01:07:01.360]  I went pretty in-depth into detail, into scenarios,
[01:07:01.360 --> 01:07:06.360]  and I kept getting the same response which was, oh, well, that wouldn't count.
[01:07:06.360 --> 01:07:08.360]  There's been a lack of integrity.
[01:07:08.360 --> 01:07:16.360]  Basically, was it a mistake or was it intentional dishonesty?
[01:07:16.360 --> 01:07:18.360]  That's basically what they said.
[01:07:18.360 --> 01:07:21.360]  The grievance would be serious if it was intentional dishonesty
[01:07:21.360 --> 01:07:23.360]  and if it was a mistake, it wouldn't be serious.
[01:07:23.360 --> 01:07:28.360]  And I kept on laying out scenarios where a lawyer promises an outcome
[01:07:28.360 --> 01:07:30.360]  and then that outcome isn't achieved.
[01:07:30.360 --> 01:07:36.360]  And this guy kept telling me, oh, well, as if he thought basically he didn't think I was a lawyer,
[01:07:36.360 --> 01:07:41.360]  so he thought that he'd be benefiting me by telling me that I wouldn't be liable
[01:07:41.360 --> 01:07:48.360]  where I had to promise an outcome and not produce that outcome.
[01:07:48.360 --> 01:07:49.360]  Okay.
[01:07:49.360 --> 01:07:53.360]  You had an attorney in mind?
[01:07:53.360 --> 01:08:00.360]  I had an attorney who lied through his teeth to me throughout his so-called representation on my behalf.
[01:08:00.360 --> 01:08:06.360]  And so just considering where you were talking about filing a bargain,
[01:08:06.360 --> 01:08:11.360]  I called the insurance company that is the main provider for malpractice insurance,
[01:08:11.360 --> 01:08:15.360]  and they beat around the bush to that effect which I was describing.
[01:08:15.360 --> 01:08:19.360]  I'm sure they did.
[01:08:19.360 --> 01:08:23.360]  What a good chance this guy figured out you weren't an attorney and you were pumping him.
[01:08:23.360 --> 01:08:24.360]  At the end he did.
[01:08:24.360 --> 01:08:29.360]  It took about 40 minutes and all of a sudden he was like, oh, well, I thought you were an attorney
[01:08:29.360 --> 01:08:32.360]  and, you know, yaddy, yaddy, yaddy.
[01:08:32.360 --> 01:08:36.360]  But now I know you're not, so I got to go.
[01:08:36.360 --> 01:08:39.360]  You're just pumping me.
[01:08:39.360 --> 01:08:42.360]  Well, okay.
[01:08:42.360 --> 01:08:44.360]  What was the point of this?
[01:08:44.360 --> 01:08:46.360]  Are you saying that?
[01:08:46.360 --> 01:08:50.360]  Because you were talking about in taxes, you know, that bar grievance has X effects,
[01:08:50.360 --> 01:08:55.360]  and I was trying to confirm what the effects would be here in Minnesota before I started the pot.
[01:08:55.360 --> 01:08:57.360]  And, you know, they beat around the bush.
[01:08:57.360 --> 01:09:05.360]  I was unable to confirm any guaranteed effect of any bar grievance which I have considered filing.
[01:09:05.360 --> 01:09:13.360]  The best way to do that is if you can find, say, a retired attorney or an attorney that will talk to you
[01:09:13.360 --> 01:09:18.360]  that doesn't have any kind of professional relationship to you.
[01:09:18.360 --> 01:09:19.360]  Yeah.
[01:09:18.360 --> 01:09:21.360]  They're more likely to be candid.
[01:09:21.360 --> 01:09:25.360]  I'm in contact with DL Nathan who was a guest on your show at one point.
[01:09:25.360 --> 01:09:27.360]  He's a retired attorney here in Minnesota.
[01:09:27.360 --> 01:09:30.360]  Yeah, have you talked to him about bar grievances?
[01:09:30.360 --> 01:09:32.360]  No, I haven't talked to him and I need to.
[01:09:32.360 --> 01:09:35.360]  Yeah, he might be a good one to talk to you about that.
[01:09:35.360 --> 01:09:45.360]  As to the attorney lying to you, you have a contract with the attorney and this all goes to contract.
[01:09:45.360 --> 01:09:56.360]  In allegations, in malpractice, all malpractice is now considered negligence.
[01:09:56.360 --> 01:10:02.360]  Whatever you claim against your attorney, you claim it under negligence.
[01:10:02.360 --> 01:10:07.360]  Even if it's intentional and you want to have the intention behind it?
[01:10:07.360 --> 01:10:13.360]  Well, you can claim it's intentional, but that was just a blanket.
[01:10:13.360 --> 01:10:23.360]  They said they did that so that you didn't have to find specific causes of action for each complaint that you had.
[01:10:23.360 --> 01:10:25.360]  It's more like insulation.
[01:10:25.360 --> 01:10:26.360]  That seems more like insulation.
[01:10:26.360 --> 01:10:31.360]  I understand that intention is subject to debate, but things like that become a loophole.
[01:10:31.360 --> 01:10:39.360]  It doesn't negate any of the causes of actions that exist already.
[01:10:39.360 --> 01:10:48.360]  I'm sitting here looking at a text on legal malpractice and I can assure you,
[01:10:48.360 --> 01:10:55.360]  no one who's an attorney read this book before they became an attorney.
[01:10:55.360 --> 01:10:59.360]  If had, they wouldn't become an attorney.
[01:10:59.360 --> 01:11:02.360]  You can sue them for everything.
[01:11:02.360 --> 01:11:03.360]  I'm looking down the list.
[01:11:03.360 --> 01:11:09.360]  Negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, constructive fraud, malicious prosecution, abuse of process,
[01:11:09.360 --> 01:11:19.360]  conspiracy, duress, breach of contract, deceptive trade practices, how it applies to lawyers,
[01:11:19.360 --> 01:11:26.360]  breach of implied warranty, breach of disciplinary rules, false advertising.
[01:11:26.360 --> 01:11:28.360]  Well, this guy's guilty of just about every one of those.
[01:11:28.360 --> 01:11:33.360]  I'm the guy who got put in jail for a week or for 20 days.
[01:11:33.360 --> 01:11:38.360]  That was a sentence because I didn't go to class by September 30, 2009,
[01:11:38.360 --> 01:11:44.360]  but I was convicted of having failed to do so on March 12, 2009,
[01:11:44.360 --> 01:11:49.360]  something about seven months in advance of the actual deadline.
[01:11:49.360 --> 01:11:55.360]  When I ordered certified transcripts, this lawyer who I had engaged,
[01:11:55.360 --> 01:12:03.360]  because I expressed my concern that the transcript's not reflecting what actually happened and being manipulated,
[01:12:03.360 --> 01:12:08.360]  he said, oh, well, you know, because this particular courthouse has no live court reporter,
[01:12:08.360 --> 01:12:14.360]  they do all automated recordings, and then if the transcript's needed, then they refer to their recording.
[01:12:14.360 --> 01:12:22.360]  He told me that he already had the way to handle it in his knowledge bank at the ready
[01:12:22.360 --> 01:12:28.360]  in the event that the transcripts seem to have been manipulated as opposed to what really happened
[01:12:28.360 --> 01:12:33.360]  and that we could procure the audio recordings to compare.
[01:12:33.360 --> 01:12:38.360]  Now, one thing, the audio recordings could be easily edited with a little sign of editing.
[01:12:38.360 --> 01:12:42.360]  Okay. Well, what was the nature of the manipulation?
[01:12:42.360 --> 01:12:48.360]  The nature of the manipulation was the judge converted herself into a prosecutor.
[01:12:48.360 --> 01:12:54.360]  There was no prosecutor present. The transcript claims that the prosecutor was there on behalf of ExCity,
[01:12:54.360 --> 01:12:58.360]  but the prosecutor didn't introduce herself to the record, and she simply wasn't there.
[01:12:58.360 --> 01:13:05.360]  The judge tried to, before I had one single chance even to state any defense whatsoever,
[01:13:05.360 --> 01:13:11.360]  affirmative or otherwise, the judge tried to tell me that she thought she knew what my defense was going to be,
[01:13:11.360 --> 01:13:14.360]  and this was it, right, and tried to get me to stipulate to it.
[01:13:14.360 --> 01:13:22.360]  There was an absolute bogus defense, which of course would have been nips in the bud immediately
[01:13:22.360 --> 01:13:25.360]  had I stipulated to it. Of course, I didn't stipulate to it.
[01:13:25.360 --> 01:13:31.360]  The transcript does not reflect the judge trying to put those words into my mouth.
[01:13:31.360 --> 01:13:40.360]  They nuanced the transcript so as to infer that, I mean, to basically yield the perception that the judge
[01:13:40.360 --> 01:13:45.360]  was not trying to lead me into painting myself in any corner whatsoever.
[01:13:45.360 --> 01:13:49.360]  Also, when the judge ruled against me after not allowing me to state my defense,
[01:13:49.360 --> 01:13:53.360]  and I was being taken from the courtroom in handcuffs, I said,
[01:13:53.360 --> 01:13:57.360]  I have not been allowed to state, you have not allowed me to state my defense.
[01:13:57.360 --> 01:14:01.360]  I have not been allowed to prepare. Please recuse yourself.
[01:14:01.360 --> 01:14:08.360]  Well, I know recusal is not something that happens retroactively, but I had been taken a little off guard,
[01:14:08.360 --> 01:14:13.360]  and that was the best I could muster. At any rate, the transcript claims that I did not say,
[01:14:13.360 --> 01:14:18.360]  I have not been allowed to state my defense. I have not been prevented from preparing.
[01:14:18.360 --> 01:14:20.360]  That's exactly what happened. That's what I said.
[01:14:20.360 --> 01:14:26.360]  Okay, wait, wait, wait. You're kind of, we need to go a little more concise.
[01:14:26.360 --> 01:14:28.360]  You're kind of rolling back.
[01:14:28.360 --> 01:14:33.360]  Okay. Now, the difference in the transcript is where I said I have not been allowed to prepare.
[01:14:33.360 --> 01:14:41.360]  I have not been allowed to state my defenses. Transcript omits the allowed qualifying terms
[01:14:41.360 --> 01:14:46.360]  and simply claims that I said I have not prepared. I have not stated my defenses.
[01:14:46.360 --> 01:14:53.360]  Have you requested a copy of the recording?
[01:14:53.360 --> 01:14:59.360]  No, I haven't. What do you think would be the best form to make the request then?
[01:14:59.360 --> 01:15:03.360]  Discovery.
[01:15:03.360 --> 01:15:06.360]  This is post. This is like the...
[01:15:06.360 --> 01:15:10.360]  Have you filed an appeal?
[01:15:10.360 --> 01:15:16.360]  No. I think my limitation on the appeal might be up.
[01:15:16.360 --> 01:15:22.360]  Okay. Then, yeah, you might have run out of time.
[01:15:22.360 --> 01:15:30.360]  There were criminal liabilities for doing what people weren't supposed to do.
[01:15:30.360 --> 01:15:32.360]  That limitation is out of...
[01:15:32.360 --> 01:15:41.360]  If you think the record was changed, oh, well, since you didn't file an appeal,
[01:15:41.360 --> 01:15:46.360]  the fact that the record was changed is irrelevant.
[01:15:46.360 --> 01:15:52.360]  What if I got the record after the limitation of the appeal expired?
[01:15:52.360 --> 01:15:55.360]  That's irrelevant.
[01:15:55.360 --> 01:15:56.360]  Yeah.
[01:15:56.360 --> 01:15:59.360]  You can't raise an issue.
[01:15:59.360 --> 01:16:05.360]  So it doesn't make any difference if they changed it.
[01:16:05.360 --> 01:16:07.360]  Isn't there still liability even if it doesn't benefit me?
[01:16:07.360 --> 01:16:10.360]  Isn't there still liability that detracts from any...
[01:16:10.360 --> 01:16:14.360]  No, no. Remember, show me the injured party.
[01:16:14.360 --> 01:16:16.360]  Yeah.
[01:16:16.360 --> 01:16:20.360]  Especially in civil litigation. It has to be an injured party.
[01:16:20.360 --> 01:16:22.360]  Russ was on the line.
[01:16:22.360 --> 01:16:25.360]  Russ, if you're listening, will you call back?
[01:16:25.360 --> 01:16:30.360]  Russ will tell you what happens when you file bar grievances.
[01:16:30.360 --> 01:16:31.360]  Okay. We're going to break.
[01:16:31.360 --> 01:16:34.360]  Maybe Russ will call back before the break's over.
[01:16:34.360 --> 01:16:39.360]  But he'll let you know what happened when he filed bar grievances.
[01:16:39.360 --> 01:16:41.360]  It was a hoot.
[01:16:41.360 --> 01:16:44.360]  Okay. Randy Kelton, Debra Stevens, rule of law.
[01:16:44.360 --> 01:17:00.360]  We'll be back. We're going to break. We'll be back shortly.
[01:17:00.360 --> 01:17:01.360]  I got to tell you one thing right now.
[01:17:01.360 --> 01:17:03.360]  Texas is a terrible place to be.
[01:17:03.360 --> 01:17:04.360]  Oh, I can't see it.
[01:17:04.360 --> 01:17:05.360]  No, it's a terrible state.
[01:17:05.360 --> 01:17:06.360]  I know.
[01:17:06.360 --> 01:17:07.360]  I mean, it looks like a tumor.
[01:17:07.360 --> 01:17:08.360]  Yeah. We have nothing to do with Texas.
[01:17:08.360 --> 01:17:11.360]  It's people in the organizations, like the loony libertarians.
[01:17:11.360 --> 01:17:12.360]  What are they called?
[01:17:12.360 --> 01:17:14.360]  Oh, uh, Detectives for Cerebral Insanity.
[01:17:14.360 --> 01:17:15.360]  No, no, Texans for Accountable Schmooze.
[01:17:15.360 --> 01:17:16.360]  No, Texans for Accountable Governor.
[01:17:16.360 --> 01:17:17.360]  There you go.
[01:17:17.360 --> 01:17:19.360]  We would never do anything to promote them in any way.
[01:17:19.360 --> 01:17:21.360]  Never do any radio public service announcements.
[01:17:21.360 --> 01:17:25.360]  Especially when they got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[01:17:25.360 --> 01:17:26.360]  Oh, yeah, with Jimmy Vaughn.
[01:17:26.360 --> 01:17:28.360]  Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part.
[01:17:28.360 --> 01:17:29.360]  Yeah, I don't know. It's sexy food stuff.
[01:17:29.360 --> 01:17:32.360]  I mean, anything like Billy Joel, Bon Jovi if you like the hot stuff.
[01:17:32.360 --> 01:17:34.360]  Now you're talking. Now you're talking.
[01:17:34.360 --> 01:17:37.360]  So whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority
[01:17:37.360 --> 01:17:40.360]  at Spider House Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[01:17:40.360 --> 01:17:42.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there.
[01:17:42.360 --> 01:17:46.360]  It's 510 West 29th and Fruits.
[01:17:46.360 --> 01:17:47.360]  Fruits?
[01:17:47.360 --> 01:17:48.360]  Fruits.
[01:17:48.360 --> 01:17:49.360]  For a while I'm going to tell you something.
[01:17:49.360 --> 01:17:50.360]  If they want 20 bucks at the door,
[01:17:50.360 --> 01:17:52.360]  if I can say Fruits 10 times fast, they should let me in for free.
[01:17:52.360 --> 01:17:53.360]  Oh, those cheap skates.
[01:17:53.360 --> 01:17:55.360]  Whatever you do, don't go to TechTechCasado for more info.
[01:17:55.360 --> 01:18:16.360]  I'll definitely not.
[01:18:16.360 --> 01:18:29.360]  We were born before the wind Also younger than the sun
[01:18:29.360 --> 01:18:39.360]  As a bonnie boat was won As we sail into the mystique
[01:18:39.360 --> 01:18:52.360]  Oh, I can now hear the sailors cry Smell the sea and feel the sky
[01:18:52.360 --> 01:19:03.360]  Let your soul and spirit fly into the mystique
[01:19:03.360 --> 01:19:14.360]  And when that foghorn blows I will be coming home
[01:19:14.360 --> 01:19:21.360]  And when the foghorn blows I want to hear it
[01:19:21.360 --> 01:19:31.360]  I don't have to fear that I want to rock your gypsy soul
[01:19:31.360 --> 01:19:37.360]  Just like when back in the days of old
[01:19:37.360 --> 01:19:38.360]  Okay, we're back.
[01:19:38.360 --> 01:19:43.360]  Grand Accountant Debra Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:19:43.360 --> 01:19:44.360]  We've got Russ back up.
[01:19:44.360 --> 01:19:49.360]  He called back in.
[01:19:49.360 --> 01:19:51.360]  Russ, you there?
[01:19:51.360 --> 01:19:52.360]  Yeah, I'm here.
[01:19:52.360 --> 01:19:53.360]  Okay.
[01:19:53.360 --> 01:19:56.360]  You had a comment or a question?
[01:19:56.360 --> 01:20:05.360]  Well, Randy, I think the time in 2007 when that attorney came to testify against me at my sentencing hearing,
[01:20:05.360 --> 01:20:12.360]  I think we really weren't for sure exactly what bar grievances really did until he came to court
[01:20:12.360 --> 01:20:18.360]  and testified to what the grievances I filed against him as law firm did to him.
[01:20:18.360 --> 01:20:23.360]  And he basically verified what we thought
[01:20:23.360 --> 01:20:29.360]  and that it caused them to almost not get malpractice insurance
[01:20:29.360 --> 01:20:35.360]  and that it almost doubled when they did finally get the insurance company to give it to him.
[01:20:35.360 --> 01:20:41.360]  And that was only just one or two bar grievances I filed on one guy.
[01:20:41.360 --> 01:20:44.360]  If you turn around and file a number of them,
[01:20:44.360 --> 01:20:47.360]  and then if that lawyer is representing an entire law firm,
[01:20:47.360 --> 01:20:52.360]  if you turn around and file against the actual people leading the law firm also,
[01:20:52.360 --> 01:20:54.360]  you can shut that thing down within a year.
[01:20:54.360 --> 01:20:55.360]  Yeah.
[01:20:55.360 --> 01:20:59.360]  Oh, one thing about Minnesota.
[01:20:59.360 --> 01:21:05.360]  Gail from Minnesota filed a whole stack of bar grievances all at one time,
[01:21:05.360 --> 01:21:15.360]  and the state bar contacted her and told her that they were treating her 15 bar grievances as a single bar grievance.
[01:21:15.360 --> 01:21:24.360]  So if you're in Minnesota, and I suspect this would be a good practice anywhere else, file one at a time.
[01:21:24.360 --> 01:21:30.360]  Yes, because they just turned around and tried to count that 15 of them as one,
[01:21:30.360 --> 01:21:33.360]  so it would only have one against the person or the law firm.
[01:21:33.360 --> 01:21:37.360]  Precisely. They were simply trying to protect the attorney.
[01:21:37.360 --> 01:21:40.360]  Because they knew for a fact, even though they weren't going to do anything with them,
[01:21:40.360 --> 01:21:45.360]  if there's 15 bar grievances filed and stuff, that that would end their careers.
[01:21:45.360 --> 01:21:51.360]  Exactly. So we need to get more creative. We get more people doing it.
[01:21:51.360 --> 01:21:55.360]  We will find the maneuvers and the tricks they pull.
[01:21:55.360 --> 01:22:03.360]  In my case where I filed against Craig Caldwell in Cherokee County,
[01:22:03.360 --> 01:22:10.360]  I filed a very large document with all the case law.
[01:22:10.360 --> 01:22:13.360]  It's been a long time structuring that thing.
[01:22:13.360 --> 01:22:17.360]  Then he said back, well, it didn't rise to the level of misconduct.
[01:22:17.360 --> 01:22:27.360]  Criminal charges, enough criminal charges in there to push them in a federal prison for the rest of his natural life.
[01:22:27.360 --> 01:22:33.360]  The only time I've ever seen the bar do anything to an attorney is when they've been disbarred.
[01:22:33.360 --> 01:22:37.360]  Then when you turn around and you file grievances,
[01:22:37.360 --> 01:22:43.360]  or like I had a bankruptcy attorney years ago that I hired to do my bankruptcy,
[01:22:43.360 --> 01:22:50.360]  and only a few months after I hired him, he got disbarred for doing something bad beforehand.
[01:22:50.360 --> 01:22:57.360]  I had to file a complaint with the bar, and the bar actually had some kind of a fund
[01:22:57.360 --> 01:23:03.360]  where I got reimbursed my money that that attorney took from me for my bankruptcy case.
[01:23:03.360 --> 01:23:08.360]  Then the court had to appoint me a different attorney to finish the bankruptcy case.
[01:23:08.360 --> 01:23:13.360]  That's the only time I've ever seen the bar do anything or provide any kind of money or anything.
[01:23:13.360 --> 01:23:23.360]  Well, he probably made a judge mad or another attorney in a powerful position.
[01:23:23.360 --> 01:23:31.360]  It surely wasn't because he was a shyster and a liar, because that seems to be standard fare.
[01:23:31.360 --> 01:23:37.360]  According to the bar association, it seems to be perfectly all right.
[01:23:37.360 --> 01:23:44.360]  I think it had something to do with, I don't remember if it was bankruptcy fraud or probate type situation,
[01:23:44.360 --> 01:23:52.360]  stealing from somebody's estate and stuff, because that seems to be the worst part when these attorneys get in trouble.
[01:23:52.360 --> 01:23:59.360]  They seem to be in more trouble for stealing from people's estates and stuff than they do anything.
[01:23:59.360 --> 01:24:07.360]  Well, I hear people where the attorneys have completely robbed their estate, and there's nothing to do about it.
[01:24:07.360 --> 01:24:11.360]  So he must have robbed from the wrong person.
[01:24:11.360 --> 01:24:14.360]  Okay, we've got a bunch of calls.
[01:24:14.360 --> 01:24:17.360]  Do you got any more issues, Russell?
[01:24:17.360 --> 01:24:18.360]  No, that's it.
[01:24:18.360 --> 01:24:23.360]  Okay. Thank you for calling. We're going to go to Bill in Wisconsin.
[01:24:23.360 --> 01:24:24.360]  Billy, there.
[01:24:24.360 --> 01:24:26.360]  Hi. Yes, I am, Randy.
[01:24:26.360 --> 01:24:29.360]  Good. Do you have a question or comment?
[01:24:29.360 --> 01:24:33.360]  I got a comment, really, and I also have a question for you, too.
[01:24:33.360 --> 01:24:37.360]  I want to come at this bar grievance in just a little bit different angle.
[01:24:37.360 --> 01:24:47.360]  Up in Wisconsin, we've had a situation where our governor had appointed someone in his office,
[01:24:47.360 --> 01:24:52.360]  on his personal staff, with the title of chief legal counsel.
[01:24:52.360 --> 01:25:00.360]  And that then implies that this person must be licensed to practice law in the state.
[01:25:00.360 --> 01:25:03.360]  However, this happened to be a lady.
[01:25:03.360 --> 01:25:07.360]  She never got her license to practice law.
[01:25:07.360 --> 01:25:10.360]  So this caused a big dust-up.
[01:25:10.360 --> 01:25:13.360]  There was a lot of print-up in the papers.
[01:25:13.360 --> 01:25:17.360]  The governor here is a Democratic party.
[01:25:17.360 --> 01:25:24.360]  The Republican party filed a grievance, and that's where it went so far,
[01:25:24.360 --> 01:25:29.360]  and also a grievance against the woman who was appointed,
[01:25:29.360 --> 01:25:33.360]  and also a grievance against the governor.
[01:25:33.360 --> 01:25:36.360]  So I took this same information, put it together,
[01:25:36.360 --> 01:25:39.360]  and I also filed a grievance against each other,
[01:25:39.360 --> 01:25:45.360]  encouraging several others around the state here to do the same.
[01:25:45.360 --> 01:25:50.360]  Interesting. You think you might get the governor disbarred?
[01:25:50.360 --> 01:25:55.360]  Don't know. At least maybe misconduct or whatever.
[01:25:55.360 --> 01:26:02.360]  To add to this story a little bit, after this grievance was filed by the Republican party,
[01:26:02.360 --> 01:26:07.360]  this gal, this individual, put in her resignation the next day,
[01:26:07.360 --> 01:26:10.360]  and no one's heard from her since.
[01:26:10.360 --> 01:26:16.360]  But she had been an attorney in California, moved here, and was working in the government
[01:26:16.360 --> 01:26:23.360]  and our state government in different positions, got appointed to this one.
[01:26:23.360 --> 01:26:30.360]  And from what I can gather, there's been a talk show of the host here who has dug into this,
[01:26:30.360 --> 01:26:36.360]  got the news out, and he's got some Freedom of Information Act requests
[01:26:36.360 --> 01:26:43.360]  that there had been emails back and forth indicating that when she had started,
[01:26:43.360 --> 01:26:46.360]  and this took place from July of last year,
[01:26:46.360 --> 01:26:51.360]  and then this whole dust-up finished up here the first week in August, around August 7th.
[01:26:51.360 --> 01:26:57.360]  But in those emails, it was a stipulation of her hiring that she gets her license,
[01:26:57.360 --> 01:27:00.360]  passes the state bar exam, and applies for the license.
[01:27:00.360 --> 01:27:03.360]  Well, if she had her license, it would have been all over, just said,
[01:27:03.360 --> 01:27:06.360]  what's your problem? There it is.
[01:27:06.360 --> 01:27:10.360]  And the state bar doesn't say that she's had a license.
[01:27:10.360 --> 01:27:12.360]  They don't come out and say, oh, yeah, she has a license.
[01:27:12.360 --> 01:27:14.360]  Here are the numbers, such and such.
[01:27:14.360 --> 01:27:16.360]  And she held herself out that way.
[01:27:16.360 --> 01:27:20.360]  So she was one of our statutes is practicing law without a license,
[01:27:20.360 --> 01:27:24.360]  and it comes down to if you hold yourself out to be an attorney and then whatever.
[01:27:24.360 --> 01:27:26.360]  There's a lot of detail to it.
[01:27:26.360 --> 01:27:30.360]  But it's obvious that she violated that.
[01:27:30.360 --> 01:27:34.360]  So that's just the civil side of things, and when you look at the criminal side,
[01:27:34.360 --> 01:27:36.360]  I don't know if that's being pursued or not.
[01:27:36.360 --> 01:27:42.360]  Well, generally, practicing law without a license is a criminal act.
[01:27:42.360 --> 01:27:44.360]  Yeah, we have it on our statutes.
[01:27:44.360 --> 01:27:45.360]  It is listed as criminal.
[01:27:45.360 --> 01:27:50.360]  It's a misdemeanor with, I'm trying to remember now,
[01:27:50.360 --> 01:27:59.360]  a 50 to a $500 fine or up to one year in jail or misconduct.
[01:27:59.360 --> 01:28:05.360]  There's three ors that are involved in there.
[01:28:05.360 --> 01:28:11.360]  Our rules for the grievance are you turn it in, they turn it over to a committee.
[01:28:11.360 --> 01:28:18.360]  The committee looks at all of this, decides if this rises to a level of really violation.
[01:28:18.360 --> 01:28:25.360]  Well, I just sent in and just gave a couple of little terse comments here
[01:28:25.360 --> 01:28:29.360]  of where the laws were violated because of what she did.
[01:28:29.360 --> 01:28:36.360]  Basically, these are the laws where a lot of them came from the rules of professional conduct,
[01:28:36.360 --> 01:28:39.360]  set up our Supreme Court, says an attorney shall be honorable
[01:28:39.360 --> 01:28:45.360]  and hold himself forth as a leader in the community and so forth.
[01:28:45.360 --> 01:28:49.360]  Then that, I just quoted those statutes.
[01:28:49.360 --> 01:28:56.360]  Then along with the, then with the governor, the governor has direct supervisory authority
[01:28:56.360 --> 01:29:00.360]  and it's his responsibility to see that people under his supervision comply
[01:29:00.360 --> 01:29:04.360]  with all the rules of professional conduct, in which case he did not.
[01:29:04.360 --> 01:29:07.360]  Respondent Superior.
[01:29:07.360 --> 01:29:09.360]  Yeah.
[01:29:09.360 --> 01:29:14.360]  He's guilty of her crime by Respondent Superior.
[01:29:14.360 --> 01:29:21.360]  Yeah, when that gets to the criminal side, well, I'm trying to work with a couple other people
[01:29:21.360 --> 01:29:27.360]  and put something together there and see if we can't promote something on that side.
[01:29:27.360 --> 01:29:28.360]  We don't know what's happened.
[01:29:28.360 --> 01:29:30.360]  I don't want to see this one dusted.
[01:29:30.360 --> 01:29:32.360]  As they say, he's shoved under the carpet.
[01:29:32.360 --> 01:29:38.360]  You might go after, okay, you might go after him for warrantile removal.
[01:29:38.360 --> 01:29:40.360]  Oh.
[01:29:40.360 --> 01:29:41.360]  We'll talk about that.
[01:29:41.360 --> 01:29:44.360]  We're about to go to break. We'll talk about that on the other side.
[01:29:44.360 --> 01:29:47.360]  If he's violated laws relating to his office,
[01:29:47.360 --> 01:29:52.360]  then he apparently has done so through someone else, he could be removed for that.
[01:29:52.360 --> 01:30:00.360]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, we'll be back on the other side.
[01:30:00.360 --> 01:30:01.360]  I got to tell you one thing right now.
[01:30:01.360 --> 01:30:03.360]  Texas is a terrible place to be.
[01:30:03.360 --> 01:30:04.360]  Oh, I can't see it.
[01:30:04.360 --> 01:30:05.360]  No, it's a terrible state.
[01:30:05.360 --> 01:30:06.360]  No.
[01:30:06.360 --> 01:30:07.360]  I mean, it looks like a tumor.
[01:30:07.360 --> 01:30:08.360]  Yeah, we have nothing to do with Texas.
[01:30:08.360 --> 01:30:12.360]  It's people in the organizations, like the loony libertarians, what are they called?
[01:30:12.360 --> 01:30:14.360]  Oh, uh, Detectives for Cerebral Insanity.
[01:30:14.360 --> 01:30:16.360]  No, no, Texans for Accountable Schmoozeries.
[01:30:16.360 --> 01:30:17.360]  No, Texans for Accountable Government.
[01:30:17.360 --> 01:30:18.360]  There you go.
[01:30:18.360 --> 01:30:20.360]  We would never do anything to promote them in any way,
[01:30:20.360 --> 01:30:22.360]  never do any radio public service announcements,
[01:30:22.360 --> 01:30:25.360]  especially when they got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[01:30:25.360 --> 01:30:27.360]  Oh, yeah, with Jimmy Vaughn.
[01:30:27.360 --> 01:30:28.360]  Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part.
[01:30:28.360 --> 01:30:29.360]  Yeah, I don't know, it's sexy blue stuff.
[01:30:29.360 --> 01:30:33.360]  I mean, anything like Billy Joel, Bon Jovi, if you like the hard stuff.
[01:30:33.360 --> 01:30:34.360]  Now you're talking, now you're talking.
[01:30:34.360 --> 01:30:37.360]  So whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority
[01:30:37.360 --> 01:30:40.360]  or the Spider House Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[01:30:40.360 --> 01:30:42.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there.
[01:30:42.360 --> 01:30:46.360]  It's 510 West 29th and Fruits.
[01:30:46.360 --> 01:30:47.360]  Fruits?
[01:30:47.360 --> 01:30:48.360]  Fruits.
[01:30:48.360 --> 01:30:49.360]  Well, I'm going to tell you something.
[01:30:49.360 --> 01:30:50.360]  They want 20 bucks at the door?
[01:30:50.360 --> 01:30:52.360]  If I can say Fruits 10 times fast, they should let me in for free.
[01:30:52.360 --> 01:30:53.360]  Oh, those cheap skates.
[01:30:53.360 --> 01:30:55.360]  Whatever you do, don't go to tagtexans.org for more info.
[01:30:55.360 --> 01:31:08.360]  I'll get to it.
[01:31:08.360 --> 01:31:17.360]  There's something happening here What it is ain't exactly clear
[01:31:17.360 --> 01:31:26.360]  There's a man with a gun over there Telling me I've got to beware
[01:31:26.360 --> 01:31:30.360]  I think it's time we stop Children, watch that sound
[01:31:30.360 --> 01:31:42.360]  Everybody look what's going down
[01:31:42.360 --> 01:31:52.360]  There's battle lines being drawn Nobody's right if everybody's wrong
[01:31:52.360 --> 01:32:01.360]  Young people speak in their minds Getting so much resistance from behind
[01:32:01.360 --> 01:32:13.360]  There's a man with a gun over there Telling me I've got to beware
[01:32:13.360 --> 01:32:14.360]  I think it's time we stop Children, watch that sound
[01:32:14.360 --> 01:32:15.360]  Everybody look what's going down
[01:32:15.360 --> 01:32:16.360]  Okay.
[01:32:16.360 --> 01:32:17.360]  We're back.
[01:32:17.360 --> 01:32:18.360]  Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law.
[01:32:18.360 --> 01:32:20.360]  We were talking to Bill from Wisconsin.
[01:32:20.360 --> 01:32:29.360]  Before the break, we were discussing quote, warrant, toll removal.
[01:32:29.360 --> 01:32:36.360]  And if the governor hired this person and knew when he hired the person or knew early
[01:32:36.360 --> 01:32:44.360]  in the whatever relationship they had that the person was an attorney licensed to practice
[01:32:44.360 --> 01:32:54.360]  somewhere else but not practiced in the current state, then he absolutely had a duty to ensure
[01:32:54.360 --> 01:33:05.360]  that she did get her license and if he hired her and expended public funds for her services,
[01:33:05.360 --> 01:33:13.360]  then he's guilty of her crime, respondent superior, and he's certainly subject to tort
[01:33:13.360 --> 01:33:23.360]  action, but primarily he's subject to misappropriation of funds for one thing and acting in concert
[01:33:23.360 --> 01:33:35.360]  in collusion with holding oneself out as an attorney, move for quote, warrant, toll.
[01:33:35.360 --> 01:33:36.360]  All right.
[01:33:36.360 --> 01:33:43.360]  And then just to face up the story a little bit, the governor has said he will not run
[01:33:43.360 --> 01:33:47.360]  for reelection in 2010.
[01:33:47.360 --> 01:33:53.360]  And it's somewhat well-known that I believe his ambition is he wants to try and become
[01:33:53.360 --> 01:33:58.360]  appointed as an appellate court judge.
[01:33:58.360 --> 01:34:04.360]  And I think any mark against him would definitely stop that action.
[01:34:04.360 --> 01:34:13.360]  Well, that is an odd thing for a to move from governor to a court of appeals.
[01:34:13.360 --> 01:34:14.360]  I don't know.
[01:34:14.360 --> 01:34:17.360]  This is what I hear, that's what his ambition may be.
[01:34:17.360 --> 01:34:23.360]  This wouldn't take place until after 2010 elections in 2011.
[01:34:23.360 --> 01:34:27.360]  Well, he's got plenty of time to get into lots of trouble in that amount of time.
[01:34:27.360 --> 01:34:35.360]  If he's dumb enough to do this, to hire someone in such a high-profile position who's not
[01:34:35.360 --> 01:34:42.360]  an attorney, this guy doesn't sound like the sharpest knife in the drawer.
[01:34:42.360 --> 01:34:47.360]  Yeah, he's been the former attorney general of the state and so forth.
[01:34:47.360 --> 01:34:51.360]  So he himself is an attorney, obviously.
[01:34:51.360 --> 01:34:58.360]  But the thing is it's the arrogance with which they conduct themselves and operate.
[01:34:58.360 --> 01:35:03.360]  They're just story upon story, but I just want to focus in on just this one here.
[01:35:03.360 --> 01:35:11.360]  If you have a number of contacts, you might have people filing criminal charges against
[01:35:11.360 --> 01:35:19.360]  the governor and this other person, each in their own jurisdictions.
[01:35:19.360 --> 01:35:22.360]  That brings up a thing.
[01:35:22.360 --> 01:35:26.360]  I do not live in a jurisdiction where the capitol is located.
[01:35:26.360 --> 01:35:27.360]  Doesn't matter.
[01:35:27.360 --> 01:35:28.360]  It's a different county.
[01:35:28.360 --> 01:35:29.360]  Okay.
[01:35:29.360 --> 01:35:30.360]  Doesn't matter.
[01:35:30.360 --> 01:35:37.360]  He's your governor for the whole state, so he's committed the criminal act.
[01:35:37.360 --> 01:35:39.360]  This is a statewide thing.
[01:35:39.360 --> 01:35:42.360]  Anyone can file a complaint.
[01:35:42.360 --> 01:35:43.360]  Okay.
[01:35:43.360 --> 01:35:49.360]  And he's misappropriated your funds from the county you live in.
[01:35:49.360 --> 01:35:51.360]  Now, you know they're not going to...
[01:35:51.360 --> 01:35:52.360]  Everybody's going to fight against it.
[01:35:52.360 --> 01:35:54.360]  Prosecutors are going to say, oh, you can't do that.
[01:35:54.360 --> 01:35:55.360]  You can't file this.
[01:35:55.360 --> 01:35:57.360]  And the judges are going to say, oh, you can't do that.
[01:35:57.360 --> 01:35:59.360]  And the police are going to refuse to take it.
[01:35:59.360 --> 01:36:01.360]  Who cares?
[01:36:01.360 --> 01:36:06.360]  I tell you, when you start going after them this way, it is a hoot.
[01:36:06.360 --> 01:36:08.360]  You get to watch them do that little chicken dance.
[01:36:08.360 --> 01:36:24.360]  They get to shuffling, and they've got to find a way to keep you from causing them major grief when you accuse a prosecuting attorney of shielding the governor from prosecution.
[01:36:24.360 --> 01:36:28.360]  This gets high profile, and it goes to Ken's laws.
[01:36:28.360 --> 01:36:32.360]  Everything is political.
[01:36:32.360 --> 01:36:38.360]  Oh, this would be a real political potato, guaranteed right up front.
[01:36:38.360 --> 01:36:42.360]  This would make, it would probably make good news print.
[01:36:42.360 --> 01:36:47.360]  Local prosecutor shields governor from prosecution.
[01:36:47.360 --> 01:36:52.360]  Secrets criminal complaints from grand jury.
[01:36:52.360 --> 01:36:53.360]  Yeah.
[01:36:53.360 --> 01:36:59.360]  Well, those are, I wanted to get together with a couple others and do those things that you're talking about now.
[01:36:59.360 --> 01:37:05.360]  But come right down, you know, sometimes two or three heads are better than one in these situations.
[01:37:05.360 --> 01:37:11.360]  And we have to start making ourselves visible.
[01:37:11.360 --> 01:37:25.360]  And when you start filing criminal charges against them, you become very visible, and you become a very serious problem very quickly because they have no way of dealing with you.
[01:37:25.360 --> 01:37:34.360]  And if the smarter they are, the more problems they have because they realize how big a problem you become.
[01:37:34.360 --> 01:37:41.360]  You're down there, you're the victim, and you're reporting crime, and they don't want to hear the crime.
[01:37:41.360 --> 01:37:43.360]  They want to protect these guys.
[01:37:43.360 --> 01:37:48.360]  Now they get the legal system turned on its head.
[01:37:48.360 --> 01:37:50.360]  They never know how to handle themselves.
[01:37:50.360 --> 01:37:56.360]  And you, when you start doing this, you will be amazed at how dumb they can be.
[01:37:56.360 --> 01:38:05.360]  I used to say that you can sit down and try to figure out what are the dumbest things they can possibly do.
[01:38:05.360 --> 01:38:09.360]  And they will outsmart you every time.
[01:38:09.360 --> 01:38:19.360]  Grown adult seemingly rational human beings do absolutely the dumbest stuff.
[01:38:19.360 --> 01:38:31.360]  When you start stinging them where they live, and if we had one person in every county doing that, we would start things changing.
[01:38:31.360 --> 01:38:33.360]  Go ahead.
[01:38:33.360 --> 01:38:36.360]  No, you mentioned the county again.
[01:38:36.360 --> 01:38:40.360]  You said as the governor, he is governor of the whole state.
[01:38:40.360 --> 01:38:54.360]  So for this particular case here, we could have a person from every county bring up some criminal charges and just go through each of their local DAs.
[01:38:54.360 --> 01:38:55.360]  Yeah.
[01:38:55.360 --> 01:39:00.360]  And they might find a Republican DA or two.
[01:39:00.360 --> 01:39:01.360]  Could be.
[01:39:01.360 --> 01:39:04.360]  Who is looking to make a name.
[01:39:04.360 --> 01:39:10.360]  Yeah, it's someone who wants to go up the ladder. He stepped on a lot of toes along the way here.
[01:39:10.360 --> 01:39:14.360]  So it just might be something to that.
[01:39:14.360 --> 01:39:22.360]  You mentioned another thing, because if you're reporting a crime, then I, as a citizen, am a victim of that crime.
[01:39:22.360 --> 01:39:29.360]  So therefore, would I not be protected under victim protection and anything that he may do?
[01:39:29.360 --> 01:39:32.360]  Retaliation, I guess, is where I'm trying to get to.
[01:39:32.360 --> 01:39:41.360]  Yeah, you're protected anyway, simply for the fact that you're reporting the crime.
[01:39:41.360 --> 01:39:48.360]  You know, I had these people in Cherokee County come after me because I reported crime.
[01:39:48.360 --> 01:40:04.360]  I wrote a motion, I filed a motion with the district court petition for a writ of mandamus, ordering them to quash the complaint and asking the judge to order them to quash the complaint and several things.
[01:40:04.360 --> 01:40:25.360]  The last thing I asked in the prayer is I asked for an order directing the county judge and county attorney to go out behind the courthouse, shoot themselves, and when they meet in hell, explain to each other how stupid all this was.
[01:40:25.360 --> 01:40:28.360]  Because it's incredibly stupid.
[01:40:28.360 --> 01:40:44.360]  I file criminal charges against them with a grand jury, and they file a bogus criminal charge against me, charging me with about as stupid an allegation as they could have come up with.
[01:40:44.360 --> 01:40:48.360]  Operating an investigating company without a license.
[01:40:48.360 --> 01:40:58.360]  Duh, I'm a journalist, gosh, I don't mean one.
[01:40:58.360 --> 01:41:02.360]  How much dumber could it have got?
[01:41:02.360 --> 01:41:05.360]  I would have never come up with something that dumb.
[01:41:05.360 --> 01:41:29.360]  There were probably things they could have at least given the semblance of making a case for, like disorderly conduct when I stood up in the courtroom, addressed the court amicus curiae, and told the judge I just handed 11 criminal complaints against you to the grand jury for what you've done in this case.
[01:41:29.360 --> 01:41:37.360]  And one of those complaints was for you hearing motions in the case after you've been disqualified. You need to get out off that bench.
[01:41:37.360 --> 01:41:42.360]  I turned to the bailiff, Mr. Bailiff, drag that judge down off that bench.
[01:41:42.360 --> 01:41:52.360]  And the judge said, Mr. Kelton, you need to leave this courtroom, or I'll have my bailiff drag you out of this courtroom.
[01:41:52.360 --> 01:41:57.360]  I said, well, in that case, I'm leaving the courtroom.
[01:41:57.360 --> 01:42:00.360]  They could have made up a charge because of that.
[01:42:00.360 --> 01:42:05.360]  Now, it would have been bogus, but at least it would have had some purchase.
[01:42:05.360 --> 01:42:07.360]  There's something to it, yeah.
[01:42:07.360 --> 01:42:10.360]  But see how many crickets.
[01:42:10.360 --> 01:42:16.360]  You know, they could have charged me with practicing law because Robert filed my motions.
[01:42:16.360 --> 01:42:20.360]  And if they did, I'd accused Robert of plagiarizing my motions.
[01:42:20.360 --> 01:42:27.360]  They couldn't have got anywhere with it, but at least it would have sounded like it had some basis.
[01:42:27.360 --> 01:42:30.360]  In fact, you'll be surprised how dumb they get.
[01:42:30.360 --> 01:42:38.360]  And this, in all my time, this is the first time anyone has ever been dumb enough to come back after me for filing a complaint.
[01:42:38.360 --> 01:42:41.360]  Generally, they're extremely cautious.
[01:42:41.360 --> 01:42:49.360]  These guys out in Cherokee County are just incredibly out of hand.
[01:42:49.360 --> 01:43:02.360]  I mean, these guys are, they just went to court, and the prosecutor got his head handed to him with these dumb charges that they filed against Robert.
[01:43:02.360 --> 01:43:03.360]  They got on the stand.
[01:43:03.360 --> 01:43:06.360]  The prosecutor put his witness on the stand.
[01:43:06.360 --> 01:43:09.360]  The first witness testified.
[01:43:09.360 --> 01:43:13.360]  The judge called both attorneys into chambers.
[01:43:13.360 --> 01:43:28.360]  Robert's attorney came out and told him, the judge said that if you will waive your right to a jury trial and let the judge adjudicate the case, he will find you not guilty on all counts.
[01:43:28.360 --> 01:43:32.360]  After the first prosecution witness.
[01:43:32.360 --> 01:43:35.360]  It was over.
[01:43:35.360 --> 01:43:36.360]  We're going to break.
[01:43:36.360 --> 01:43:40.360]  Are you going to have any more questions or comments after the break?
[01:43:40.360 --> 01:43:42.360]  Yeah, just one.
[01:43:42.360 --> 01:43:44.360]  Okay, okay.
[01:43:44.360 --> 01:43:46.360]  We'll bring you up right after the break.
[01:43:46.360 --> 01:43:48.360]  Randy Kelton, David Stevens, Root of Law Radio.
[01:43:48.360 --> 01:44:00.360]  We'll be right back.
[01:44:00.360 --> 01:44:01.360]  I got to tell you one thing right now.
[01:44:01.360 --> 01:44:03.360]  Texas is a terrible place to be.
[01:44:03.360 --> 01:44:04.360]  Oh, I can't see it.
[01:44:04.360 --> 01:44:05.360]  No, it's a terrible state.
[01:44:05.360 --> 01:44:07.360]  I mean, it looks like a tumor.
[01:44:07.360 --> 01:44:08.360]  Yeah, we have nothing to do with Texas.
[01:44:08.360 --> 01:44:12.360]  It's people in the organization, like the loony libertarians, what are they called?
[01:44:12.360 --> 01:44:13.360]  Oh, what?
[01:44:13.360 --> 01:44:14.360]  The Texans for Cerebral Insanity.
[01:44:14.360 --> 01:44:15.360]  No, no.
[01:44:15.360 --> 01:44:16.360]  Texans for Accountable Schmooze.
[01:44:16.360 --> 01:44:17.360]  Yeah, Texans for Accountable Government.
[01:44:17.360 --> 01:44:18.360]  There you go.
[01:44:18.360 --> 01:44:19.360]  We would never do anything to promote them in any way.
[01:44:19.360 --> 01:44:25.360]  Never do any radio, public service announcements, especially when they got this party coming up this Friday at 7 p.m.
[01:44:25.360 --> 01:44:26.360]  Oh, yeah, with Jimmy Vaughn.
[01:44:26.360 --> 01:44:28.360]  Yeah, Jimmy Vaughn's going to play the part.
[01:44:28.360 --> 01:44:29.360]  Yeah, I don't know.
[01:44:29.360 --> 01:44:30.360]  It's sexy blue stuff, I mean.
[01:44:30.360 --> 01:44:32.360]  Give me like Billy Joel, Bon Jovi if you like the hot stuff.
[01:44:32.360 --> 01:44:33.360]  Now you're talking.
[01:44:33.360 --> 01:44:34.360]  Now you're talking.
[01:44:34.360 --> 01:44:39.360]  So whatever you do, don't show up to the United States Art Authority at Spider House Cafe this Friday at 7 p.m.
[01:44:39.360 --> 01:44:41.360]  Tell me where it is so I don't go there.
[01:44:41.360 --> 01:44:45.360]  It's 510 West 29th and Fruits.
[01:44:45.360 --> 01:44:46.360]  Fruits?
[01:44:46.360 --> 01:44:47.360]  Fruits.
[01:44:47.360 --> 01:44:48.360]  For a while, I'm going to tell you something.
[01:44:48.360 --> 01:44:49.360]  They want 20 bucks at the door?
[01:44:49.360 --> 01:44:51.360]  If I can say Fruits 10 times fast, they should let me in for free.
[01:44:51.360 --> 01:44:52.360]  Oh, those cheap skates.
[01:44:52.360 --> 01:44:55.360]  Whatever you do, don't go to tagtexans.org for more info.
[01:44:55.360 --> 01:45:18.360]  I'll definitely not.
[01:45:18.360 --> 01:45:19.360]  Okay, we're back.
[01:45:19.360 --> 01:45:21.360]  Grandie Count and Debbie Stevens, Rule of Law.
[01:45:21.360 --> 01:45:24.360]  I kind of shortened up the break this time.
[01:45:24.360 --> 01:45:32.360]  I have much more information I want to go over, and we're almost used up two hours already.
[01:45:32.360 --> 01:45:35.360]  Okay, Bill, you had another comment or question?
[01:45:35.360 --> 01:45:43.360]  Yeah, just as you've talked about when you file the grievance with the bar,
[01:45:43.360 --> 01:45:49.360]  is there a way that you can check to see how many grievances have been filed against an attorney?
[01:45:49.360 --> 01:45:53.360]  I think you mentioned somewhere some girl filed like 15.
[01:45:53.360 --> 01:45:56.360]  So we're just going to make all of these as one?
[01:45:56.360 --> 01:46:00.360]  Well, what if different people file them as I'm thinking about here?
[01:46:00.360 --> 01:46:03.360]  Would they try and condense those to one?
[01:46:03.360 --> 01:46:07.360]  Is there a method whereby you can check how many grievances are filed?
[01:46:07.360 --> 01:46:09.360]  That's my point.
[01:46:09.360 --> 01:46:10.360]  No.
[01:46:10.360 --> 01:46:14.360]  They make all of these secret.
[01:46:14.360 --> 01:46:18.360]  When you file a bar grievance, it becomes secret.
[01:46:18.360 --> 01:46:25.360]  In Utah, if you file a bar grievance and you reveal it, it's a felony.
[01:46:25.360 --> 01:46:32.360]  And that sounds like a problem, but it's kind of the way of things.
[01:46:32.360 --> 01:46:36.360]  Everything has two sides to it.
[01:46:36.360 --> 01:46:41.360]  These attorneys, they're the ones that run the bar,
[01:46:41.360 --> 01:46:48.360]  and they have made any complaint against them secret so none of us can find out about it.
[01:46:48.360 --> 01:46:56.360]  Well, the problem for the insurance carrier is, and Freeman was talking about this earlier,
[01:46:56.360 --> 01:47:00.360]  well, if you did this or you did that, that's not too bad, this is not too bad.
[01:47:00.360 --> 01:47:03.360]  They can't look at those.
[01:47:03.360 --> 01:47:11.360]  There's no way for them to know because they're secret.
[01:47:11.360 --> 01:47:16.360]  You're not allowed to reveal it, the attorney's not allowed to reveal it.
[01:47:16.360 --> 01:47:20.360]  So how are they going to gauge their level of risk?
[01:47:20.360 --> 01:47:23.360]  By valid bar grievances?
[01:47:23.360 --> 01:47:29.360]  They don't know what they are, so they have no way of telling if they're valid or not.
[01:47:29.360 --> 01:47:35.360]  By the numbers, that's the only thing that counts.
[01:47:35.360 --> 01:47:36.360]  That was my point.
[01:47:36.360 --> 01:47:40.360]  Can you just get the numbers, not the grievances filed by somebody else?
[01:47:40.360 --> 01:47:45.360]  I'm just saying, you know, I look up an attorney's name and it just says he's had two or three grievances.
[01:47:45.360 --> 01:47:50.360]  No, no, you can't get anything.
[01:47:50.360 --> 01:47:53.360]  So you need to get an insurance company.
[01:47:53.360 --> 01:48:03.360]  Except the attorney has to notify his insurance carrier when he gets a bar grievance.
[01:48:03.360 --> 01:48:08.360]  They have a right to notice because they have an interest,
[01:48:08.360 --> 01:48:19.360]  but there's nothing in the law that authorizes him to reveal the content.
[01:48:19.360 --> 01:48:31.360]  So it may well be that they do, but I've never heard of any indication that there's a difference between one and the other.
[01:48:31.360 --> 01:48:39.360]  The insurance carriers from all I hear, and this is what Russell was talking about earlier,
[01:48:39.360 --> 01:48:47.360]  I don't think he stipulated what went on there, but he filed three bar grievances against this attorney.
[01:48:47.360 --> 01:48:58.360]  He was the other side's attorney, so he wasn't even his own attorney, and the other side changed law firms.
[01:48:58.360 --> 01:49:06.360]  And then this attorney came back on the stand and complained that since Russell filed these three bar grievances against us,
[01:49:06.360 --> 01:49:14.360]  that we almost couldn't get malpractice insurance the next year, and when we did, it almost doubled.
[01:49:14.360 --> 01:49:23.360]  So it was the numbers, and I suspect it's going to be the same everywhere, that it's just the numbers.
[01:49:23.360 --> 01:49:34.360]  I can't imagine any way they could group bar grievances from different people into a single bar grievance.
[01:49:34.360 --> 01:49:43.360]  They may try to, but when you get a bar grievance from Joe Blow and Sam Schmuck, they're different people.
[01:49:43.360 --> 01:49:47.360]  So the bar grievance, each one's going to be somewhat different.
[01:49:47.360 --> 01:49:52.360]  I think it will nail him proper.
[01:49:52.360 --> 01:49:53.360]  Okay.
[01:49:53.360 --> 01:50:05.360]  And the other thing, the complaints may do him even more harm because some of these prosecutors out there,
[01:50:05.360 --> 01:50:15.360]  even other Democrats who are trying to move up the ladder, may sting him.
[01:50:15.360 --> 01:50:19.360]  Republicans almost certainly will.
[01:50:19.360 --> 01:50:27.360]  If you can get a Republican who's trying to use the prosecutor's office as a springboard to hire office,
[01:50:27.360 --> 01:50:36.360]  you might actually take a complaint against the governor, make him answer, just to further embarrass him.
[01:50:36.360 --> 01:50:37.360]  That was a good thought.
[01:50:37.360 --> 01:50:39.360]  Okay.
[01:50:39.360 --> 01:50:41.360]  It's at least worth a try.
[01:50:41.360 --> 01:50:42.360]  Absolutely.
[01:50:42.360 --> 01:50:43.360]  Okay.
[01:50:43.360 --> 01:50:44.360]  I'll get off now.
[01:50:44.360 --> 01:50:45.360]  You answered my question.
[01:50:45.360 --> 01:50:46.360]  There was a lot of other people.
[01:50:46.360 --> 01:50:47.360]  Okay.
[01:50:47.360 --> 01:50:48.360]  Thank you, Bill.
[01:50:48.360 --> 01:50:52.360]  We have another caller, Jerry from Oregon.
[01:50:52.360 --> 01:50:53.360]  That's me, Randy.
[01:50:53.360 --> 01:50:54.360]  How are you tonight?
[01:50:54.360 --> 01:50:55.360]  I am doing fine.
[01:50:55.360 --> 01:50:57.360]  How are things going out there?
[01:50:57.360 --> 01:50:58.360]  Good.
[01:50:58.360 --> 01:51:08.360]  I have a question about this structural forfeiture of the whole case, right?
[01:51:08.360 --> 01:51:10.360]  Yes, structural errors.
[01:51:10.360 --> 01:51:11.360]  Right.
[01:51:11.360 --> 01:51:18.360]  So when these occur, for example, in what you started the show out with,
[01:51:18.360 --> 01:51:27.360]  you were talking about how there was no adversarial challenge to the proceedings,
[01:51:27.360 --> 01:51:33.360]  and before that lack of adversarial challenge, it was a structural error,
[01:51:33.360 --> 01:51:38.360]  and the whole thing is thrown out the window.
[01:51:38.360 --> 01:51:39.360]  Is that correct?
[01:51:39.360 --> 01:51:40.360]  Right.
[01:51:40.360 --> 01:51:46.360]  On a structural error as opposed to a trial error.
[01:51:46.360 --> 01:51:47.360]  Okay.
[01:51:47.360 --> 01:51:49.360]  You can find the structural errors,
[01:51:49.360 --> 01:51:53.360]  and where we found this was in a book on habeas corpus,
[01:51:53.360 --> 01:51:58.360]  where there are challenges, you know, habeas corpus challenges,
[01:51:58.360 --> 01:52:02.360]  and that's the perfect place to look for this kind of thing.
[01:52:02.360 --> 01:52:09.360]  So does it refer to what are the elements for the lack of adversarial challenge?
[01:52:09.360 --> 01:52:16.360]  Well, the elements?
[01:52:16.360 --> 01:52:18.360]  No.
[01:52:18.360 --> 01:52:23.360]  That would be case specific.
[01:52:23.360 --> 01:52:27.360]  You'd have to go there and say, this obviously happened.
[01:52:27.360 --> 01:52:31.360]  Like in my case, I'm going to go Monday to a hearing,
[01:52:31.360 --> 01:52:36.360]  and they're probably going to continue it because the primary actor
[01:52:36.360 --> 01:52:39.360]  wasn't subpoenaed for some reason.
[01:52:39.360 --> 01:52:42.360]  The sergeant had smashed my face into a wall when I told him,
[01:52:42.360 --> 01:52:46.360]  what part of I do not want to talk to you do you not understand?
[01:52:46.360 --> 01:52:47.360]  He's not going to be there,
[01:52:47.360 --> 01:52:52.360]  so they're going to get continuance to make sure he's there.
[01:52:52.360 --> 01:52:57.360]  But we're going to talk about structural errors.
[01:52:57.360 --> 01:53:02.360]  They arrested me and held me 24 hours and never took me before, magistrate,
[01:53:02.360 --> 01:53:06.360]  and never even charged me, just let me go.
[01:53:06.360 --> 01:53:09.360]  That is a structural problem.
[01:53:09.360 --> 01:53:13.360]  You would file a motion to dismiss it on that basis then?
[01:53:13.360 --> 01:53:14.360]  Yes.
[01:53:14.360 --> 01:53:19.360]  And that is a matter that no one will dispute.
[01:53:19.360 --> 01:53:23.360]  They're not going to say, oh, no, we didn't take him to the Travis County Jail,
[01:53:23.360 --> 01:53:28.360]  have him booked into the Travis County Jail for 24 hours.
[01:53:28.360 --> 01:53:30.360]  That's on the record.
[01:53:30.360 --> 01:53:33.360]  They can't deny it.
[01:53:33.360 --> 01:53:40.360]  So we take what's in the record and take it apart on due process.
[01:53:40.360 --> 01:53:41.360]  Right.
[01:53:41.360 --> 01:53:46.360]  So if you walk that out on due process from the moment of arrest
[01:53:46.360 --> 01:53:49.360]  to where you're to have the examining trial,
[01:53:49.360 --> 01:53:56.360]  at the examining trial is where you would be able to say
[01:53:56.360 --> 01:54:03.360]  that you didn't have due process in the form of adversarial challenge.
[01:54:03.360 --> 01:54:04.360]  Correct?
[01:54:04.360 --> 01:54:06.360]  Yeah, that was this particular one.
[01:54:06.360 --> 01:54:09.360]  When they brought me before a magistrate.
[01:54:09.360 --> 01:54:14.360]  Now, there are other structural errors prior to this.
[01:54:14.360 --> 01:54:19.360]  Violation of due process is a structural error.
[01:54:19.360 --> 01:54:24.360]  But at this point, when they brought me before the magistrate,
[01:54:24.360 --> 01:54:30.360]  very specifically, I had a right to representation of counsel.
[01:54:30.360 --> 01:54:31.360]  Any counsel.
[01:54:31.360 --> 01:54:36.360]  They had to provide you with some form of counsel just so you could go over
[01:54:36.360 --> 01:54:40.360]  the information that was there against you, correct?
[01:54:40.360 --> 01:54:41.360]  Exactly.
[01:54:41.360 --> 01:54:46.360]  And had that been done, I would have been released immediately.
[01:54:46.360 --> 01:54:47.360]  Now, I have a question.
[01:54:47.360 --> 01:54:57.360]  Does that follow, being that it takes place at that point, at that exact moment,
[01:54:57.360 --> 01:55:02.360]  aren't you still in a common law jurisdiction because of that?
[01:55:02.360 --> 01:55:05.360]  Because under Article 6 of the Constitution,
[01:55:05.360 --> 01:55:09.360]  you have the assistance of counsel for your defense,
[01:55:09.360 --> 01:55:12.360]  and it becomes a common law jurisdiction?
[01:55:12.360 --> 01:55:13.360]  No.
[01:55:13.360 --> 01:55:14.360]  No?
[01:55:14.360 --> 01:55:17.360]  Clearly under statutory law.
[01:55:17.360 --> 01:55:19.360]  Penal code is statutory.
[01:55:19.360 --> 01:55:23.360]  Code of Penal Procedure is statutory.
[01:55:23.360 --> 01:55:24.360]  But it's not a problem.
[01:55:24.360 --> 01:55:26.360]  Right.
[01:55:26.360 --> 01:55:32.360]  I understand that, but yet it is a violation of your due process,
[01:55:32.360 --> 01:55:36.360]  which is a constitutional issue.
[01:55:36.360 --> 01:55:37.360]  Yes.
[01:55:37.360 --> 01:55:42.360]  Some due process violations are constitutional, some are not.
[01:55:42.360 --> 01:55:48.360]  Not taking me directly to a magistrate is not constitutional.
[01:55:48.360 --> 01:55:51.360]  That's not mentioned in Constitution.
[01:55:51.360 --> 01:55:57.360]  But it is mentioned in statute.
[01:55:57.360 --> 01:56:02.360]  Couldn't you argue that you had the right to assistance of counsel
[01:56:02.360 --> 01:56:09.360]  from the moment that your liberty is infringed upon?
[01:56:09.360 --> 01:56:11.360]  No.
[01:56:11.360 --> 01:56:13.360]  No.
[01:56:13.360 --> 01:56:22.360]  The only time you have a right to counsel is when you go before a judicial tribunal.
[01:56:22.360 --> 01:56:32.360]  And then what they say is it must be a critical point in the prosecution.
[01:56:32.360 --> 01:56:35.360]  And what Texas had been saying was this is just a magistration.
[01:56:35.360 --> 01:56:38.360]  It's not a critical point in the prosecution.
[01:56:38.360 --> 01:56:40.360]  And I'm saying, are you nuts?
[01:56:40.360 --> 01:56:41.360]  Of course it is.
[01:56:41.360 --> 01:56:48.360]  That's the hearing that makes a determination of my liberty.
[01:56:48.360 --> 01:56:51.360]  Right, because it's a challenge probably caused.
[01:56:51.360 --> 01:56:59.360]  I'm going before a judge, so I need counsel.
[01:56:59.360 --> 01:57:02.360]  Now, that goes to Constitution.
[01:57:02.360 --> 01:57:11.360]  Being questioned once I have invoked my right to counsel, that invokes Constitution.
[01:57:11.360 --> 01:57:15.360]  But not being taken directly to the magistrate doesn't.
[01:57:15.360 --> 01:57:21.360]  Being booked in before I'm charged with a crime, that doesn't go to Constitution.
[01:57:21.360 --> 01:57:24.360]  It goes to due process.
[01:57:24.360 --> 01:57:29.360]  There are a lot of things they can do wrong that don't necessarily go to constitutional issues.
[01:57:29.360 --> 01:57:34.360]  And that's a problem a lot of people have when they file 1983 suits,
[01:57:34.360 --> 01:57:43.360]  is they make accusations that don't go to constitutional issues.
[01:57:43.360 --> 01:57:49.360]  And in this case, there are some.
[01:57:49.360 --> 01:57:59.360]  When the magistrate held the hearing in secret, that went to a constitutional issue.
[01:57:59.360 --> 01:58:03.360]  Right face my accuser.
[01:58:03.360 --> 01:58:06.360]  And let me come back on the other side.
[01:58:06.360 --> 01:58:08.360]  We'll walk through some more of those.
[01:58:08.360 --> 01:58:13.360]  I'll have the break to kind of go through my head and figure those out.
[01:58:13.360 --> 01:58:15.360]  But hang on, Jerry.
[01:58:15.360 --> 01:58:16.360]  We're going to go to break.
[01:58:16.360 --> 01:58:22.360]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Eddie Craig, Rule of Law Radio.
[01:58:22.360 --> 01:58:27.360]  This is our info, four-hour info marathon.
[01:58:27.360 --> 01:58:31.360]  So we've got another two hours.
[01:58:31.360 --> 01:58:32.360]  This is nine o'clock.
[01:58:32.360 --> 01:58:34.360]  Yeah, we've got another ten o'clock.
[01:58:34.360 --> 01:58:36.360]  We've got another two hours to go.
[01:58:36.360 --> 01:58:38.360]  Okay, we'll be right back.
[01:58:38.360 --> 01:58:48.360]  See you on the other side.
[01:59:08.360 --> 01:59:18.360]  Right.
[01:59:18.360 --> 01:59:28.360]  Right.
[01:59:28.360 --> 01:59:38.360]  Right.
[01:59:38.360 --> 01:59:48.360]  Right.
[01:59:48.360 --> 01:59:58.360]  Right.