ROL_2011-06-02_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:04.600]  This news brief brought to you by the International Newsnet.
[00:04.600 --> 00:10.980]  Nigerian police raided a hospital in the city of Aba this week, rescuing 32 pregnant girls
[00:10.980 --> 00:13.880]  held by an alleged human trafficking ring.
[00:13.880 --> 00:19.680]  The girls aged between 15 and 17 years were locked up and used to produce babies that
[00:19.680 --> 00:23.360]  were allegedly sold for ritual purposes or adoption.
[00:23.360 --> 00:29.560]  The UN estimates that at least 10 children are sold daily across Nigeria.
[00:29.560 --> 00:34.040]  The Department of Health and Human Services said Wednesday it would prohibit Indiana from
[00:34.040 --> 00:39.600]  carrying out a new state law that cuts off money to planned parenthood clinics that serve
[00:39.600 --> 00:41.080]  women on Medicaid.
[00:41.080 --> 00:45.840]  The law targets planned parenthood for providing abortion services, but would also prohibit
[00:45.840 --> 00:51.400]  nearly 10,000 women from accessing preventive health care, such as contraception, cancer
[00:51.400 --> 00:55.320]  screenings and STD testing and treatment.
[00:55.320 --> 00:59.920]  Authorities said Wednesday Egypt's former President Hosni Mubarak and his two sons have
[00:59.920 --> 01:05.320]  been ordered to face trial on August 3rd in Cairo for their role in killing protesters
[01:05.320 --> 01:06.320]  and for graft.
[01:06.320 --> 01:12.200]  Mubarak ousted on February 11 at the mass demonstrations demanding he end his 30 years
[01:12.200 --> 01:16.760]  in power, has been questioned for his role in a crackdown that led to the killing of
[01:16.760 --> 01:22.320]  more than 800 demonstrators and has been probed over corruption.
[01:22.320 --> 01:26.800]  Republican leaders in the House Wednesday postponed a vote on Representative Dennis
[01:26.800 --> 01:31.720]  Cassinic's resolution to end U.S. involvement in the bombing of Libya, fearing it would
[01:31.720 --> 01:32.720]  pass.
[01:32.720 --> 01:37.320]  GOP leaders' official reason for pulling the measure is that they need to quote, compel
[01:37.320 --> 01:41.240]  more information and consultation from the Obama administration.
[01:41.240 --> 01:45.840]  But with the Libya bombing dragging on for three months and recently extended for three
[01:45.840 --> 01:50.520]  more, a bipartisan group of legislators is growing tired of the intervention.
[01:50.520 --> 01:56.040]  The House GOP is working on alternatives to voting on Cassinic's war-ending legislation,
[01:56.040 --> 02:00.160]  such as having the Armed Services Committee write backup proposals.
[02:00.160 --> 02:05.880]  Because the Cassinic proposal relates to the 1973 War Powers Act, it is considered privileged
[02:05.880 --> 02:11.360]  under House rules, meaning that Cassinic could force a floor vote even if Democratic and Republican
[02:11.360 --> 02:14.920]  leaders are opposed to doing so.
[02:14.920 --> 02:20.560]  Egypt's 30-year ruler, Hosni Mubarak, was overthrown in February, but Egyptians still
[02:20.560 --> 02:26.120]  risked prosecution for voicing criticisms of post-revolution military rule and the slow
[02:26.120 --> 02:27.640]  pace of reforms.
[02:27.640 --> 02:32.320]  In a country where the Internet can offer shelter from repression, bloggers play a role
[02:32.320 --> 02:34.880]  in debunking official propaganda.
[02:34.880 --> 02:39.320]  Many Egyptians have taken to their blogs to write scathing critiques of the Supreme
[02:39.320 --> 02:45.080]  Council of the Armed Forces that assume power after Mubarak stepped down, criticizing the
[02:45.080 --> 02:49.960]  military in any form as a dangerous act in Egypt and is sometimes considered a crime.
[02:49.960 --> 02:54.800]  Michael Nabil, a pacifist who blogged against the army, was tried and sentenced to three
[02:54.800 --> 02:57.800]  years in prison by a military court in April.
[02:57.800 --> 03:20.400]  Nabil is the first trial of a blogger since the Revolution, but others have followed.
[03:57.800 --> 04:24.760]  All right, folks, this is Thursday night, June 2, 2011.
[04:24.760 --> 04:26.960]  This is Rue LeBlanc Radio.
[04:26.960 --> 04:29.760]  Thank you for listening out there.
[04:29.760 --> 04:31.880]  Just some update information for you folks.
[04:31.880 --> 04:36.280]  Tonight we are live, but tomorrow night we will be running an archive because Randy
[04:36.280 --> 04:39.280]  will still be in Australia and everything.
[04:39.280 --> 04:42.920]  We've got some stuff we've got to finish getting ready for next week.
[04:42.920 --> 04:48.800]  But tonight we are live, so if you have any questions or issues, please get on the phone
[04:48.800 --> 04:52.880]  board and get lined up for them because we're going to go right into those pretty much at
[04:52.880 --> 04:54.880]  the beginning of the show tonight.
[04:54.880 --> 05:00.000]  The only thing that I would like to talk about before we go to taking calls is one of the
[05:00.000 --> 05:06.760]  folks that comes to my seminar sent me a clipping of a case out of Atlanta, Georgia where this
[05:06.760 --> 05:12.760]  gentleman who had some sort of dealings, it appears from what I've read here that he either
[05:12.760 --> 05:20.800]  worked for or had some sort of business dealings with the owner and the business that he has
[05:20.800 --> 05:25.520]  of running the boats called the Made of the Mist up in New York at the base of Niagara
[05:25.520 --> 05:26.520]  Falls.
[05:26.520 --> 05:29.760]  You know, the tourist ships they take out there and take people around the falls and
[05:29.760 --> 05:32.880]  out in the Bay Area there and it's called the Made of the Mist.
[05:32.880 --> 05:39.400]  Well, this gentleman actually had some sort of connection with them, whether it be employment
[05:39.400 --> 05:41.920]  or something of that nature.
[05:41.920 --> 05:49.880]  And the gentleman's name is William M. Windsor and he actually filed a legal suit in the
[05:49.880 --> 05:58.760]  federal courts in 2006 when he was named a defendant in a civil lawsuit by Christopher
[05:58.760 --> 06:05.640]  Glenn who is either who runs or owns the Made of the Mist line there in Niagara Falls.
[06:05.640 --> 06:12.760]  But it turns out that Christopher Glenn, the accuser in the case, actually falsified the
[06:12.760 --> 06:19.840]  accusations and all the affidavits supporting the information in the case against Mr. Windsor
[06:19.840 --> 06:27.760]  Mr. Windsor got counter affidavits and further evidence that proved that he was not guilty
[06:27.760 --> 06:33.280]  of any of the things he was accused of and not only that that the information filed in
[06:33.280 --> 06:40.840]  the court by Christopher Glenn was totally falsified and knowingly falsified for the
[06:40.840 --> 06:44.840]  sole purpose of causing Mr. Windsor harm.
[06:44.840 --> 06:50.480]  He took this evidence and he filed it in the court and sought restitution from the court
[06:50.480 --> 06:54.120]  for Christopher Glenn's actions.
[06:54.120 --> 07:04.160]  Well, it turns out that this 32 year federal judge, Orinda D. Evans, declared that Mr. Windsor
[07:04.160 --> 07:10.080]  should not have tried to fight the lawsuit that Christopher Glenn had filed against
[07:10.080 --> 07:11.080]  him.
[07:11.080 --> 07:13.720]  Right or wrong, he shouldn't have tried to fight it.
[07:13.720 --> 07:19.880]  And because he tried to fight it, she forced him to pay all the legal fees for Made of
[07:19.880 --> 07:21.040]  the Mist.
[07:21.040 --> 07:24.800]  Even though he was innocent of having done anything and he was the one being falsely
[07:24.800 --> 07:32.160]  sued, he's the one that got in trouble for defending himself.
[07:32.160 --> 07:37.160]  Then Mr. Windsor appealed this case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit,
[07:37.160 --> 07:43.680]  that the federal judges, Dubena Hall and Fay, simply rubber stamp Judge Evans is ruling
[07:43.680 --> 07:46.080]  in the lower federal court.
[07:46.080 --> 07:53.160]  So Windsor then took his appeal up to the United States Supreme Court and the Supreme
[07:53.160 --> 07:55.960]  Court said, we don't want to hear it.
[07:55.960 --> 08:00.720]  They denied certiorari and didn't want to hear the case at all.
[08:00.720 --> 08:08.720]  Now what Windsor has said and what he's proven in the courts there is that the federal judges
[08:08.720 --> 08:15.560]  are absolutely willing at any time they like to ignore the rules, to ignore the law, to
[08:15.560 --> 08:19.080]  ignore the Constitution, as if none of them exist.
[08:19.080 --> 08:23.000]  They will do what they want when they want.
[08:23.000 --> 08:29.880]  And by not taking the certiorari and making a decision about what was going on, the Supreme
[08:29.880 --> 08:32.880]  Court has condoned this behavior.
[08:32.880 --> 08:36.640]  Let me ask you something here.
[08:36.640 --> 08:45.000]  You say that this gentleman had proof of that documents were fraudulent and fabricated and
[08:45.000 --> 08:46.760]  all these other things.
[08:46.760 --> 08:53.800]  Do you know if in the original case at the district court level, was there an evidentiary
[08:53.800 --> 08:57.560]  hearing at all?
[08:57.560 --> 09:03.160]  This doesn't say anything about this case originating in the state district courts.
[09:03.160 --> 09:04.160]  No, no, no.
[09:04.160 --> 09:05.160]  I don't mean the state district court.
[09:05.160 --> 09:07.960]  I mean the federal district courts.
[09:07.960 --> 09:13.760]  No, it doesn't give any information about that in this particular article.
[09:13.760 --> 09:18.640]  I was still looking to see if I can find the actual lawsuit filing themselves to see what
[09:18.640 --> 09:19.640]  it is.
[09:19.640 --> 09:21.280]  We could probably look it up on Pacer.
[09:21.280 --> 09:28.480]  And the reason I'm asking that is because if there was an evidentiary hearing, depending
[09:28.480 --> 09:34.160]  on what happened at that hearing is going to make all the difference in the world concerning
[09:34.160 --> 09:41.280]  what happens in the case because if there's an evidentiary hearing and this gentleman
[09:41.280 --> 09:49.680]  either didn't try to get his documents entered into evidence or if he did, maybe there were
[09:49.680 --> 09:57.800]  objections that were sustained preventing those documents from getting into evidence.
[09:57.800 --> 10:02.960]  If there was a situation where there was an evidentiary hearing and he just had those
[10:02.960 --> 10:08.680]  documents attached to, like say, his exhibits to his motion to dismiss, that's not good
[10:08.680 --> 10:09.680]  enough.
[10:09.680 --> 10:15.520]  They have to be entered into evidence in order for it to really count.
[10:15.520 --> 10:21.420]  And so we need to look further at this case because there could be some technicalities
[10:21.420 --> 10:24.720]  like that where the judge could be.
[10:24.720 --> 10:28.840]  But it doesn't show that he was attempting to prosay this.
[10:28.840 --> 10:33.240]  If this happened, then his attorneys were the ones that were inept.
[10:33.240 --> 10:34.400]  Absolutely.
[10:34.400 --> 10:39.000]  And they should have known better if that is what you're saying is the case.
[10:39.000 --> 10:43.760]  But based upon what the gentleman says through this article, it doesn't appear to be the
[10:43.760 --> 10:49.600]  case, but if anybody out there has access to PACER or Lexus or anything, the actual
[10:49.600 --> 11:04.040]  civil lawsuit is 1 colon 06 dash Charlie Victor dash 0714 dash Omega Delta Echo.
[11:04.040 --> 11:09.520]  That's the actual civil lawsuit that was filed against him by Christopher Glenn.
[11:09.520 --> 11:22.400]  The docket number in the U.S. Supreme Court was 10 dash 632, 10 dash 633 and 10 dash 690.
[11:22.400 --> 11:27.560]  So if anybody wants to look those up and see what they can see, that would be fine.
[11:27.560 --> 11:30.080]  But that's the information the article has.
[11:30.080 --> 11:33.960]  I just found it here just a little while ago, so I have not had an opportunity to pull up
[11:33.960 --> 11:38.240]  the actual suit to read it and find out.
[11:38.240 --> 11:44.440]  But just based upon the gentleman's commentary, it looks like they did everything correctly
[11:44.440 --> 11:46.440]  and the courts just chose to ignore it.
[11:46.440 --> 11:52.840]  I do agree that in lots of cases, there will be those instances where the defendant did
[11:52.840 --> 11:57.840]  not do something correctly to get his information in.
[11:57.840 --> 12:01.800]  But from the way the discussion is going, it doesn't look like that's what happened here.
[12:01.800 --> 12:09.720]  It looks like he was completely ramrodded right out the door.
[12:09.720 --> 12:13.040]  But it would be interesting to know for sure one way or the other.
[12:13.040 --> 12:15.200]  All right, folks.
[12:15.200 --> 12:22.560]  We do have a caller on the board, 512-646-1984 is the call-in number.
[12:22.560 --> 12:27.080]  Like I said, tomorrow night we will be running an archive, so if you have any issues, tonight's
[12:27.080 --> 12:29.200]  the night to call in about it.
[12:29.200 --> 12:34.400]  Just please remember, Randy is not here, so please don't bring up any mortgage issues.
[12:34.400 --> 12:39.520]  He's not here to help us deal with those, and neither Deborah nor I have had the time
[12:39.520 --> 12:44.600]  or ability to get into that to any depth to be of any real help to you.
[12:44.600 --> 12:50.200]  But again, we do have a caller, Rob in Mississippi, even Rob, what can we do for you?
[12:50.200 --> 12:51.840]  Hi, Eddie.
[12:51.840 --> 13:00.600]  I was traveling 1.30 a.m. Monday and my personal automobile was topped by a sheriff's deputy.
[13:00.600 --> 13:08.800]  He informed me that my Mississippi plates, I'm sorry, my New Mexico plates were expired,
[13:08.800 --> 13:10.440]  which I knew already.
[13:10.440 --> 13:14.960]  I do have a driver's license because I'm a commercial truck driver, but I wasn't using
[13:14.960 --> 13:15.960]  it at the time.
[13:15.960 --> 13:24.480]  Anyway, he asked me if I had insurance, I declined to answer, reserving my Fifth Amendment rights.
[13:24.480 --> 13:29.120]  Second deputy stepped up and struck me in the shoulder from the driver's side window of
[13:29.120 --> 13:33.600]  my vehicle, told me to answer the question, not give him a hard time.
[13:33.600 --> 13:39.480]  I repeated that I was not going to answer that question.
[13:39.480 --> 13:43.400]  He instructed me to step out of the vehicle.
[13:43.400 --> 13:48.680]  The story long, they continued to ask me the same question about insurance, cuffed me,
[13:48.680 --> 13:53.560]  put me in the back of the squad car, asked me if they could search my vehicle.
[13:53.560 --> 13:57.600]  I told them no, I did not consent to a search.
[13:57.600 --> 14:01.080]  They proceeded to search my vehicle, asked me if I had any guns or drugs.
[14:01.080 --> 14:07.000]  If I told them no, they searched my vehicle, didn't come back with any guns or drugs.
[14:07.000 --> 14:11.640]  After an hour of all of this, they told me that I was under arrest or disturbing the
[14:11.640 --> 14:17.940]  police or for public disturbance and breach of peace, which are disorderly conducting
[14:17.940 --> 14:20.600]  breach of peace, kept me in the car.
[14:20.600 --> 14:24.560]  This only conduct being the fact you simply wouldn't answer their question?
[14:24.560 --> 14:25.560]  Exactly.
[14:25.560 --> 14:26.560]  Exactly.
[14:26.560 --> 14:32.200]  At one point prior to them cuffing me, the second deputy told me that I would be arrested
[14:32.200 --> 14:37.880]  if I didn't answer their questions, that I had to answer their questions.
[14:37.880 --> 14:44.440]  They arrested me officially after about an hour and a half, left me in the car, cuffed
[14:44.440 --> 14:50.840]  for another hour while the first deputy did the paperwork, took me to the county jail,
[14:50.840 --> 14:53.200]  processed me there.
[14:53.200 --> 14:57.480]  When I was in the car after I had been told that I was under arrest, I requested to be
[14:57.480 --> 14:59.640]  taken to a magistrate.
[14:59.640 --> 15:03.680]  When they got me to the county jail, I requested to see a magistrate.
[15:03.680 --> 15:08.960]  I requested a third time to see a magistrate after I'd been there for about 20 minutes.
[15:08.960 --> 15:11.640]  They told me that there wasn't one available at that time.
[15:11.640 --> 15:12.800]  I said, go on, call him.
[15:12.800 --> 15:13.800]  Wake him up.
[15:13.800 --> 15:15.800]  He won't mind.
[15:15.800 --> 15:17.800]  They said, no.
[15:17.800 --> 15:27.040]  Anyway, they released me on a $1,600 bail, which I paid 10% of.
[15:27.040 --> 15:31.080]  I was told by a friend of mine who is a civil rights attorney in Utah that that made me
[15:31.080 --> 15:37.840]  and I waived my right of not seeing a magistrate to have bail granted.
[15:37.840 --> 15:44.960]  Anyway, I've got a whole list of stuff they did wrong according to the Mississippi statute
[15:44.960 --> 15:48.600]  violating my rights.
[15:48.600 --> 15:55.840]  My main issue at this point is that my wife and my kids were planning on moving back to
[15:55.840 --> 16:01.720]  New Mexico on the 16th, which is the date that I have to appear by.
[16:01.720 --> 16:06.480]  I would love to kick the crap all the way out of these guys and file criminal complaints
[16:06.480 --> 16:10.640]  against them and sue them civilly, but I don't want to stick around Mississippi for another
[16:10.640 --> 16:12.640]  year to do that.
[16:12.640 --> 16:19.040]  Well, if you don't, that's going to be your call, but that's going to be the only option
[16:19.040 --> 16:22.480]  you have is to either stay or make trips.
[16:22.480 --> 16:24.480]  Yeah, and Rob, there's another.
[16:24.480 --> 16:26.120]  You're going to sue them.
[16:26.120 --> 16:27.120]  That's what you've got to do.
[16:27.120 --> 16:29.680]  Yeah, and Rob, there's another issue too.
[16:29.680 --> 16:34.960]  You have to look in the statute and see in your state if the jailers are authorized to
[16:34.960 --> 16:41.320]  set bail because if they set bail without the magistrate, that's a crime, so you need
[16:41.320 --> 16:46.720]  to look and see if they were even authorized to do that because if they're not, then you
[16:46.720 --> 16:51.320]  didn't necessarily waive your right to have bail set by a magistrate.
[16:51.320 --> 16:54.960]  You're likely the magistrate's the only entity that could do that anyway.
[16:54.960 --> 16:56.320]  Just stay right there, Rob.
[16:56.320 --> 17:00.920]  We'll be right back.
[17:00.920 --> 17:05.160]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals, and coin
[17:05.160 --> 17:07.640]  supplies in the Austin Metro area.
[17:07.640 --> 17:08.840]  We also ship worldwide.
[17:08.840 --> 17:13.320]  We're a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin
[17:13.320 --> 17:14.320]  and metals purchases.
[17:14.320 --> 17:19.200]  Because of you, Austin, business has been so good that we've had to move to a new and
[17:19.200 --> 17:20.680]  bigger location.
[17:20.680 --> 17:27.000]  We're now located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, 1.2 miles north on Burnett from our previous
[17:27.000 --> 17:28.000]  location.
[17:28.000 --> 17:31.840]  We're on the west side of Burnett Road in the Stanley Insurance Building on the ground
[17:31.840 --> 17:35.560]  floor next to the Ishibon Sushi and the Genie Car Wash.
[17:35.560 --> 17:39.360]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 5.
[17:39.360 --> 17:45.520]  You're welcome to stop in during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440.
[17:45.520 --> 17:49.960]  Ask for Chad or Becky and say that you heard about us on Rule of Law Radio or Texas Liberty
[17:49.960 --> 17:50.960]  Radio.
[17:50.960 --> 17:52.440]  That's Capital Corn and Bullion.
[17:52.440 --> 18:00.520]  At our new location at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, we'll call 512-646-6440.
[18:00.520 --> 18:05.840]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.840 --> 18:09.520]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Meyers Proven Method.
[18:09.520 --> 18:13.680]  Michael Meyers has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you
[18:13.680 --> 18:14.680]  can win two.
[18:14.680 --> 18:19.480]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.480 --> 18:25.240]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[18:25.240 --> 18:29.840]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit reports, how to turn the
[18:29.840 --> 18:34.080]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.080 --> 18:39.200]  The Michael Meyers Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.200 --> 18:41.320]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.320 --> 18:46.880]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Meyers banner
[18:46.880 --> 18:49.760]  or email Michael Meyers at yahoo.com.
[18:49.760 --> 18:59.400]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com to learn how to stop debt collectors
[18:59.400 --> 19:00.400]  next.
[19:00.400 --> 19:18.480]  All right, folks, we're back.
[19:18.480 --> 19:19.880]  We're taking your calls.
[19:19.880 --> 19:28.720]  Again, if you want to call in this week, you better call in tonight, 512-646-1984 because
[19:28.720 --> 19:32.440]  Randy's not going to be here tomorrow night.
[19:32.440 --> 19:37.640]  I have some other things that I most attend to, so call in tonight if you'd like to.
[19:37.640 --> 19:38.640]  Back to Rob.
[19:38.640 --> 19:45.160]  Rob, it's not a matter of whether you waived your right to have bail set by a magistrate.
[19:45.160 --> 19:49.320]  That's just not even a logical concept.
[19:49.320 --> 19:57.520]  The issue at stake is what entity or entities are authorized under law to set bail in the
[19:57.520 --> 20:02.240]  first place and when are they authorized to do that?
[20:02.240 --> 20:07.680]  For example, here in Texas, the magistrate is the only entity that's authorized to set
[20:07.680 --> 20:16.880]  bail, and not only that, the only time that he is authorized to do that is during an examining
[20:16.880 --> 20:24.440]  trial, which must take place immediately upon the accused being arrested.
[20:24.440 --> 20:28.720]  Once the accused is arrested, they must be brought directly to the magistrate for the
[20:28.720 --> 20:34.400]  purpose of the examining trial, basically as a probable cause hearing, to determine
[20:34.400 --> 20:39.880]  if there's any probable cause at all, and if there is, that's when the bail has to
[20:39.880 --> 20:40.880]  be set.
[20:40.880 --> 20:45.920]  But the way it is actually done here in Texas is that they arrest you and take you straight
[20:45.920 --> 20:52.120]  to jail, which is aggravated kidnapping, and then they have an ex parte hearing between
[20:52.120 --> 20:56.960]  the magistrate and the cop, while you're being cuffed and stuffed in the orange suit
[20:56.960 --> 21:00.920]  and fingerprinted in the camera, and the pictures and mug shots and all that.
[21:00.920 --> 21:10.040]  The bail is set ex parte when it's not even a real examining trial, so that's illegal.
[21:10.040 --> 21:13.840]  Even though the magistrate's the only entity that's authorized to set bail, he can only
[21:13.840 --> 21:18.080]  set bail at a certain specific time and place.
[21:18.080 --> 21:23.680]  It's not a matter of a right, of what we have a right to, it's a matter of what they are
[21:23.680 --> 21:30.240]  authorized under law to do, and so if they've broken the law, then it has nothing to do
[21:30.240 --> 21:33.800]  about whether you waived your right to it or not.
[21:33.800 --> 21:37.840]  So Eddie, you had some other comments on this.
[21:37.840 --> 21:41.880]  Yeah, let me back you up here just a little bit.
[21:41.880 --> 21:46.880]  The examining trial is not to be held at first appearance.
[21:46.880 --> 21:50.080]  At the first appearance, the one they call the magistration.
[21:50.080 --> 21:53.800]  They do call it that because it was not given a name in the statutes at all.
[21:53.800 --> 21:56.400]  It's the 1517 hearing.
[21:56.400 --> 22:04.000]  The 1517 hearing specifically states that at that hearing, the judge must inform the
[22:04.000 --> 22:08.280]  accused of their right to an examining trial.
[22:08.280 --> 22:13.840]  Hence, it cannot be in an examining trial they're conducting at that moment.
[22:13.840 --> 22:20.400]  And the reason for that is is because an examining trial according to chapter 16 is basically
[22:20.400 --> 22:24.320]  the same thing as trial minus the jury.
[22:24.320 --> 22:30.320]  You get to call witnesses, introduce evidence, everything that the witnesses say is supposed
[22:30.320 --> 22:36.760]  to be reduced to writing, the judge is supposed to have it certified and reviewed by the witnesses,
[22:36.760 --> 22:41.000]  the whole nine yards, all that happens at an examining trial.
[22:41.000 --> 22:44.160]  That does not happen at the initial proceeding.
[22:44.160 --> 22:51.160]  This magistration is simply so they can get you out of jail if the offense is one that
[22:51.160 --> 22:53.720]  you can be bonded for.
[22:53.720 --> 22:58.720]  And to see also whether or not you should have been arrested at all.
[22:58.720 --> 23:03.000]  That's the purpose of the magistration, whether or not they can release you on a PR or some
[23:03.000 --> 23:05.120]  other type of bond.
[23:05.120 --> 23:14.000]  Given that 1517 does specifically authorize the magistrate to set bond, but it also states
[23:14.000 --> 23:21.240]  that if the individual is being released on a fine only offense, that he must be released
[23:21.240 --> 23:27.800]  on a PR bond, says it right there in 1517.
[23:27.800 --> 23:35.000]  So given that there are separate things they're supposed to do, according to 1517 there are
[23:35.000 --> 23:40.040]  at least four appearances before a judge that occur in the proceeding.
[23:40.040 --> 23:47.360]  The initial appearance known as the magistration or the 1517 hearing, the examining trial,
[23:47.360 --> 23:52.000]  the arraignment, and the actual trial.
[23:52.000 --> 24:00.040]  The only thing that comes between the first three and trial are hearings on motions.
[24:00.040 --> 24:05.760]  And any other type of evidentiary hearing the court allows you to have.
[24:05.760 --> 24:10.820]  Those are the only additions to those four things, if and when they occur at all.
[24:10.820 --> 24:15.680]  So given that there are a minimum of four appearances that an individual in Texas is
[24:15.680 --> 24:22.320]  supposed to make in front of a magistrate, they skip everything at that first appearance
[24:22.320 --> 24:25.160]  and go straight to arraignment.
[24:25.160 --> 24:27.600]  And then they even do that wrong.
[24:27.600 --> 24:38.280]  Well, the statutes here are pretty specific in terms of after the arrest they can not
[24:38.280 --> 24:43.760]  take me to a magistrate if one is not available, but then they must release on a promise to
[24:43.760 --> 24:49.360]  appear before a magistrate for an examining trial and the bail setting.
[24:49.360 --> 24:50.360]  Right.
[24:50.360 --> 24:54.760]  Well, the other thing here is what your friend or whoever it was you talked to told you about
[24:54.760 --> 25:02.240]  waving your right, you cannot wave a right if they had a ministerial duty to do something
[25:02.240 --> 25:07.280]  and didn't, which deprived you of that right.
[25:07.280 --> 25:13.360]  The fact that you did not see a magistrate and the law said you were supposed to see
[25:13.360 --> 25:22.400]  a magistrate, you did not wave your right to anything because you exercised your right
[25:22.400 --> 25:25.920]  to get out of jail because they were holding you illegally.
[25:25.920 --> 25:29.960]  And the only way you could do that was pay extortion money.
[25:29.960 --> 25:31.920]  That's not a waiver of a right.
[25:31.920 --> 25:32.920]  Yeah.
[25:32.920 --> 25:36.680]  The charge that they arrested me on was the disorderly conduct breach of peace, which
[25:36.680 --> 25:42.840]  very clearly in the statute says that I must be in a public place with innocent bystanders
[25:42.840 --> 25:43.840]  around.
[25:43.840 --> 25:46.320]  I'm annoying the heck out of them.
[25:46.320 --> 25:53.200]  The police come and tell me to leave and I refuse to leave, which doesn't have any resemblance
[25:53.200 --> 25:57.160]  to the situation I was in.
[25:57.160 --> 26:01.240]  I would have gladly left if the deputies had instructed me to leave.
[26:01.240 --> 26:02.240]  They wouldn't.
[26:02.240 --> 26:04.280]  Where were you during the stop?
[26:04.280 --> 26:08.280]  I was on US Highway 61.
[26:08.280 --> 26:10.560]  You were pulled over on the side of the highway?
[26:10.560 --> 26:12.560]  Yes, sir.
[26:12.560 --> 26:13.560]  Okay.
[26:13.560 --> 26:20.440]  Well, the issue here is not whether or not you have a case, obviously you do.
[26:20.440 --> 26:23.720]  The issue here is, are you going to be around and prosecute it?
[26:23.720 --> 26:27.280]  You say no and you don't want to take the time to have to do that.
[26:27.280 --> 26:32.160]  Well, if that's true, then I don't know what else we're going to be able to do for you.
[26:32.160 --> 26:38.040]  Can I go ahead and leave here, move back to New Mexico and come back for the appearances
[26:38.040 --> 26:40.040]  to fight this?
[26:40.040 --> 26:41.040]  Absolutely.
[26:41.040 --> 26:45.640]  Okay, so I don't have to stay here to do all this, I just have to come back to it.
[26:45.640 --> 26:51.000]  You have to go back there to file the suit and everything and since you live there at
[26:51.000 --> 26:56.200]  the time and all the events took place within the state, correct?
[26:56.200 --> 26:57.360]  Yeah.
[26:57.360 --> 27:00.920]  Then you would have standing to sue in that state court.
[27:00.920 --> 27:01.920]  Okay.
[27:01.920 --> 27:05.640]  I've got another question on a different topic.
[27:05.640 --> 27:09.720]  I've got a debt collector in federal court.
[27:09.720 --> 27:18.360]  They are fighting me on lack of personal jurisdiction because they're out of Colorado.
[27:18.360 --> 27:31.720]  As far as the special appearance goes, you cannot waive your right for impersonal jurisdiction.
[27:31.720 --> 27:36.160]  Does that have to be a physical appearance or if they are filing motions without a request
[27:36.160 --> 27:40.480]  for special appearance, are they granting jurisdiction of the court?
[27:40.480 --> 27:45.240]  Special appearance doesn't mean without being there, okay?
[27:45.240 --> 27:49.440]  Special appearance means you're not waiving impersonal jurisdiction in order to make the
[27:49.440 --> 27:55.240]  appearance and it's usually reserved for the specific intent of challenging the jurisdiction
[27:55.240 --> 27:58.920]  of the court in the matter to begin with.
[27:58.920 --> 28:03.960]  But if they're filing motions challenging jurisdiction but not filing them under a special
[28:03.960 --> 28:07.560]  appearance, are they essentially granting jurisdiction to the court?
[28:07.560 --> 28:11.120]  They're granting impersonal jurisdiction if they're not doing it in special appearance.
[28:11.120 --> 28:15.080]  Why are they saying that you don't have personal jurisdiction?
[28:15.080 --> 28:22.000]  Because they're claiming that I acquired this alleged debt in New Mexico and that they came
[28:22.000 --> 28:29.720]  after me when I was a resident in New Mexico, which is not true.
[28:29.720 --> 28:34.960]  Whether or not the alleged debt is real at the time that they were assigned this alleged
[28:34.960 --> 28:36.840]  debt, I was already a resident in New Mexico.
[28:36.840 --> 28:37.840]  Well, wait a minute.
[28:37.840 --> 28:38.840]  Wait a minute.
[28:38.840 --> 28:41.440]  Are you the plaintiff or the defendant in the case?
[28:41.440 --> 28:44.240]  I'm the plaintiff in a federal case on this.
[28:44.240 --> 28:47.360]  What statute did you file the case under?
[28:47.360 --> 28:49.360]  FGRA and FDCPA.
[28:49.360 --> 28:52.960]  Okay, but hold on.
[28:52.960 --> 28:57.160]  There's another point of origin we need to go to here.
[28:57.160 --> 28:59.920]  You're suing them for violations of those acts.
[28:59.920 --> 29:02.960]  You're not suing them for the debt.
[29:02.960 --> 29:09.800]  Where were you when they violated those laws in contacting you and doing what they did?
[29:09.800 --> 29:10.800]  I was here.
[29:10.800 --> 29:11.800]  Mississippi.
[29:11.800 --> 29:13.600]  Then that's where you're suing them.
[29:13.600 --> 29:16.760]  Then that's where you sue them in whatever district court in Mississippi.
[29:16.760 --> 29:23.440]  So you've got to keep in mind whenever you sue under FCRA and DCPA, it has nothing to
[29:23.440 --> 29:25.080]  do with the debt.
[29:25.080 --> 29:30.920]  It has to do with violations of your civil rights under those civil rights protections
[29:30.920 --> 29:31.920]  laws.
[29:31.920 --> 29:36.960]  One of the biggest mistakes that people make when they file these suits on the civil cover
[29:36.960 --> 29:43.800]  sheet is they check consumer protection laws or consumer rights laws.
[29:43.800 --> 29:45.160]  It has nothing to do with that.
[29:45.160 --> 29:47.920]  It's a violation of your civil rights.
[29:47.920 --> 29:52.840]  The debt, whether or not it exists, whether or not it's valid, has nothing to do with
[29:52.840 --> 29:56.880]  it and you should never even get into that discussion with them.
[29:56.880 --> 29:57.880]  That's the Michael Merris method.
[29:57.880 --> 29:58.880]  We'll be right back.
[29:58.880 --> 29:59.880]  I lost my son.
[29:59.880 --> 30:00.880]  My nephew.
[30:00.880 --> 30:01.880]  My uncle.
[30:01.880 --> 30:02.880]  My son.
[30:02.880 --> 30:07.840]  On September 11, 2001, most people don't know that a third tower fell on September
[30:07.840 --> 30:08.840]  11.
[30:08.840 --> 30:12.480]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[30:12.480 --> 30:18.280]  Although the official explanation is that fire brought down Building 7, over 1,200 architects
[30:18.280 --> 30:22.040]  and engineers has looked into the evidence and believed there is more to the story.
[30:22.040 --> 30:23.520]  Bring justice to my son.
[30:23.520 --> 30:24.520]  My uncle.
[30:24.520 --> 30:25.520]  My nephew.
[30:25.520 --> 30:26.520]  My son.
[30:26.520 --> 30:27.520]  Go to building what.org.
[30:27.520 --> 30:28.520]  Why it fell.
[30:28.520 --> 30:29.520]  Why it matters.
[30:29.520 --> 30:30.520]  And what you can do.
[30:30.520 --> 30:36.320]  It's clear cell phones have changed the way we live and work, but have they negatively
[30:36.320 --> 30:37.320]  affected our health?
[30:37.320 --> 30:41.480]  I'm Dr. Cameron Albrecht and I'll be back in just a moment with new findings about how
[30:41.480 --> 30:45.800]  cell phones may actually alter our brain chemistry.
[30:45.800 --> 30:47.400]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:47.400 --> 30:51.000]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:51.000 --> 30:55.760]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:55.760 --> 30:57.200]  So protect your rights.
[30:57.200 --> 31:00.920]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[31:00.920 --> 31:03.520]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[31:03.520 --> 31:07.800]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[31:07.800 --> 31:11.320]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[31:11.320 --> 31:14.840]  Start over with StartPage.
[31:14.840 --> 31:17.280]  Cell phones emit radio frequency energy.
[31:17.280 --> 31:18.280]  It's a fact.
[31:18.280 --> 31:21.880]  Whether it's dangerous to have a phone beaming this kind of radiation near your head has
[31:21.880 --> 31:22.880]  been disputed.
[31:22.880 --> 31:27.200]  Some have blamed it for brain tumors, while cell phone companies have downplayed concerns.
[31:27.200 --> 31:31.680]  Well, now the Journal of the American Medical Association is confirming that cell phones
[31:31.680 --> 31:33.240]  affect brain chemistry.
[31:33.240 --> 31:38.280]  The study of 47 volunteers showed that glucose metabolism in the area of the brain closest
[31:38.280 --> 31:41.960]  to the cell phone antenna increases when the cell phone is on.
[31:41.960 --> 31:46.000]  While researchers aren't sure whether this exposure causes damage, I'm not taking any
[31:46.000 --> 31:47.000]  chances.
[31:47.000 --> 31:50.440]  I always keep the phone far from my body, and I use a corded headset.
[31:50.440 --> 32:20.280]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[32:20.440 --> 32:50.280]  All right, when are you going to stop abusing your power?
[32:50.280 --> 32:56.520]  All right, Rob, listen, I know a thing or two about these kinds of suits because I filed
[32:56.520 --> 33:03.080]  one myself, and Michael Maris is helping me with my suit, and you've got to keep in mind
[33:03.080 --> 33:06.360]  the debt is in dispute.
[33:06.360 --> 33:10.880]  Whether it's a valid debt or not has nothing to do with the case.
[33:10.880 --> 33:18.480]  They're trying to snooker you into admitting that the debt is valid by raising all of these
[33:18.480 --> 33:23.880]  issues, and in doing so, they're perpetrating fraud upon the court.
[33:23.880 --> 33:32.440]  What matters is did they violate FCRA or DCPA or TCPA for that matter during the course
[33:32.440 --> 33:38.040]  of their attempted debt collection, and they're dealings with the credit reporting agencies,
[33:38.040 --> 33:44.760]  and where you were located, where your physical residence was at the time of these alleged
[33:44.760 --> 33:51.320]  violations of those acts on their part is what matters as far as standing is concerned.
[33:51.320 --> 33:57.360]  All right, so that's essentially what I've been saying.
[33:57.360 --> 34:01.520]  You just need to respond back to them that they're trying to argue the debt.
[34:01.520 --> 34:07.280]  I'm arguing that they violated the civil rights laws, and they did it when I was here.
[34:07.280 --> 34:11.560]  Okay, that's simple.
[34:11.560 --> 34:17.440]  One final question back on the arrest.
[34:17.440 --> 34:23.960]  As far as going after them civilly and criminally, if I cut any kind of deal with the court,
[34:23.960 --> 34:28.360]  do I wait my right to do that?
[34:28.360 --> 34:30.320]  Say that one more time?
[34:30.320 --> 34:38.240]  If I cut any kind of deal with the court to get my end of this dropped, do I waive any
[34:38.240 --> 34:43.280]  rights to file criminal charges or sue them civilly?
[34:43.280 --> 34:45.440]  Not unless it's in the deal you make.
[34:45.440 --> 34:47.040]  Okay, good.
[34:47.040 --> 34:53.160]  But what you are waiving is that you can't go back and try to get it expunged off the
[34:53.160 --> 34:54.160]  record later.
[34:54.160 --> 34:59.720]  If it gets it dropped against him, it won't be on the record anyway.
[34:59.720 --> 35:07.680]  No, but if you plead to a deal of some lesser charge or something, if you plead to any deal,
[35:07.680 --> 35:10.240]  you cannot go back and get it expunged later.
[35:10.240 --> 35:11.240]  Right.
[35:11.240 --> 35:17.400]  I've got a perfectly clean record, and Mississippi has a statute that allows for me to go and
[35:17.400 --> 35:22.120]  do four hours of traffic school if I have no other violations.
[35:22.120 --> 35:25.040]  So I can get this stuff.
[35:25.040 --> 35:38.040]  I've got one no tags, one failure show proof of insurance, and then the BS disorderly conduct
[35:38.040 --> 35:39.040]  charge.
[35:39.040 --> 35:46.520]  The disorderly conduct has to be dropped immediately if it doesn't, I'll sue the judge.
[35:46.520 --> 35:54.760]  As far as the other two, I can go and prove current registration insurance now.
[35:54.760 --> 36:00.240]  I can get those reduced and then do traffic school to make them go away, and then come
[36:00.240 --> 36:02.840]  back and hammer these guys later.
[36:02.840 --> 36:11.160]  Okay, that ought to be fine except like she's saying, don't cut a deal that allows you to
[36:11.160 --> 36:15.320]  say, yeah, I'm partially guilty because here's the problem.
[36:15.320 --> 36:22.960]  If you do anything to not win, if the case is not dismissed or decided in your favor,
[36:22.960 --> 36:27.800]  then you lose the ability to sue for malicious prosecution.
[36:27.800 --> 36:29.080]  Okay.
[36:29.080 --> 36:34.800]  And that could impact your ability to sue for one or more of the other issues.
[36:34.800 --> 36:35.800]  Right.
[36:35.800 --> 36:38.880]  Well, the officer had no cause to pull me over in the first place.
[36:38.880 --> 36:40.680]  So what if I had expired New Mexico tax?
[36:40.680 --> 36:43.280]  What's that got to do with the Mississippi Sheriff's deputy?
[36:43.280 --> 36:48.080]  Does he have any probable cause to pull me over because of that?
[36:48.080 --> 36:50.080]  No, technically he doesn't.
[36:50.080 --> 36:53.080]  He has no authority to enforce New Mexico law.
[36:53.080 --> 36:54.080]  Right.
[36:54.080 --> 36:56.080]  That's pretty much what I thought.
[36:56.080 --> 36:59.640]  I was pretty sure I heard you make similar comments before.
[36:59.640 --> 37:04.160]  So yeah, I'm still digging through the statutes.
[37:04.160 --> 37:09.840]  I'm pretty much convinced that Mississippi, like Texas, the transportation codes are
[37:09.840 --> 37:13.560]  all commercial, but I haven't been able to definitively prove that yet.
[37:13.560 --> 37:18.400]  There are some strong indications, but no definitive proof that I've been able to come
[37:18.400 --> 37:24.080]  up with, but yeah.
[37:24.080 --> 37:28.200]  You guys are awesome and I love you and thanks for all your help by listening to you guys
[37:28.200 --> 37:29.200]  all the time.
[37:29.200 --> 37:30.200]  Thanks, Rob.
[37:30.200 --> 37:31.200]  Thanks, Rob.
[37:31.200 --> 37:34.480]  If you've got anything else you want to tell me, awesome.
[37:34.480 --> 37:35.960]  If not, I'll let you go.
[37:35.960 --> 37:37.480]  No, not all to do it.
[37:37.480 --> 37:38.480]  All right.
[37:38.480 --> 37:39.480]  Thanks, Rob.
[37:39.480 --> 37:40.480]  You guys have a great night.
[37:40.480 --> 37:41.480]  God bless.
[37:41.480 --> 37:42.480]  Okay.
[37:42.480 --> 37:43.480]  God bless.
[37:43.480 --> 37:44.480]  All right.
[37:44.480 --> 37:47.280]  Folks, we only got one other caller on the board, Mike from Tennessee.
[37:47.280 --> 37:53.400]  So if you want to call in 512-646-1984, Mike, thanks for calling in.
[37:53.400 --> 37:54.880]  What is your question for us tonight?
[37:54.880 --> 37:55.880]  Yeah.
[37:55.880 --> 37:56.880]  Hi, Deborah.
[37:56.880 --> 37:57.880]  Hi, Eddie.
[37:57.880 --> 37:58.880]  Edith?
[37:58.880 --> 38:00.800]  This is what I've got going on here in Chattanooga.
[38:00.800 --> 38:03.240]  There's a lady I know, age 50.
[38:03.240 --> 38:10.000]  She has a duplex that happens to rent out to two guys over on the side.
[38:10.000 --> 38:17.160]  They allowed a friend of theirs to come over, set up a meth lab, and the police came, got
[38:17.160 --> 38:22.600]  them, charged her with it as if she was running it.
[38:22.600 --> 38:26.720]  You know, she knows nothing about this because they did all this in a day's time.
[38:26.720 --> 38:30.560]  Does she have a formal rental contract with them?
[38:30.560 --> 38:31.560]  No.
[38:31.560 --> 38:33.880]  Oh, well, then she might be a host.
[38:33.880 --> 38:34.880]  Okay.
[38:34.880 --> 38:36.480]  Here's the other problem.
[38:36.480 --> 38:37.480]  Yeah.
[38:37.480 --> 38:38.480]  You need to check it.
[38:38.480 --> 38:39.480]  Is she in Tennessee?
[38:39.480 --> 38:40.480]  Say that again.
[38:40.480 --> 38:41.480]  Is she in Tennessee?
[38:41.480 --> 38:42.480]  Now, here's the...
[38:42.480 --> 38:43.480]  Yes.
[38:43.480 --> 38:49.760]  Yeah, you know, the woman that's 50 is in Chattanooga here.
[38:49.760 --> 38:55.520]  Her daughter's been renting out for the one side and the mother pays for everything, 650
[38:55.520 --> 38:56.520]  a month.
[38:56.520 --> 39:01.000]  And so the mother for the last couple of years have been paying the rent for both sides.
[39:01.000 --> 39:02.160]  Her daughter stays in.
[39:02.160 --> 39:05.000]  Her daughter's getting married, has moved to Atlanta.
[39:05.000 --> 39:06.000]  Okay.
[39:06.000 --> 39:07.000]  So the place is open.
[39:07.000 --> 39:11.440]  These two guys said, we'll clean it up, paint it, make it look spiffy and everything for
[39:11.440 --> 39:14.520]  rent and we'll pay you some as we go.
[39:14.520 --> 39:19.160]  But she didn't have a written contract to that regard or any of the terms of conditions
[39:19.160 --> 39:20.160]  of rent?
[39:20.160 --> 39:21.160]  No.
[39:21.160 --> 39:22.160]  No.
[39:22.160 --> 39:23.160]  Okay.
[39:23.160 --> 39:24.160]  She's got a real problem.
[39:24.160 --> 39:25.160]  All right.
[39:25.160 --> 39:31.000]  This is why most rental agreements for and lease agreements for apartments, whether it's
[39:31.000 --> 39:36.760]  you're renting somebody's full house, full property, a duplex or anything, this is why
[39:36.760 --> 39:43.400]  the rental agreements are usually about 25 pages long to set down all the terms and conditions
[39:43.400 --> 39:50.320]  and to indemnify the property owners from any potential unknown illegal activity that
[39:50.320 --> 39:51.600]  might go on.
[39:51.600 --> 39:56.720]  Otherwise, every time there's a drug bust in an apartment complex unit, they could take
[39:56.720 --> 40:03.080]  down the owner of the whole property, the whole apartment complex.
[40:03.080 --> 40:09.720]  If she's going to, and if there's not even a legitimate verbal agreement indemnifying
[40:09.720 --> 40:15.840]  herself from any potential illegal activity, she could have a serious problem.
[40:15.840 --> 40:20.840]  Now she could go ahead and say that she had no idea this was going on and she was just
[40:20.840 --> 40:23.120]  renting out to these two guys.
[40:23.120 --> 40:28.160]  But yeah, this is a serious, she could have a serious problem when there's nothing in
[40:28.160 --> 40:30.040]  writing in place.
[40:30.040 --> 40:35.400]  The other issue here becomes that Tennessee from the things I've been reading has some
[40:35.400 --> 40:41.960]  really, really offensive and abusive civil forfeiture laws.
[40:41.960 --> 40:48.400]  This is exactly how a lot of these departments are financing themselves by stealing people's
[40:48.400 --> 40:51.280]  property using the civil forfeiture laws.
[40:51.280 --> 40:54.280]  If it's used in a drug crime, they can take it.
[40:54.280 --> 40:55.280]  Yeah.
[40:55.280 --> 40:56.800]  That's kind of the way.
[40:56.800 --> 41:02.600]  Now then the side where this was at, they've got it boarded up and everything and you can't
[41:02.600 --> 41:03.600]  enter it.
[41:03.600 --> 41:07.320]  The other side where the lady lives, it's still open and stuff.
[41:07.320 --> 41:12.480]  Well, has the property owner filed an affidavit with the court yet in the case saying that
[41:12.480 --> 41:19.160]  she was just renting and had no knowledge of any activities going on in that other unit?
[41:19.160 --> 41:23.560]  No, because, okay, here's the thing, he's kind of afraid to say anything because the
[41:23.560 --> 41:25.440]  liability may bounce on him.
[41:25.440 --> 41:26.440]  He don't want to say a word.
[41:26.440 --> 41:29.760]  Well, then he's going to be liable if he doesn't say anything.
[41:29.760 --> 41:35.040]  I would highly suggest and we don't give legal advice on this show, but if they're already
[41:35.040 --> 41:41.800]  trying to hold the property owner liable, the best thing what I would do is I would file
[41:41.800 --> 41:48.480]  an affidavit, a notarized affidavit immediately with that court saying I was renting to these
[41:48.480 --> 41:56.040]  such and such people and I have no idea what activities that were going on in that unit.
[41:56.040 --> 42:02.880]  I certainly would not have condoned any illegal activities or else I would have evicted them
[42:02.880 --> 42:08.200]  immediately if I had found out and I had no knowledge and if the property owner doesn't
[42:08.200 --> 42:14.320]  file an affidavit to that fact, the property owner is going to probably lose the property.
[42:14.320 --> 42:18.000]  Okay, okay, now then, here's the other part of it.
[42:18.000 --> 42:24.320]  This happened a couple of weeks ago and they arrested that lady, the 50-year-old lady,
[42:24.320 --> 42:29.520]  that night and they kept her in, you know, it's like a jail for women.
[42:29.520 --> 42:31.000]  She's the property owner?
[42:31.000 --> 42:34.600]  No, she's that renter, you know, she's the renter.
[42:34.600 --> 42:38.680]  She needs to file an affidavit too.
[42:38.680 --> 42:44.240]  The woman who was living in the next door unit needs to file an affidavit that I was
[42:44.240 --> 42:52.320]  just renting side A or whatever side A, side B. I knew nothing about the actions or activities
[42:52.320 --> 42:59.480]  of the renters in unit B. I rented unit A. I knew nothing about that.
[42:59.480 --> 43:02.120]  I certainly wouldn't have condoned it if I had known.
[43:02.120 --> 43:06.440]  I probably would have moved out if I had known and the owner of the property needs to file
[43:06.440 --> 43:10.800]  the same type of affidavit saying, I knew nothing about these activities.
[43:10.800 --> 43:16.120]  I would not have condoned them and if I had gotten any indication that they were doing
[43:16.120 --> 43:19.720]  anything like this, I would have evicted them and called the police on them.
[43:19.720 --> 43:24.080]  If those kinds of affidavits aren't filed, they're all going to be in a lot of trouble.
[43:24.080 --> 43:25.080]  Okay, now here's the problem.
[43:25.080 --> 43:26.080]  I'm kind of confused here.
[43:26.080 --> 43:27.080]  I'm kind of confused here.
[43:27.080 --> 43:28.080]  An affidavit.
[43:28.080 --> 43:30.880]  When she's in jail, she don't have access to a notary.
[43:30.880 --> 43:32.440]  No, that's not true.
[43:32.440 --> 43:33.440]  That's not true.
[43:33.440 --> 43:36.520]  They have to give you access to the courts when you're in prison.
[43:36.520 --> 43:39.200]  They can't deny you access to the courts when you're in prison.
[43:39.200 --> 43:44.120]  If you want to sign affidavits and file documents with the court, the jailers have to provide
[43:44.120 --> 43:45.440]  opportunity for that.
[43:45.440 --> 43:46.440]  That's not true.
[43:46.440 --> 43:47.440]  All right.
[43:47.440 --> 43:50.760]  Right there, Mike, we'll be right back.
[43:50.760 --> 43:52.760]  This is the rule of law.
[43:52.760 --> 43:58.280]  Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, if you want to make phone calls to us, 512-646-1984.
[43:58.280 --> 44:05.280]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so
[44:05.280 --> 44:08.920]  easy and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[44:08.920 --> 44:12.120]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books then.
[44:12.120 --> 44:13.120]  Brave New Books?
[44:13.120 --> 44:14.120]  Yes.
[44:14.120 --> 44:18.160]  Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex Jones,
[44:18.160 --> 44:20.280]  Ron Paul, and G. Edward Griffin.
[44:20.280 --> 44:23.440]  They even stock inner food, Burkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[44:23.440 --> 44:26.600]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[44:26.600 --> 44:28.040]  Go check it out for yourself.
[44:28.040 --> 44:32.120]  It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street just south of UT.
[44:32.120 --> 44:36.160]  Oh, by UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[44:36.160 --> 44:41.080]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[44:41.080 --> 44:44.160]  facility just behind the bookstore.
[44:44.160 --> 44:47.080]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[44:47.080 --> 44:51.840]  Monday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. and 1 to 6 p.m. on Sundays.
[44:51.840 --> 45:00.760]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503 or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[45:00.760 --> 45:07.520]  At hempusa.org, we offer chemical-free products to people around the world detoxifying self-healing
[45:07.520 --> 45:09.720]  while rebuilding the immune system.
[45:09.720 --> 45:15.720]  We urge our listeners to please consider our largest-selling product, micro-plant powder.
[45:15.720 --> 45:20.760]  Our micro-plant powder is rich in silica and probiotics to help rebuild the immune system
[45:20.760 --> 45:24.000]  and to create a healthy stomach flora.
[45:24.000 --> 45:28.000]  Micro-plant powder is excellent for daily intake and is perfect to add to your storage
[45:28.000 --> 45:29.000]  shelter.
[45:29.000 --> 45:32.600]  We urge our listeners to please visit us at hempusa.org.
[45:32.600 --> 45:36.160]  And remember, all of our products are chemical-free and healthy to eat.
[45:36.160 --> 45:40.840]  We constantly strive to give you the best service, highest quality and rapid shipping
[45:40.840 --> 45:41.840]  anywhere.
[45:41.840 --> 45:45.560]  And we offer free shipping on orders over $95 in the U.S.
[45:45.560 --> 45:51.480]  Please visit us at hempusa.org or call 908-6912608.
[45:51.480 --> 45:54.480]  That's 908-6912608.
[45:54.480 --> 46:18.920]  See what our powder, seeds and oil can do for you at hempusa.org.
[46:18.920 --> 46:19.920]  All right, we are back.
[46:19.920 --> 46:20.920]  Yeah, Mike.
[46:20.920 --> 46:27.880]  Listen, regardless of whether somebody who is incarcerated has an attorney or not, in
[46:27.880 --> 46:37.640]  every state, it is illegal for the jailers to deny or prohibit or otherwise impede access
[46:37.640 --> 46:40.000]  to the courts.
[46:40.000 --> 46:45.800]  A person, an incarcerated accused person, cannot be denied access to the courts just
[46:45.800 --> 46:47.720]  because they are in jail.
[46:47.720 --> 46:54.840]  The jailers have to provide some kind of mechanism in order for the accused to be able to file
[46:54.840 --> 46:56.600]  documents with the court.
[46:56.600 --> 46:59.560]  In fact, generally the way it works is they'll bring in a notary.
[46:59.560 --> 47:02.640]  Generally, there's a notary at the jail.
[47:02.640 --> 47:07.360]  Generally a notary works at the jail for that purpose or they bring in one that works for
[47:07.360 --> 47:08.360]  the court.
[47:08.360 --> 47:13.800]  They call them in from the courthouse and they have to give you pen and paper or whatever
[47:13.800 --> 47:16.800]  they have to give you access to a law library.
[47:16.800 --> 47:24.160]  They have to give you some mechanisms in order to do legal research and to write and file
[47:24.160 --> 47:28.520]  documents with the court, including ones that need to be notarized, period.
[47:28.520 --> 47:33.240]  If not, they can go down for a denial of access to the courts.
[47:33.240 --> 47:37.640]  Now, Eddie, you had some comments you wanted to make on this case.
[47:37.640 --> 47:41.480]  Well, I'm a little bit confused here.
[47:41.480 --> 47:45.840]  Originally, we're talking as if the lady in jail is the owner.
[47:45.840 --> 47:47.360]  Now she's just the renter.
[47:47.360 --> 47:48.360]  Yeah.
[47:48.360 --> 47:50.160]  Yeah, she's always been the renter.
[47:50.160 --> 47:51.160]  She was never there.
[47:51.160 --> 47:52.160]  Okay.
[47:52.160 --> 47:56.600]  Then how did the officer, how did she make a deal with anybody about Unit 2 if she is
[47:56.600 --> 47:59.440]  just the renter?
[47:59.440 --> 48:04.560]  How does she have the authority to rent any part of that building to anybody under any
[48:04.560 --> 48:08.960]  conditional form of agreement as a renter?
[48:08.960 --> 48:12.920]  Yeah, I'm with you on that.
[48:12.920 --> 48:21.760]  Probably she doesn't because that owner hasn't okayed her to sublet that side out.
[48:21.760 --> 48:22.760]  Okay.
[48:22.760 --> 48:28.440]  So unless her name actually shows that she is renting both sides.
[48:28.440 --> 48:29.440]  Well, it does.
[48:29.440 --> 48:35.880]  That is the way she has always done this, is she actually rents both sides technically.
[48:35.880 --> 48:39.720]  Then the sublet is where Deborah is absolutely correct.
[48:39.720 --> 48:47.240]  She's gotten herself into trouble because she has consented to the occupancy of what
[48:47.240 --> 48:51.840]  under the contract terms is her property.
[48:51.840 --> 48:59.240]  And if she never had consent from the property owner to sublet in the first place, she does
[48:59.240 --> 49:01.200]  have a big problem.
[49:01.200 --> 49:02.200]  Okay.
[49:02.200 --> 49:06.000]  I can't say on that whether he was aware of it or not.
[49:06.000 --> 49:07.800]  It could be and he could have okayed it.
[49:07.800 --> 49:08.800]  Wait, wait, wait.
[49:08.800 --> 49:09.800]  Maybe the owner?
[49:09.800 --> 49:10.800]  Yes.
[49:10.800 --> 49:11.800]  He is the owner.
[49:11.800 --> 49:17.560]  I can't say what his stand is on it because in the past it's been, the daughter rented
[49:17.560 --> 49:22.560]  that side and it was in her name, but mother has always paid it for the last two years.
[49:22.560 --> 49:27.200]  100% of the time the daughter has never, the first time ever paid for it.
[49:27.200 --> 49:28.200]  And so the daughter...
[49:28.200 --> 49:32.120]  Right, but when you say it's in her name, was it in the daughter's name or the mother's
[49:32.120 --> 49:33.120]  name?
[49:33.120 --> 49:34.120]  Mother's name.
[49:34.120 --> 49:38.040]  So both sides are actually in the mother's name?
[49:38.040 --> 49:39.840]  Yes.
[49:39.840 --> 49:41.400]  And you're positive of that?
[49:41.400 --> 49:49.120]  I feel really confident because I know the last couple of months since the daughter wasn't
[49:49.120 --> 49:54.400]  there and they started talking about the rent and she said, I'm going to continue paying
[49:54.400 --> 49:59.840]  you the 650 like I always have and I want both sides because the daughter...
[49:59.840 --> 50:04.640]  Yeah, but did they change the contract?
[50:04.640 --> 50:09.960]  And if they, as she says, I want both sides, that's an indicator to me that her name was
[50:09.960 --> 50:14.280]  not on the other side.
[50:14.280 --> 50:19.760]  The fact that she's paying for it is not relevant to whose name is on the lease.
[50:19.760 --> 50:20.760]  Okay.
[50:20.760 --> 50:22.440]  Well then, you know what?
[50:22.440 --> 50:27.320]  That lease was signed a couple of years ago and it's kind of expired.
[50:27.320 --> 50:31.640]  It's really a month to month lease, say the last six months or so.
[50:31.640 --> 50:37.120]  As long as it's got a term for that in the lease agreement, that's normal.
[50:37.120 --> 50:38.120]  Okay.
[50:38.120 --> 50:40.120]  All right.
[50:40.120 --> 50:43.480]  So the fact that it's month to month doesn't change anything either.
[50:43.480 --> 50:49.320]  Whoever's name is on the paperwork is still the responsible party for the month to month
[50:49.320 --> 50:50.320]  leasing.
[50:50.320 --> 50:51.320]  Okay.
[50:51.320 --> 50:52.320]  Okay.
[50:52.320 --> 51:00.640]  Now here's another angle on this I was thinking on this is this lady is disabled and I've
[51:00.640 --> 51:02.920]  got power of attorney from her.
[51:02.920 --> 51:08.000]  I go and do banking for her sometimes and go and get medication and things for her.
[51:08.000 --> 51:10.560]  The last two years I've done that.
[51:10.560 --> 51:17.880]  And so what they're saying, the original police officers are saying that she admitted to knowing
[51:17.880 --> 51:23.040]  about that other side or having a key to it and that is what they're getting around.
[51:23.040 --> 51:26.200]  And she admitted she had a key to that side.
[51:26.200 --> 51:28.560]  That's how they're locking it to it.
[51:28.560 --> 51:29.560]  So what?
[51:29.560 --> 51:31.160]  What is the property owner?
[51:31.160 --> 51:32.160]  Right.
[51:32.160 --> 51:37.920]  But here's why they're leaking that together is they're trying to say since she had the
[51:37.920 --> 51:40.600]  key to the other side, she had access to it.
[51:40.600 --> 51:42.120]  So she must have known about it.
[51:42.120 --> 51:44.640]  So they're trying to jump it like that.
[51:44.640 --> 51:48.880]  And that's why they're trying to prosecute her as if she's doing the math.
[51:48.880 --> 51:51.200]  And that's, you know, they've been treating her like a criminal.
[51:51.200 --> 51:56.400]  They just, you know, she can only make one call a day and you can only have one visitor
[51:56.400 --> 51:57.400]  a week.
[51:57.400 --> 52:00.560]  They want her to get an attorney and see she doesn't have any money right now.
[52:00.560 --> 52:03.640]  She only has enough money to pay everything from month to month.
[52:03.640 --> 52:07.480]  And they want to charge her a thousand or two for bail and all this stuff.
[52:07.480 --> 52:08.480]  They want her to.
[52:08.480 --> 52:12.160]  Where's her court appointed attorney in all this?
[52:12.160 --> 52:13.680]  She doesn't have an attorney.
[52:13.680 --> 52:14.680]  They were supposed to.
[52:14.680 --> 52:19.160]  Well, she dang well better be getting one.
[52:19.160 --> 52:24.840]  They're supposed to assign her legal counsel if she cannot afford to pay for it.
[52:24.840 --> 52:27.560]  Where is it?
[52:27.560 --> 52:30.680]  Well, okay, here's the thing.
[52:30.680 --> 52:35.480]  She was going to have a hearing today and they, the policeman didn't show up.
[52:35.480 --> 52:37.320]  So they postponed it till tomorrow.
[52:37.320 --> 52:40.600]  They will be a hearing on her case tomorrow.
[52:40.600 --> 52:44.800]  And she, if she doesn't file something and writing demanding that these things that are
[52:44.800 --> 52:49.160]  supposed to be done, get done, she's going to sit in there until she writes.
[52:49.160 --> 52:50.160]  Okay.
[52:50.160 --> 52:51.480]  She will not go to trial.
[52:51.480 --> 52:53.360]  She will not get anything.
[52:53.360 --> 52:54.360]  Okay.
[52:54.360 --> 52:58.400]  Now here's the next thing they're wanting to do is they're suggesting for this to go
[52:58.400 --> 53:00.400]  to the grand jury.
[53:00.400 --> 53:05.480]  Well, they have to.
[53:05.480 --> 53:08.120]  They can't prosecute her without an indictment.
[53:08.120 --> 53:09.120]  Okay.
[53:09.120 --> 53:10.640]  So they don't have that right now.
[53:10.640 --> 53:12.520]  Here's what I was thinking.
[53:12.520 --> 53:17.520]  The reason why they're holding her on any charges right now is they're twisting what
[53:17.520 --> 53:20.440]  she said, the fact that she has a key and stuff.
[53:20.440 --> 53:25.880]  If I've got power of attorney over her and her testimony is null and void, then wouldn't
[53:25.880 --> 53:27.200]  they have to let her go then?
[53:27.200 --> 53:28.440]  Cause that's what they're trying to charge.
[53:28.440 --> 53:30.840]  What do you mean her testimony is null and void?
[53:30.840 --> 53:36.120]  She can't give you power of attorney to stand in her place for being accused of a crime.
[53:36.120 --> 53:37.840]  Oh, she can't.
[53:37.840 --> 53:39.160]  No.
[53:39.160 --> 53:41.240]  Because if they did, you would be the one in jail.
[53:41.240 --> 53:46.400]  Now she'd be sitting home drinking coffee.
[53:46.400 --> 53:56.400]  Well, okay, so when she signed something, you know, that power of attorney says that.
[53:56.400 --> 54:01.600]  Power of attorney is only good for specifically what it says it's good for, and it cannot
[54:01.600 --> 54:05.600]  be applied to certain things.
[54:05.600 --> 54:11.080]  Taking responsibility for a criminal act of another is one of those things.
[54:11.080 --> 54:12.080]  Okay.
[54:12.080 --> 54:13.080]  Okay.
[54:13.080 --> 54:18.360]  So the quickest thing for her to do is just do the affidavit and have the original owner
[54:18.360 --> 54:21.680]  of that property say the same thing in her behalf.
[54:21.680 --> 54:22.680]  Get that in.
[54:22.680 --> 54:23.680]  Right.
[54:23.680 --> 54:28.840]  And she needs to explain in that affidavit that the only reason she had a key to the other
[54:28.840 --> 54:33.480]  side was that it was originally her daughter's apartment.
[54:33.480 --> 54:34.960]  Okay.
[54:34.960 --> 54:36.720]  Okay.
[54:36.720 --> 54:41.680]  The other question becomes is did these guys change the lock on the property and would
[54:41.680 --> 54:43.800]  her key have actually fit anymore?
[54:43.800 --> 54:44.800]  Who knows?
[54:44.800 --> 54:47.840]  She may have thought she had a key and it actually didn't.
[54:47.840 --> 54:48.840]  Right.
[54:48.840 --> 54:54.160]  But plus, you know, those people next door invited somebody in there that they didn't
[54:54.160 --> 54:57.760]  know that I guess that they had the meth stuff maybe.
[54:57.760 --> 55:03.160]  You know, they just brought it in and, you know, like a suitcase kind of container and
[55:03.160 --> 55:04.680]  start making it.
[55:04.680 --> 55:06.880]  And then somebody calls the law on them.
[55:06.880 --> 55:12.320]  It sure does have the appearance of this whole thing was set up.
[55:12.320 --> 55:16.400]  Well it very well could be if they're after the property, like I said.
[55:16.400 --> 55:20.800]  Well, you know, all right, the affidavit is really the quick thing it's going to get her
[55:20.800 --> 55:21.800]  out then.
[55:21.800 --> 55:29.360]  Well, can't guarantee that, but it will at least submit her facts and get them submitted
[55:29.360 --> 55:30.800]  to the court.
[55:30.800 --> 55:31.800]  Okay.
[55:31.800 --> 55:32.800]  All right.
[55:32.800 --> 55:38.600]  And then she just going to have to get a court appointed judge, I mean, she needs to demand
[55:38.600 --> 55:40.240]  a court appointed counsel.
[55:40.240 --> 55:42.240]  She can't afford one.
[55:42.240 --> 55:43.240]  Absolutely.
[55:43.240 --> 55:44.240]  Okay.
[55:44.240 --> 55:45.240]  All right then.
[55:45.240 --> 55:46.240]  Thanks, Eddie and Deborah.
[55:46.240 --> 55:47.240]  You're welcome.
[55:47.240 --> 55:48.240]  All right.
[55:48.240 --> 55:49.240]  Thanks.
[55:49.240 --> 55:50.240]  Thank you, Mike.
[55:50.240 --> 55:51.240]  Okay.
[55:51.240 --> 55:52.240]  Yeah.
[55:52.240 --> 56:00.440]  And folks, this should be a lesson to everybody that if you're going to rent out your apartment,
[56:00.440 --> 56:10.160]  a part of your duplex or anything else, you better make sure you've got, if not a very
[56:10.160 --> 56:19.480]  clear cut contract in writing, at least a good verbal contract that you are indemnified
[56:19.480 --> 56:23.320]  from any potential illegal activities that might come down.
[56:23.320 --> 56:27.400]  That's in the contracts of all these standard lease agreements.
[56:27.400 --> 56:29.680]  Otherwise, it has to be.
[56:29.680 --> 56:36.000]  Otherwise, every time there's a marijuana bust in an apartment unit anywhere, they would
[56:36.000 --> 56:39.360]  take down the owner of the entire complex.
[56:39.360 --> 56:40.360]  So think about it.
[56:40.360 --> 56:41.360]  That never happens.
[56:41.360 --> 56:42.720]  And there's a reason for that.
[56:42.720 --> 56:45.680]  You have to be very careful when you're renting out your property.
[56:45.680 --> 56:46.680]  All right.
[56:46.680 --> 56:49.960]  We're going to go now to Charles in Oklahoma.
[56:49.960 --> 56:51.760]  Charles, thanks for calling in.
[56:51.760 --> 56:54.800]  We've only got about a minute or so before we go to the top of the hour break, so we
[56:54.800 --> 56:55.800]  will hold you over.
[56:55.800 --> 56:57.200]  But what do you got for us tonight?
[56:57.200 --> 56:59.880]  Well, it's kind of, I just recently got done with the divorce.
[56:59.880 --> 57:04.120]  It took a minute to get the divorce papers drawn, but maybe both one of them.
[57:04.120 --> 57:08.640]  I never signed any divorce papers, however, my issue is, it's in two different places
[57:08.640 --> 57:11.320]  and there's both players responsible for their own attorney fees.
[57:11.320 --> 57:16.880]  On the same day, it was signed by the judge, and I never signed any nor did my attorney.
[57:16.880 --> 57:20.320]  The judge also signed another piece of paper saying I would be holding a content of court
[57:20.320 --> 57:24.200]  30 days later if I failed to pay her attorney fee.
[57:24.200 --> 57:27.800]  How is that, how does that make any sense?
[57:27.800 --> 57:32.760]  Well, it doesn't cause the written order is going to take precedent unless the judge
[57:32.760 --> 57:35.480]  rescinds the order with another written order.
[57:35.480 --> 57:36.480]  Yeah.
[57:36.480 --> 57:38.160]  And the other piece of paper.
[57:38.160 --> 57:44.000]  That may have just have been his standard spiel, and he may not have actually applied
[57:44.000 --> 57:45.160]  it to you.
[57:45.160 --> 57:49.600]  He just says it at the end of every divorce proceeding, and he just got slap happy with
[57:49.600 --> 57:50.600]  it.
[57:50.600 --> 57:54.480]  And we talked about it, and when we did the divorce proceeding, they both agreed to pay
[57:54.480 --> 57:57.200]  her attorney fee, and then the divorce proceeding.
[57:57.200 --> 57:59.280]  And the written order backs that up, correct?
[57:59.280 --> 58:03.000]  Yeah, the written order backs that up, and then on the 17th, they did that.
[58:03.000 --> 58:09.400]  Okay, now the question is, is it the divorce decree, or is it the order that says that?
[58:09.400 --> 58:14.400]  I should have another difference, to be honest with you, I'm just, I'm new to this divorce
[58:14.400 --> 58:15.400]  stuff.
[58:15.400 --> 58:19.080]  Okay, if you'll hang on, we'll pick you up on the other side of the break and I'll explain
[58:19.080 --> 58:20.560]  the difference to you.
[58:20.560 --> 58:24.560]  Basically, what you guys agreed to is the decree.
[58:24.560 --> 58:25.560]  Okay.
[58:25.560 --> 58:26.560]  Okay.
[58:26.560 --> 58:28.560]  And what I think I have.
[58:28.560 --> 58:34.040]  Yeah, when you agree to do this, she's agreeing to do that, that's the decree.
[58:34.040 --> 58:38.800]  The judge signs off on that, saying, okay, the parties pre-agree to do such and such,
[58:38.800 --> 58:40.800]  they stipulate such and such, fine.
[58:40.800 --> 58:44.640]  But if you'll hang on, Charles, we'll pick you up on the other side, all right?
[58:44.640 --> 58:50.520]  All right, folks, this is Rule of Law Radio, 512-6462.
[58:50.520 --> 58:55.680]  In 1984, we've only got a couple of folks on the board, so please give us a call.
[58:55.680 --> 59:00.240]  We'll be right back after the break.
[59:00.240 --> 59:05.680]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated
[59:05.680 --> 59:08.480]  because they struggle to understand it.
[59:08.480 --> 59:13.880]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise
[59:13.880 --> 59:17.120]  the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:17.120 --> 59:18.880]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:18.880 --> 59:24.800]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more
[59:24.800 --> 59:28.520]  than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:28.520 --> 59:33.520]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance
[59:33.520 --> 59:38.240]  into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:38.240 --> 59:43.400]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:43.400 --> 59:53.800]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:53.800 --> 59:57.880]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:57.880 --> 59:59.880]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:59.880 --> 01:00:04.640]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Network.
[01:00:04.640 --> 01:00:10.240]  A UN investigators report when say accused Libyan government forces of war crimes, but
[01:00:10.240 --> 01:00:13.840]  it said there is evidence of opposition abuses as well.
[01:00:13.840 --> 01:00:18.840]  The report said rebel forces were guilty of abuses that would constitute war crimes.
[01:00:18.840 --> 01:00:23.720]  It emerged recently that the U.S. has used cluster bombs in the conflict, which are banned
[01:00:23.720 --> 01:00:25.600]  under international law.
[01:00:25.600 --> 01:00:31.880]  25 Pakistani troops died Tuesday in clashes with militants who crossed the Afghan border,
[01:00:31.880 --> 01:00:37.120]  200 insurgents wearing military uniform and bushed a security checkpoint outside Pakistan's
[01:00:37.120 --> 01:00:38.360]  tribal areas.
[01:00:38.360 --> 01:00:43.640]  13 Pakistani security troops were killed in a similar cross-border raid by the Taliban
[01:00:43.640 --> 01:00:45.360]  two months ago.
[01:00:45.360 --> 01:00:49.920]  15 people were killed in the central town of Rostin Thursday.
[01:00:49.920 --> 01:00:55.680]  Assyrian forces continued a five-day assault on flashpoint cities across the country, attempting
[01:00:55.680 --> 01:00:57.200]  to squash dissent.
[01:00:57.200 --> 01:01:03.120]  The shelling and heavy machine gunfire in Rostin lifted the death toll to 69 since Sunday.
[01:01:03.120 --> 01:01:08.520]  Despite rising civilian casualties from weeks of unrest, people across Syria continued to
[01:01:08.520 --> 01:01:12.240]  protest the autocracy of President Bashar al-Assad.
[01:01:12.240 --> 01:01:19.080]  Ahead of UN climate talks, Bolivia's ambassador to the UN warned the global carbon market,
[01:01:19.080 --> 01:01:26.280]  valued at $124 billion in 2010, may create a new financial bubble and said it is a poor
[01:01:26.280 --> 01:01:28.760]  way to address the climate crisis.
[01:01:28.760 --> 01:01:34.120]  Pablo Salon spearheaded a failed effort at last year's UN climate summit in Mexico to
[01:01:34.120 --> 01:01:39.160]  exclude carbon market mechanisms from a program designed to protect forests.
[01:01:39.160 --> 01:01:44.880]  Salon said this week carbon credits can be bought for around $15 a metric ton and then
[01:01:44.880 --> 01:01:49.000]  resold for $100 a metric ton or more in some cases.
[01:01:49.000 --> 01:01:54.320]  Quote, in reality it is the same ton of CO2, so there are many problems related to the
[01:01:54.320 --> 01:01:57.760]  carbon market that are not really under control at all.
[01:01:57.760 --> 01:02:01.880]  The ambassador added that developed countries have failed to live up to their promises on
[01:02:01.880 --> 01:02:06.320]  emission limits and carbon trading has not spurred further action.
[01:02:06.320 --> 01:02:11.360]  Climate negotiators gather for yet another round of UN talks in Bonn, Germany on June
[01:02:11.360 --> 01:02:12.360]  6.
[01:02:12.360 --> 01:02:18.400]  As sit-ins and protests continue in Spain, music fans and political activists have been
[01:02:18.400 --> 01:02:24.240]  remembering singer-songwriter Gil Scott-Haron, who died last Friday, activists taking part
[01:02:24.240 --> 01:02:29.760]  in Spain's ongoing demonstrations that began in the lead-up to May's local elections, have
[01:02:29.760 --> 01:02:35.160]  seen inevitable links between Scott-Haron's anthem, the revolution will not be televised,
[01:02:35.160 --> 01:02:36.160]  and their movement.
[01:02:36.160 --> 01:02:41.560]  Heron's lyrics, which often express the urgent need to struggle for justice, echo the sentiments
[01:02:41.560 --> 01:02:47.000]  of Spain's youth who have taken to the streets against high unemployment and their two-party
[01:02:47.000 --> 01:02:48.000]  political system.
[01:02:48.000 --> 01:02:53.080]  However, a day after Scott-Haron's death, when Catalonia and police brutally charged
[01:02:53.080 --> 01:02:58.760]  into a crowd of unarmed demonstrators in Barcelona, journalist Guy Hedgeko observed that Stanley
[01:02:58.760 --> 01:03:03.880]  Kubrick's ultra-violent film, A Clockwork Orange, seemed a more fitting 70s cultural
[01:03:03.880 --> 01:03:24.120]  touch-tone to think of.
[01:04:03.880 --> 01:04:29.400]  Alright folks, we are back, this is Rule of Law Radio, it is June 2, 2011, I figured
[01:04:29.400 --> 01:04:33.000]  I'd say that again instead of just at the first, but when the archives are running,
[01:04:33.000 --> 01:04:37.680]  you'll know that this is not live, it's Memorex.
[01:04:37.680 --> 01:04:41.640]  We are talking to Charles in Oklahoma, Troy, we see you on the line, so if you'll hang
[01:04:41.640 --> 01:04:44.640]  in there we'll get to you here in just a minute when we finish up with Charles.
[01:04:44.640 --> 01:04:51.160]  After that folks, the phone lines will be open, so please get in line, 512-646-1984 is
[01:04:51.160 --> 01:04:52.160]  the call-in number.
[01:04:52.160 --> 01:04:57.200]  Alright Charles, let's finish you up here, now you understand the difference now between
[01:04:57.200 --> 01:05:00.160]  the decree and the order?
[01:05:00.160 --> 01:05:04.400]  Not exactly, I'm looking at the one I've gotten, part of me that has more of a both
[01:05:04.400 --> 01:05:09.440]  pay attorney fee, the only piece of paper I actually have on the divorce is the decree
[01:05:09.440 --> 01:05:15.120]  of dissolution of marriage, and that's what I've been staying for the judge.
[01:05:15.120 --> 01:05:22.720]  Right, and that's everything that the judge says will be done as part of the divorce and
[01:05:22.720 --> 01:05:28.280]  then he'll sign an order to that effect, okay?
[01:05:28.280 --> 01:05:36.080]  So whatever's been agreed to in the decree, as long as he does not alter it on the order,
[01:05:36.080 --> 01:05:38.880]  the order will say stands.
[01:05:38.880 --> 01:05:45.320]  Okay, and how would I tell about this order that may have altered it?
[01:05:45.320 --> 01:05:50.280]  You go back to the clerk of the court and ask them was there a different order issued
[01:05:50.280 --> 01:05:56.480]  after the fact or in some other way attest to this case because what he decreed in court
[01:05:56.480 --> 01:05:59.560]  and what's written, they don't jive.
[01:05:59.560 --> 01:06:04.280]  Yeah, they're not dead, I mean that's what's kind of got me curious, you know we both
[01:06:04.280 --> 01:06:08.600]  agreed that we'd pay our attorney fees, but now I'm being told I'd pay our attorney fees
[01:06:08.600 --> 01:06:10.280]  or I'll be held in contempt to court.
[01:06:10.280 --> 01:06:16.120]  Well if the signed order says different then that's what I would go by.
[01:06:16.120 --> 01:06:20.280]  Okay, so I need to see if I can find the signed order.
[01:06:20.280 --> 01:06:26.680]  It makes sense to me, I'm kind of curious if that and I do stress and everything else
[01:06:26.680 --> 01:06:29.680]  and then I'm comfortable with that.
[01:06:29.680 --> 01:06:34.880]  Alright, and then you don't mind if I could ask one more quick question, just kind of
[01:06:34.880 --> 01:06:35.880]  curiosity.
[01:06:35.880 --> 01:06:37.880]  No, I don't mind at all.
[01:06:37.880 --> 01:06:46.040]  I'm a disabled bit, I've got PDI, which is basically a mild form of memory law, but
[01:06:46.040 --> 01:06:51.200]  now I can prove like, you know, my ex-wife she tried to hold me or tried to have a BPL
[01:06:51.200 --> 01:06:53.680]  split against me because of it and they were always dismissed.
[01:06:53.680 --> 01:06:57.520]  In fact, there's so many that the judge eventually told us she doesn't anymore that she'd be
[01:06:57.520 --> 01:07:02.000]  held in contempt to court and could cry for the next amount of days, I'm not too sure
[01:07:02.000 --> 01:07:03.000]  how many.
[01:07:03.000 --> 01:07:10.600]  But now, along with my PDI though, they gave me, I guess joint custody, they're not shared,
[01:07:10.600 --> 01:07:14.800]  but I came right exactly where it was based, I got a standard for all the visitations,
[01:07:14.800 --> 01:07:21.800]  I got pulled, I couldn't have 50-50 because of my TVIs that allowed, I mean, kind of serious.
[01:07:21.800 --> 01:07:26.360]  You know, they're reasoning for what I wouldn't be able to get my kids to school.
[01:07:26.360 --> 01:07:27.360]  Okay.
[01:07:27.360 --> 01:07:31.960]  So, who is supplying this benefit you're talking about?
[01:07:31.960 --> 01:07:32.960]  Is it the state?
[01:07:32.960 --> 01:07:33.960]  Is it the federal government?
[01:07:33.960 --> 01:07:40.040]  It looks like it's just the district court of Cleveland County, Oklahoma itself.
[01:07:40.040 --> 01:07:42.920]  Well, they're not the ones that are funding it.
[01:07:42.920 --> 01:07:46.920]  They're just making a ruling based on something regarding it.
[01:07:46.920 --> 01:07:50.560]  Where are the funds you're talking about for the disability coming from?
[01:07:50.560 --> 01:07:53.240]  Oh, that's from the VA, federal government.
[01:07:53.240 --> 01:07:54.800]  Okay, from the VA?
[01:07:54.800 --> 01:07:55.800]  Yeah.
[01:07:55.800 --> 01:07:57.040]  All right.
[01:07:57.040 --> 01:07:59.680]  And then the court made a ruling that said what?
[01:07:59.680 --> 01:08:04.000]  Well, basically, she stated in front of me and because I, you know, asked again, well,
[01:08:04.000 --> 01:08:05.120]  what about 50-50?
[01:08:05.120 --> 01:08:06.120]  She being the judge?
[01:08:06.120 --> 01:08:07.120]  Yes, she being the judge.
[01:08:07.120 --> 01:08:12.520]  Say that, well, I ask the judge what she wants me to do is because of my TVIs, she switched
[01:08:12.520 --> 01:08:16.120]  my normal days against normal fathers, get their kids on like, you know, Friday, Saturday,
[01:08:16.120 --> 01:08:20.120]  Sunday while I get my kids on Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, and she wants to see that
[01:08:20.120 --> 01:08:23.840]  I can get my kids to and from school on time and everything else.
[01:08:23.840 --> 01:08:27.920]  You know, I'm going to make a lot of money, so it's going to cost me more money to get
[01:08:27.920 --> 01:08:28.920]  an attorney.
[01:08:28.920 --> 01:08:32.480]  I've already been told, you know, that she could still not care, even though I've gotten
[01:08:32.480 --> 01:08:36.000]  my kids to school on time and pick them up from school on time every day.
[01:08:36.000 --> 01:08:37.800]  You know what I'm saying?
[01:08:37.800 --> 01:08:42.360]  So, you know, I mean, is that, I don't know, I still don't know.
[01:08:42.360 --> 01:08:45.600]  I still don't feel like I can use the disability against you like that.
[01:08:45.600 --> 01:08:46.600]  You know?
[01:08:46.600 --> 01:08:49.960]  Well, they can, but what is your proof that that's what she's doing?
[01:08:49.960 --> 01:08:51.800]  I don't have anything in writing.
[01:08:51.800 --> 01:08:52.800]  That's just what she said.
[01:08:52.800 --> 01:08:55.800]  She said to bring it back to court, so I guess the only proof would be me.
[01:08:55.800 --> 01:08:58.000]  Well, was there a court reporter in the room?
[01:08:58.000 --> 01:08:59.000]  I don't know.
[01:08:59.000 --> 01:09:00.000]  It was just a room.
[01:09:00.000 --> 01:09:03.680]  It wasn't like a formal, we didn't stand up in front of a, you know, in a big court room
[01:09:03.680 --> 01:09:06.720]  we just went to judge's chambers.
[01:09:06.720 --> 01:09:08.960]  And you didn't go in with a recorder in your pocket?
[01:09:08.960 --> 01:09:09.960]  Shame on you.
[01:09:09.960 --> 01:09:10.960]  No, I didn't.
[01:09:10.960 --> 01:09:20.040]  Well, technically, no, they cannot use the disability against you that way as a qualification
[01:09:20.040 --> 01:09:29.040]  to do something else unless that something else is a matter of life for somebody else.
[01:09:29.040 --> 01:09:30.040]  Yeah.
[01:09:30.040 --> 01:09:34.920]  For instance, you know, a guy with no arms and no legs most assuredly should not be applying
[01:09:34.920 --> 01:09:37.200]  for jobs as a lifeguard.
[01:09:37.200 --> 01:09:38.440]  Right.
[01:09:38.440 --> 01:09:43.720]  So depending upon what your disability is and the circumstances, there may be a reason
[01:09:43.720 --> 01:09:46.520]  for it, not saying yours qualifies for that.
[01:09:46.520 --> 01:09:47.520]  Yeah.
[01:09:47.520 --> 01:09:51.800]  But there are some simple logical rules that somebody needs to take into consideration
[01:09:51.800 --> 01:09:52.800]  here.
[01:09:52.800 --> 01:09:53.800]  Yeah.
[01:09:53.800 --> 01:09:56.760]  The reason she took that for the kids' education is that I wouldn't be able to get on to school
[01:09:56.760 --> 01:09:59.480]  on time, and that's what my ex-wife was saying.
[01:09:59.480 --> 01:10:04.160]  And I mean, I can actually, you know, my plan is on the next time we go to court is I'm
[01:10:04.160 --> 01:10:07.480]  going to put their attendance record, which I have, and show them every day that I have
[01:10:07.480 --> 01:10:10.760]  them there on school on time, and then several days when she had to leave her missed school
[01:10:10.760 --> 01:10:16.080]  entirely or delay, you know, starting, and, you know, you know, show their grades, differences,
[01:10:16.080 --> 01:10:19.360]  you know, from when they turn in, you know, homework on my days where they're making
[01:10:19.360 --> 01:10:21.080]  good grades and she doesn't do it.
[01:10:21.080 --> 01:10:26.040]  Well, when it comes to the alleged welfare of children, they have a lot of leeway in
[01:10:26.040 --> 01:10:27.880]  what they can and cannot do.
[01:10:27.880 --> 01:10:28.880]  Okay.
[01:10:28.880 --> 01:10:31.280]  Right or wrong, they have it.
[01:10:31.280 --> 01:10:32.280]  Okay.
[01:10:32.280 --> 01:10:37.600]  So, if she makes the argument that she is looking after the children's best interest,
[01:10:37.600 --> 01:10:40.960]  you better believe yours will not come first.
[01:10:40.960 --> 01:10:41.960]  Right.
[01:10:41.960 --> 01:10:46.800]  So, I mean, I don't think it's as if, you know, as a father, I mean, I'm a lot of father
[01:10:46.800 --> 01:10:50.400]  at work, but then, you know, I wanted to, I couldn't continue myself in that marriage,
[01:10:50.400 --> 01:10:51.400]  but...
[01:10:51.400 --> 01:10:52.400]  No, no, no, no.
[01:10:52.400 --> 01:10:54.280]  All that's not relevant to what we're talking about, though.
[01:10:54.280 --> 01:10:55.280]  Yeah.
[01:10:55.280 --> 01:10:59.920]  What we're talking about here is simply whether or not the court wishes to determine you are
[01:10:59.920 --> 01:11:04.920]  capable of seeing to the welfare of the children whatever reason they want to make up.
[01:11:04.920 --> 01:11:05.920]  Yeah.
[01:11:05.920 --> 01:11:06.920]  Okay.
[01:11:06.920 --> 01:11:11.280]  So, that could be why she said, you know, basically, you know, she gave me a timeline for me to
[01:11:11.280 --> 01:11:12.280]  come back, you know.
[01:11:12.280 --> 01:11:15.920]  I think she said, you know, she gave me an excursion or whatever and I could argue...
[01:11:15.920 --> 01:11:23.520]  So, given that, yeah, given that, your question about can they do that in that context?
[01:11:23.520 --> 01:11:24.520]  Absolutely.
[01:11:24.520 --> 01:11:25.520]  Okay.
[01:11:25.520 --> 01:11:26.520]  Is it right or moral?
[01:11:26.520 --> 01:11:27.520]  Can't answer that.
[01:11:27.520 --> 01:11:28.520]  Don't know all the circumstances.
[01:11:28.520 --> 01:11:29.520]  Yeah.
[01:11:29.520 --> 01:11:30.520]  Okay.
[01:11:30.520 --> 01:11:31.520]  But maybe, maybe not.
[01:11:31.520 --> 01:11:32.520]  Okay.
[01:11:32.520 --> 01:11:35.920]  So, what I'm going to have to do is go down to the courthouse, though, and ask if there's
[01:11:35.920 --> 01:11:38.520]  any amendments or anything made to this, create a dissolution.
[01:11:38.520 --> 01:11:39.520]  Yeah.
[01:11:39.520 --> 01:11:43.000]  You need to see if there's any additional order or anything of that nature that was not given
[01:11:43.000 --> 01:11:45.000]  out to you or your attorney.
[01:11:45.000 --> 01:11:46.000]  Okay.
[01:11:46.000 --> 01:11:48.520]  So, and that makes a little bit sense to me.
[01:11:48.520 --> 01:11:52.520]  I mean, it still doesn't make sense how it could be in this, and signed by the judge
[01:11:52.520 --> 01:11:53.520]  versus, you know.
[01:11:53.520 --> 01:11:54.520]  No.
[01:11:54.520 --> 01:11:58.520]  Well, unless he amended the order, then that should be what it is.
[01:11:58.520 --> 01:11:59.520]  Okay.
[01:11:59.520 --> 01:12:02.520]  And here's a curiosity question before I let you go.
[01:12:02.520 --> 01:12:05.520]  Now, like I stated at the beginning, this doesn't, you know, a divorce to create doesn't
[01:12:05.520 --> 01:12:08.520]  have my signature or my attorney's signature on it.
[01:12:08.520 --> 01:12:11.520]  And does that make a difference to her?
[01:12:11.520 --> 01:12:17.520]  Well, the court will assume it's, it's a done deal after a certain number of days anyway,
[01:12:17.520 --> 01:12:21.520]  whether you signed it or not, but why haven't you signed it?
[01:12:21.520 --> 01:12:22.520]  Well, I didn't know.
[01:12:22.520 --> 01:12:28.520]  Now, originally, because like I said, when we went into court, a lot of things at my ex-wife,
[01:12:28.520 --> 01:12:31.520]  I thrown in divorce papers, weren't agreed on between the two of us, and we agreed on
[01:12:31.520 --> 01:12:32.520]  there in court.
[01:12:32.520 --> 01:12:34.520]  And they had to be added into the divorce papers.
[01:12:34.520 --> 01:12:35.520]  And then-
[01:12:35.520 --> 01:12:39.520]  Is what is in your hand what you agreed to?
[01:12:39.520 --> 01:12:40.520]  90% of it.
[01:12:40.520 --> 01:12:41.520]  Not everything in it.
[01:12:41.520 --> 01:12:43.520]  But I mean, nothing in here.
[01:12:43.520 --> 01:12:44.520]  Okay.
[01:12:44.520 --> 01:12:51.520]  Well, the problem is, is did the judge rule on that other 10% whether you like it or not?
[01:12:51.520 --> 01:12:52.520]  I want to say yes.
[01:12:52.520 --> 01:12:53.520]  You know, she's in the court.
[01:12:53.520 --> 01:12:54.520]  She said, yeah.
[01:12:54.520 --> 01:12:59.520]  You know, one of the things was she's got a brother that is not good with children.
[01:12:59.520 --> 01:13:03.520]  I was just saying that he has a history where he could look him up.
[01:13:03.520 --> 01:13:04.520]  Okay.
[01:13:04.520 --> 01:13:05.520]  But I don't need the details.
[01:13:05.520 --> 01:13:07.520]  I just need an answer to that question.
[01:13:07.520 --> 01:13:14.520]  If the judge ruled against you on the other 10% that you don't like, then you've got two
[01:13:14.520 --> 01:13:15.520]  options.
[01:13:15.520 --> 01:13:20.520]  Continue to fight whatever it is you're fighting as far as the divorce goes.
[01:13:20.520 --> 01:13:23.520]  Or accept it and be done with it and sign it.
[01:13:23.520 --> 01:13:24.520]  I'm accepting the divorce.
[01:13:24.520 --> 01:13:27.520]  I mean, I'm pretty much, you know, everything, you know, I'm content with it.
[01:13:27.520 --> 01:13:30.520]  The only thing I don't like is that I'm going to be held in contempt of court.
[01:13:30.520 --> 01:13:31.520]  And it says in here that we're-
[01:13:31.520 --> 01:13:33.520]  Well, is that in the paperwork?
[01:13:33.520 --> 01:13:35.520]  That's not in this paperwork.
[01:13:35.520 --> 01:13:36.520]  In this paperwork, I got a pardon.
[01:13:36.520 --> 01:13:40.520]  It says we have to say, you know, each other, we're going to pay our pardon.
[01:13:40.520 --> 01:13:41.520]  Okay.
[01:13:41.520 --> 01:13:45.520]  If that is what you've got and that is what is signed unless you find something different
[01:13:45.520 --> 01:13:49.520]  in the court record, when you go talk to the clerk, that's what stands.
[01:13:49.520 --> 01:13:51.520]  And I'm going to have to go down and do that.
[01:13:51.520 --> 01:13:52.520]  It doesn't bother me to do it.
[01:13:52.520 --> 01:13:56.520]  So, you know, I'll go down and get that squared away.
[01:13:56.520 --> 01:13:59.520]  And then other than that, then there's no way I've got figured, you know, the judge
[01:13:59.520 --> 01:14:01.520]  is just stamping away and signing away for it.
[01:14:01.520 --> 01:14:03.520]  At that day, you know, the attorney like-
[01:14:03.520 --> 01:14:07.520]  Well, like I said, they may have been on autopilot and just said something they
[01:14:07.520 --> 01:14:09.520]  normally say in most of the cases.
[01:14:09.520 --> 01:14:11.520]  Yeah.
[01:14:11.520 --> 01:14:13.520]  So, all right.
[01:14:13.520 --> 01:14:16.520]  And I don't think there's any other questions there for you.
[01:14:16.520 --> 01:14:18.520]  Okay, Charles.
[01:14:18.520 --> 01:14:19.520]  It should be good to hear.
[01:14:19.520 --> 01:14:20.520]  Thanks for calling in, then.
[01:14:20.520 --> 01:14:21.520]  All right.
[01:14:21.520 --> 01:14:22.520]  Thank you.
[01:14:22.520 --> 01:14:23.520]  And y'all have a good night.
[01:14:23.520 --> 01:14:24.520]  You too.
[01:14:24.520 --> 01:14:25.520]  All right.
[01:14:25.520 --> 01:14:26.520]  All right.
[01:14:26.520 --> 01:14:28.520]  We have Troy in Minnesota.
[01:14:28.520 --> 01:14:30.520]  Troy, you got about two minutes.
[01:14:30.520 --> 01:14:32.520]  What can we do for you?
[01:14:32.520 --> 01:14:38.520]  Yeah, I called in probably a month ago in regards to a creditor case I'm involved with
[01:14:38.520 --> 01:14:41.520]  in regards to how these creditors are named.
[01:14:41.520 --> 01:14:46.520]  They've got their national association and they got their national association, USA.
[01:14:46.520 --> 01:14:52.520]  And I was sued on with the plaintiff in the heading under N.A.
[01:14:52.520 --> 01:14:58.520]  and I challenged and denied everything and went into discovery and seven months into
[01:14:58.520 --> 01:15:04.520]  it, I challenged that they weren't a party of interest.
[01:15:04.520 --> 01:15:15.520]  And then they went to, as I pulled my motion to compel, they filed a motion to amend their
[01:15:15.520 --> 01:15:22.520]  client and then they changed the, they said that they misnamed their plaintiff and they
[01:15:22.520 --> 01:15:26.520]  want to change their, who the plaintiff is.
[01:15:26.520 --> 01:15:35.520]  And I challenged, I guess I, what do you want to say, challenged their motion stating that
[01:15:35.520 --> 01:15:37.520]  they've had seven months to know who their client is.
[01:15:37.520 --> 01:15:42.520]  I've claimed all along, you know, denied everything all along.
[01:15:42.520 --> 01:15:47.520]  And now that I challenge, you know, I want to know who the party of interest is now that
[01:15:47.520 --> 01:15:51.520]  they, and they suddenly find out who their client is.
[01:15:51.520 --> 01:15:54.520]  Move for sanctions against the opposing council.
[01:15:54.520 --> 01:16:01.520]  Move to dismiss for, for just being a harassing lawsuit to run at cost.
[01:16:01.520 --> 01:16:02.520]  Okay.
[01:16:02.520 --> 01:16:04.520]  That'd be one thing I would do.
[01:16:04.520 --> 01:16:05.520]  Okay.
[01:16:05.520 --> 01:16:11.520]  I called you guys here a while before that time and Randy said to file a counter claim.
[01:16:11.520 --> 01:16:19.520]  And the thing is, I filed it the day of that motion, the motion, and the judge came out
[01:16:19.520 --> 01:16:23.520]  and she was pretty much, I shouldn't say livid, but she was, she was like, I don't even know
[01:16:23.520 --> 01:16:26.520]  what this is.
[01:16:26.520 --> 01:16:27.520]  You know, what have you.
[01:16:27.520 --> 01:16:28.520]  Yeah.
[01:16:28.520 --> 01:16:29.520]  And apparently.
[01:16:29.520 --> 01:16:30.520]  Talking to you or the other side.
[01:16:30.520 --> 01:16:31.520]  To myself.
[01:16:31.520 --> 01:16:34.520]  I'll just hang on here.
[01:16:34.520 --> 01:16:35.520]  Okay.
[01:16:35.520 --> 01:16:36.520]  All right, folks.
[01:16:36.520 --> 01:16:38.520]  This is rule of law radio.
[01:16:38.520 --> 01:16:40.520]  Troy is our last caller at the moment.
[01:16:40.520 --> 01:16:44.520]  So five, one, two, six, four, six, 1984 is a call in number.
[01:16:44.520 --> 01:16:45.520]  Give us a call.
[01:16:45.520 --> 01:16:50.520]  If you have any other issues tonight, tonight to get them in tomorrow night, we will be
[01:16:50.520 --> 01:16:51.520]  running an archive.
[01:16:51.520 --> 01:16:55.520]  So if you've got something you need dealt with tonight tonight, folks, we'll be right back
[01:16:55.520 --> 01:16:59.520]  on the other side of the break.
[01:16:59.520 --> 01:17:04.520]  Capital coin and bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals and coin supplies
[01:17:04.520 --> 01:17:06.520]  in the Austin metro area.
[01:17:06.520 --> 01:17:08.520]  We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:08.520 --> 01:17:12.520]  We're a family owned and operated business that offers competitive prices on your coin
[01:17:12.520 --> 01:17:14.520]  and metals purchases.
[01:17:14.520 --> 01:17:18.520]  Because of you, Austin, business has been so good that we've had to move to a new and
[01:17:18.520 --> 01:17:19.520]  bigger location.
[01:17:19.520 --> 01:17:26.520]  We're now located at 7304 Burnett Road, sweet a 1.2 miles north on Burnett from our previous
[01:17:26.520 --> 01:17:27.520]  location.
[01:17:27.520 --> 01:17:31.520]  We're on the west side of Burnett Road in Stanley insurance building on the ground floor
[01:17:31.520 --> 01:17:34.520]  next to the Ishibon sushi and the genie car wash.
[01:17:34.520 --> 01:17:38.520]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 5.
[01:17:38.520 --> 01:17:44.520]  You welcome to stop in during regular business hours or call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:44.520 --> 01:17:49.520]  Ask for Chad or Becky and say that you heard about us on rule of law radio or Texas Liberty
[01:17:49.520 --> 01:17:50.520]  Radio.
[01:17:50.520 --> 01:17:55.520]  That's capital coin and bullion at our new location at 7304 Burnett Road, sweet a or
[01:17:55.520 --> 01:17:59.520]  call 512-646-6440.
[01:17:59.520 --> 01:18:03.520]  My name is Randall Kelton and I co-host on rule of law radio.
[01:18:03.520 --> 01:18:08.520]  We specialize in showing people how to strike back against corrupt public officials.
[01:18:08.520 --> 01:18:13.520]  With the mortgage crisis worsening, we set our sights on finding a remedy for people
[01:18:13.520 --> 01:18:15.520]  who have been cheated by their lenders.
[01:18:15.520 --> 01:18:19.520]  If you have a mortgage or have paid yours off, you have probably been cheated out of
[01:18:19.520 --> 01:18:20.520]  thousands.
[01:18:20.520 --> 01:18:22.520]  But there is a remedy.
[01:18:22.520 --> 01:18:31.520]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call me at 512-430-4140 and find out how to use the
[01:18:31.520 --> 01:18:36.520]  consumer protection laws to recover what the lenders have stolen through fraud and
[01:18:36.520 --> 01:18:37.520]  deception.
[01:18:37.520 --> 01:18:42.520]  We will prepare for you a qualified written request that will expose the fraud and put
[01:18:42.520 --> 01:18:43.520]  the lenders on the dime.
[01:18:43.520 --> 01:18:47.520]  Lender fraud is bankrupting this country and it's time to fight back.
[01:18:47.520 --> 01:18:57.520]  Go to remediesinrealestate.com or call 512-430-4140 and get the information you need to stop
[01:18:57.520 --> 01:19:23.520]  the money changers in their tracks.
[01:19:23.520 --> 01:19:32.520]  All right folks, we are back.
[01:19:32.520 --> 01:19:34.520]  This is rule of law radio.
[01:19:34.520 --> 01:19:38.520]  We are right now talking to Troy in Minnesota.
[01:19:38.520 --> 01:19:43.520]  All right, Troy, you were saying that you had an issue with a debt collector lawsuit you've
[01:19:43.520 --> 01:19:44.520]  got going.
[01:19:44.520 --> 01:19:49.520]  And you got a recommendation from Randy to file a countersuit.
[01:19:49.520 --> 01:19:54.520]  What specific issue was the countersuit made to address?
[01:19:54.520 --> 01:19:59.520]  Well, he told me to go for malicious prosecution and then I also threw in their fraud and then
[01:19:59.520 --> 01:20:04.520]  I put in their negligence for bringing, you know, this lawsuit.
[01:20:04.520 --> 01:20:11.520]  And the thing I argued right after I got their emotion to amend, I filed my discovery.
[01:20:11.520 --> 01:20:18.520]  I filed my discovery with them and they sent everything back signed on behalf of the plaintiffs
[01:20:18.520 --> 01:20:25.520]  that they've had listed from, what do you want to say, representative of their company
[01:20:25.520 --> 01:20:34.520]  and I've got four signatures signed on behalf of Capital One Bank, USA, NA.
[01:20:34.520 --> 01:20:37.520]  And then I was pushing for a...
[01:20:37.520 --> 01:20:39.520]  Is this for a mortgage?
[01:20:39.520 --> 01:20:41.520]  No, no.
[01:20:41.520 --> 01:20:42.520]  Okay.
[01:20:42.520 --> 01:20:47.520]  This is a consumer debt deal, whatever.
[01:20:47.520 --> 01:20:54.520]  And the thing is, I had four, you know, discovery sponsors back from the plaintiff.
[01:20:54.520 --> 01:20:58.520]  They were signed on behalf of NA, USA.
[01:20:58.520 --> 01:21:05.520]  And then when I pushed for this motion to compel, they filed their motion to amend and
[01:21:05.520 --> 01:21:15.520]  then after, on the same day I got their, you know, their notice of motion, I get a sworn
[01:21:15.520 --> 01:21:25.520]  behalf of David that was signed on the same date by NA, the plaintiff that they wanted
[01:21:25.520 --> 01:21:27.520]  to amend it to.
[01:21:27.520 --> 01:21:34.520]  And all these signatures are notarized and signed on the same day, four of them on behalf
[01:21:34.520 --> 01:21:37.520]  of Capital One Bank, USA, NA.
[01:21:37.520 --> 01:21:44.520]  And then that last one for their amended one that they kind of shoveled in under the table
[01:21:44.520 --> 01:21:51.520]  at the last minute was signed on behalf of NA by the same guy representing two different,
[01:21:51.520 --> 01:21:56.520]  two different entities, you know, sworn on the same day.
[01:21:56.520 --> 01:22:00.520]  And that's where I went after, you know, kind of pushed for the fraud and the counterclaim.
[01:22:00.520 --> 01:22:06.520]  And in Minnesota, I think you have to, from what the judge was saying, you must have to
[01:22:06.520 --> 01:22:10.520]  file a motion to leave of court.
[01:22:10.520 --> 01:22:17.520]  But then I think it's rules and civil procedure, I think 9.05, I can't quote me on that, but
[01:22:17.520 --> 01:22:26.520]  they have a thing in there for special pleadings and everments, pleading fraud, you know, but
[01:22:26.520 --> 01:22:28.520]  it doesn't go into detail into it.
[01:22:28.520 --> 01:22:34.520]  And I don't know if Texas has anything like that or not.
[01:22:34.520 --> 01:22:38.520]  Well, maybe I've just thrown you for a loop.
[01:22:38.520 --> 01:22:40.520]  Just a little bit.
[01:22:40.520 --> 01:22:46.520]  Well, the issue here is when they amended this, it sounds to me like you've got a robo-signer
[01:22:46.520 --> 01:22:48.520]  on these affidavits.
[01:22:48.520 --> 01:22:53.520]  You need something declaring the identity of the person that's notarizing this, where their
[01:22:53.520 --> 01:22:58.520]  actual physical location is, and so on and so forth.
[01:22:58.520 --> 01:23:04.520]  It's especially questionable since you're saying they're representing multiple entities.
[01:23:04.520 --> 01:23:10.520]  Now, the deal is, agency cannot be proven from the mouth of the agent.
[01:23:10.520 --> 01:23:15.520]  It can only be proven from the mouth of the principal.
[01:23:15.520 --> 01:23:22.520]  So the question is, is the person that's making these affidavits someone that's actually in
[01:23:22.520 --> 01:23:28.520]  the direct employee of the particular agency, or are they hired specifically for the purpose
[01:23:28.520 --> 01:23:30.520]  of signing documents?
[01:23:30.520 --> 01:23:31.520]  Okay.
[01:23:31.520 --> 01:23:36.520]  And I take it that's just kind of going through my first discovery process.
[01:23:36.520 --> 01:23:40.520]  That's about the only means you're going to get that is via subpoena.
[01:23:40.520 --> 01:23:42.520]  Correct.
[01:23:42.520 --> 01:23:43.520]  Okay.
[01:23:43.520 --> 01:23:44.520]  All right.
[01:23:44.520 --> 01:23:49.520]  But yeah, the judge came out, she pretty much just threw the, and I know Randy said this,
[01:23:49.520 --> 01:23:53.520]  they're going to rule against you from day one.
[01:23:53.520 --> 01:23:55.520]  They're not going to give you anything.
[01:23:55.520 --> 01:24:00.520]  But yeah, she granted it to them, and I'm just kind of curious on that.
[01:24:00.520 --> 01:24:05.520]  Does the guy file those counterclaims again when he answers this claim?
[01:24:05.520 --> 01:24:10.520]  Or I know you guys are not lawyers and not giving legal advice.
[01:24:10.520 --> 01:24:12.520]  What do you mean does he file the counterclaim?
[01:24:12.520 --> 01:24:15.520]  Do I file my counterclaims again?
[01:24:15.520 --> 01:24:20.520]  Like I said, I mean, if this goes, I mean, I kind of set myself up for an appeal with
[01:24:20.520 --> 01:24:24.520]  my arguments against their motion to a man.
[01:24:24.520 --> 01:24:33.520]  I believe I've argued it well enough where if they do say they win, I can go back and
[01:24:33.520 --> 01:24:40.520]  say that the judge shouldn't have, you know, amended, let them amend that pleading.
[01:24:40.520 --> 01:24:42.520]  Just with my arguments.
[01:24:42.520 --> 01:24:46.520]  As long as you've got statute and case law to base that on, that's fine.
[01:24:46.520 --> 01:24:47.520]  I did.
[01:24:47.520 --> 01:24:53.520]  If you've got case law that says after a certain point in time, if they're making this argument
[01:24:53.520 --> 01:24:58.520]  for this plaintiff, and then suddenly all these arguments don't apply because it's a completely
[01:24:58.520 --> 01:25:06.520]  different plaintiff, party in interest, so to speak, then the judge should be going,
[01:25:06.520 --> 01:25:11.520]  what, you guys don't know enough about your own case to know what you're filing in this court?
[01:25:11.520 --> 01:25:16.520]  Well, if they're trying to amend the pleadings, you need to object to that at the time that
[01:25:16.520 --> 01:25:18.520]  they try to amend the pleadings.
[01:25:18.520 --> 01:25:19.520]  I did.
[01:25:19.520 --> 01:25:24.520]  But the judge came out, and like I said, I had my stuff in.
[01:25:24.520 --> 01:25:29.520]  I filed my response, and then they filed a reply, and then I filed my response within
[01:25:29.520 --> 01:25:34.520]  three days, and the judge pretty much walked out of her chambers and granted it to him
[01:25:34.520 --> 01:25:36.520]  within two seconds.
[01:25:36.520 --> 01:25:43.520]  You know, she had her mind set onto it, and you know, I was going to go through my stuff.
[01:25:43.520 --> 01:25:48.520]  Well, at least you have it on the record that you objected to them amending the pleadings.
[01:25:48.520 --> 01:25:52.520]  I mean, really, the way we have to look at things is that when it comes to the trial
[01:25:52.520 --> 01:25:55.520]  court level, don't ever expect to win.
[01:25:55.520 --> 01:25:58.520]  That's not the purpose of that stage of the game.
[01:25:58.520 --> 01:26:00.520]  It's just to lay the record for the appeal.
[01:26:00.520 --> 01:26:01.520]  Okay.
[01:26:01.520 --> 01:26:07.520]  But as far as filing the counterclaim again, that doesn't make any sense to me.
[01:26:07.520 --> 01:26:09.520]  If you file the counterclaim, you file the counterclaim.
[01:26:09.520 --> 01:26:14.520]  You don't file it again unless you're trying to amend, unless you're trying to amend your
[01:26:14.520 --> 01:26:16.520]  original complaint.
[01:26:16.520 --> 01:26:18.520]  And I wasn't.
[01:26:18.520 --> 01:26:24.520]  I was just filing a counterclaim at the beginning, but they say, you know, and that's why I say
[01:26:24.520 --> 01:26:29.520]  I've got to do a little more research on special pleadings, but you've got to do that.
[01:26:29.520 --> 01:26:36.520]  File a counterclaim after you've, if you file a counterclaim after you answer, you have
[01:26:36.520 --> 01:26:38.520]  to do it by leave of court.
[01:26:38.520 --> 01:26:46.520]  Unless, I looked at the special pleadings, and I think it's 905 Rules of Civil Procedure in Minnesota,
[01:26:46.520 --> 01:26:52.520]  that it had a, for special pleadings, and it talked about agreements of fraud.
[01:26:52.520 --> 01:26:57.520]  And you didn't have to have a leave of court.
[01:26:57.520 --> 01:27:03.520]  But like I said, the judge came out, you know, and that was one of my counts, along with
[01:27:03.520 --> 01:27:09.520]  delicious prosecution, which I think, going through Jurisdictionary, they throw that on
[01:27:09.520 --> 01:27:15.520]  unless you, the case has been ruled in your favor, but I did fraud and negligence on top
[01:27:15.520 --> 01:27:17.520]  of that also.
[01:27:17.520 --> 01:27:24.520]  But she just kind of, I mean, I was just like, she threw that out and whatever, she granted
[01:27:24.520 --> 01:27:26.520]  it to him.
[01:27:26.520 --> 01:27:31.520]  So, I know I got to do my homework, but I just, I didn't know if you guys had any leeway on
[01:27:31.520 --> 01:27:33.520]  that or not.
[01:27:33.520 --> 01:27:38.520]  Well, file a findings of fact and conclusions at law, demanding she say how and why she
[01:27:38.520 --> 01:27:43.520]  granted their motion or denied yours.
[01:27:43.520 --> 01:27:49.520]  What statute that you're finding a fact, and what case law decision supporting that statute,
[01:27:49.520 --> 01:27:51.520]  that's your conclusions of law.
[01:27:51.520 --> 01:27:55.520]  Well, I asked her that while we were in the courtroom, and she...
[01:27:55.520 --> 01:28:00.520]  Don't ask it, file a motion demanding it in writing.
[01:28:00.520 --> 01:28:01.520]  Okay.
[01:28:01.520 --> 01:28:02.520]  All right.
[01:28:02.520 --> 01:28:03.520]  Okay.
[01:28:03.520 --> 01:28:05.520]  All right, I'll run with that.
[01:28:05.520 --> 01:28:08.520]  Is anybody else on the line?
[01:28:08.520 --> 01:28:11.520]  Yeah, we have another caller right after you.
[01:28:11.520 --> 01:28:12.520]  I got one more.
[01:28:12.520 --> 01:28:15.520]  About a minute and a half left in this segment.
[01:28:15.520 --> 01:28:20.520]  Got an attorney that filed the answers for their client.
[01:28:20.520 --> 01:28:22.520]  What's the scoop on that?
[01:28:22.520 --> 01:28:27.520]  Attorney can't answer interrogatories, can they, for their client?
[01:28:27.520 --> 01:28:33.520]  They can tell the client whether or not to respond to a particular interrogatory or how.
[01:28:33.520 --> 01:28:34.520]  Okay.
[01:28:34.520 --> 01:28:41.520]  But in my discovery questions, in my interrogatories, the second question is who is answering these
[01:28:41.520 --> 01:28:47.520]  interrogatories, and the lawyer listed his own name.
[01:28:47.520 --> 01:28:49.520]  And that's under oath.
[01:28:49.520 --> 01:28:53.520]  Well, how does he have personal knowledge of anything?
[01:28:53.520 --> 01:28:57.520]  If the client's sitting there telling him.
[01:28:57.520 --> 01:29:00.520]  Which he's not even in the same state.
[01:29:00.520 --> 01:29:02.520]  I mean, over the phone.
[01:29:02.520 --> 01:29:12.520]  I mean, he signed it two or three days before his client executed the documents.
[01:29:12.520 --> 01:29:14.520]  He can be put on the stand.
[01:29:14.520 --> 01:29:15.520]  Executed.
[01:29:15.520 --> 01:29:17.520]  You mean filed?
[01:29:17.520 --> 01:29:22.520]  He filed the discovery responses to me, and they were just signed on behalf of the attorney.
[01:29:22.520 --> 01:29:32.520]  And then about three weeks later, I got the fully executed ones from their client.
[01:29:32.520 --> 01:29:35.520]  Did the answers match?
[01:29:35.520 --> 01:29:40.520]  Well, yeah, it was just a photocopy, I mean.
[01:29:40.520 --> 01:29:41.520]  Okay.
[01:29:41.520 --> 01:29:49.520]  Then there's nothing there saying what time they communicated to make that happen, is there?
[01:29:49.520 --> 01:29:52.520]  Okay, hang on, Roy, we'll finish up.
[01:29:52.520 --> 01:29:56.520]  All right, folks, this is rule of law radio 512-646-1984.
[01:29:56.520 --> 01:29:58.520]  Gary, we'll get you on the other side.
[01:29:58.520 --> 01:29:59.520]  We'll be right back.
[01:29:59.520 --> 01:30:03.520]  Top 10 reasons to question the official story of the Oklahoma City bombing.
[01:30:03.520 --> 01:30:05.520]  Number nine, the extra leg.
[01:30:05.520 --> 01:30:08.520]  Former Oklahoma State medical examiner Dr. Fred Jordan had stated,
[01:30:08.520 --> 01:30:12.520]  we had eight people with amputated left legs and nine left legs to account for.
[01:30:12.520 --> 01:30:17.520]  Chief pathologist for Northern Ireland, T.K. Marshall, who performed over 2,500 autopses in his time,
[01:30:17.520 --> 01:30:19.520]  stated, there's never been an unknown victim.
[01:30:19.520 --> 01:30:22.520]  This leg belonged to a perpetrator close enough to the bomb
[01:30:22.520 --> 01:30:25.520]  or his body to be damaged, leaving only a left leg behind.
[01:30:25.520 --> 01:30:26.520]  Who was this person?
[01:30:26.520 --> 01:30:29.520]  Please go to okcbombingtruth.com.
[01:30:29.520 --> 01:30:34.520]  Fishing is a wonderful pastime.
[01:30:34.520 --> 01:30:37.520]  It's a terrific way to bond with family and get in touch with nature.
[01:30:37.520 --> 01:30:41.520]  But there's a scary kind of fishing you'll want nothing to do with.
[01:30:41.520 --> 01:30:45.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll tell you more in just a moment.
[01:30:45.520 --> 01:30:47.520]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:47.520 --> 01:30:51.520]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:51.520 --> 01:30:55.520]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:55.520 --> 01:30:57.520]  So protect your rights.
[01:30:57.520 --> 01:31:01.520]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:31:01.520 --> 01:31:03.520]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:31:03.520 --> 01:31:07.520]  This public service announcement is brought to you by startpage.com,
[01:31:07.520 --> 01:31:11.520]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing.
[01:31:11.520 --> 01:31:14.520]  Start over with Start Page.
[01:31:14.520 --> 01:31:17.520]  Fishing spelled with a pH isn't very sporting.
[01:31:17.520 --> 01:31:21.520]  The goal is to reel in personal information and compromise your accounts.
[01:31:21.520 --> 01:31:24.520]  The pH in fishing stands for phony.
[01:31:24.520 --> 01:31:28.520]  Fishing scams involve impersonating legitimate organizations like banks,
[01:31:28.520 --> 01:31:30.520]  and the bait is usually a phony email.
[01:31:30.520 --> 01:31:34.520]  A fishing email may ask for account information or provide a link to an official looking website,
[01:31:34.520 --> 01:31:36.520]  but don't fall for it.
[01:31:36.520 --> 01:31:40.520]  Never email your bank account number, your user ID or passwords.
[01:31:40.520 --> 01:31:44.520]  Your payment companies won't ask you to, and it's best to enter a website address directly
[01:31:44.520 --> 01:31:48.520]  rather than clicking on an email link to check an account or make a purchase.
[01:31:48.520 --> 01:31:52.520]  Accidentally typing data into a fishing website could cost you thousands.
[01:31:52.520 --> 01:31:54.520]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:54.520 --> 01:32:21.520]  Thank you for watching.
[01:32:21.520 --> 01:32:27.520]  Hi folks, we are back. This is Rural Law Radio 512-646-1984.
[01:32:27.520 --> 01:32:31.520]  Jeff's a call in number. We've got about a half an hour left in the show.
[01:32:31.520 --> 01:32:35.520]  We have Troy from Minnesota and Gary from Texas.
[01:32:35.520 --> 01:32:38.520]  We're going to finish up with Troy real quick and then go to Gary.
[01:32:38.520 --> 01:32:41.520]  Alright Troy, let's see if we can wrap you up here.
[01:32:41.520 --> 01:32:46.520]  On the question of when these documents were executed versus when they were signed,
[01:32:46.520 --> 01:32:50.520]  you don't have any way of knowing when the attorney and his client communicated.
[01:32:50.520 --> 01:33:00.520]  He simply gave you a fast response to your information request or whatever it was you filed.
[01:33:00.520 --> 01:33:06.520]  And it's very possible that he had already spoken to the client,
[01:33:06.520 --> 01:33:11.520]  gotten the answers to the deposition or the interrogatories,
[01:33:11.520 --> 01:33:14.520]  went ahead and submitted them to you.
[01:33:14.520 --> 01:33:22.520]  The client verified the information in the interrogatories and filed the executed copies three or four days later.
[01:33:22.520 --> 01:33:26.520]  All that's entirely possible and entirely legal.
[01:33:26.520 --> 01:33:32.520]  Okay. Alright. The net answers my questions.
[01:33:32.520 --> 01:33:35.520]  Okay. We'll go from there. Thank you guys. Have a good night.
[01:33:35.520 --> 01:33:37.520]  You're welcome Troy. Thanks Troy. Have a good night.
[01:33:37.520 --> 01:33:39.520]  You bet.
[01:33:39.520 --> 01:33:44.520]  Alright, now let's go to Gary in Texas. Gary, what can we do for you?
[01:33:44.520 --> 01:33:48.520]  Yes, sir. The reason I was calling, I wanted to find out if you could tell me,
[01:33:48.520 --> 01:33:53.520]  in the transportation code, I've heard you speak many times on that issue,
[01:33:53.520 --> 01:34:00.520]  but I need to know which statute it is that says that speed limits only apply against commercial traffic.
[01:34:00.520 --> 01:34:02.520]  I can't remember which statute that is.
[01:34:02.520 --> 01:34:06.520]  It's not speed limits, it's the speed signs,
[01:34:06.520 --> 01:34:10.520]  which is what the officer uses to gauge the speed on the highway.
[01:34:10.520 --> 01:34:12.520]  Right.
[01:34:12.520 --> 01:34:16.520]  Okay. The speed sign is in 201.904.
[01:34:16.520 --> 01:34:24.520]  The speed limits are covered under 545.351 and 352.
[01:34:24.520 --> 01:34:30.520]  351 and 352. Okay. I have one real quick question.
[01:34:30.520 --> 01:34:39.520]  If a TSA employee working at the airport in Texas at Austin or Dallas,
[01:34:39.520 --> 01:34:46.520]  were to grow a small child, I have a question.
[01:34:46.520 --> 01:34:53.520]  If you were to successfully be able to bring a grand jury, a criminal complaint for official oppression,
[01:34:53.520 --> 01:35:00.520]  for violating their Fourth Amendment right, or sexual assault, that type of thing,
[01:35:00.520 --> 01:35:04.520]  is it an auto, is it true? I don't believe it is.
[01:35:04.520 --> 01:35:09.520]  I don't see how it could be, but is it factual that since he's a federal employee,
[01:35:09.520 --> 01:35:15.520]  he can ask for that to be removed to a federal court?
[01:35:15.520 --> 01:35:17.520]  He can.
[01:35:17.520 --> 01:35:23.520]  Yeah, he can ask, but here's the problem, which the courts don't seem to understand.
[01:35:23.520 --> 01:35:30.520]  The federal government was never granted authority over criminal cases that occurred within the states
[01:35:30.520 --> 01:35:34.520]  except for treason and counterfeiting.
[01:35:34.520 --> 01:35:44.520]  That's the only criminal action the federal government was ever given lawful authority to operate under.
[01:35:44.520 --> 01:35:51.520]  So can they request it? Yes. Is it legal for them to get it? Absolutely not.
[01:35:51.520 --> 01:36:01.520]  And if the federal judge grants the removal, well, then you just file a motion to show why the federal court
[01:36:01.520 --> 01:36:07.520]  has no subject matter jurisdiction and demand that the federal judge remand the case back to the state.
[01:36:07.520 --> 01:36:14.520]  Okay, because I had somebody that was an attorney try to tell me that it was automatic that if it's a federal employee,
[01:36:14.520 --> 01:36:16.520]  it would be remanded to a federal court.
[01:36:16.520 --> 01:36:18.520]  Well, no, no, it's automatic.
[01:36:18.520 --> 01:36:23.520]  It would automatically be requested, but that doesn't mean it gets to stay.
[01:36:23.520 --> 01:36:28.520]  Removal is automatic. They can remove it automatically.
[01:36:28.520 --> 01:36:37.520]  At that point, the federal judge would decide whether or not he has subject matter jurisdiction to accept the removal.
[01:36:37.520 --> 01:36:42.520]  And if the judge decides he doesn't have subject matter jurisdiction over the issue,
[01:36:42.520 --> 01:36:47.520]  then the proper response is to remand the case back to the state.
[01:36:47.520 --> 01:36:53.520]  So you would want to go in and argue with the federal court that they simply don't have subject matter jurisdiction.
[01:36:53.520 --> 01:36:55.520]  Yes, yes.
[01:36:55.520 --> 01:37:03.520]  In fact, in local hands, maybe that is the method that checks in the upcoming special session.
[01:37:03.520 --> 01:37:09.520]  If the governor doesn't, you know, allow them to bring that up.
[01:37:09.520 --> 01:37:14.520]  What's that, 1937, how still 1937 that they didn't have time to pass?
[01:37:14.520 --> 01:37:15.520]  Right.
[01:37:15.520 --> 01:37:22.520]  Hopefully as much as I'm for that bill, that bill actually technically isn't necessary
[01:37:22.520 --> 01:37:27.520]  because Texas has laws against these very acts already on the books.
[01:37:27.520 --> 01:37:30.520]  Yeah, but there's a problem with the laws that are already on the books.
[01:37:30.520 --> 01:37:40.520]  The problem with the laws that are already on the books is that in order for it to be sexual assault or inappropriate touching,
[01:37:40.520 --> 01:37:49.520]  you have to prove intent on the part of the accused of having a lewd intent in their mind.
[01:37:49.520 --> 01:37:52.520]  Now that is a thought crime.
[01:37:52.520 --> 01:38:01.520]  If they were committing the act in their mind strictly for the purpose of doing a search as part of a standard security procedure,
[01:38:01.520 --> 01:38:11.520]  then you cannot prove it would be extremely difficult to prove that they had a lewd intent while they were doing their own mind,
[01:38:11.520 --> 01:38:13.520]  while they were doing the touching.
[01:38:13.520 --> 01:38:19.520]  That's why this House Bill 1937 is so important because it takes away all of that.
[01:38:19.520 --> 01:38:24.520]  It doesn't matter what the intent was in their mind, whether it was lewd or not.
[01:38:24.520 --> 01:38:38.520]  That bill just says that a public servant cannot touch a private as a means of security protocol for access to a public facility unless there is probable cause.
[01:38:38.520 --> 01:38:43.520]  Now that brings up another issue. There is a rally this Saturday.
[01:38:43.520 --> 01:38:55.520]  I don't remember exactly the time, but there is a rally this Saturday at the state capitol to demand that Rick Perry place this bill on special session.
[01:38:55.520 --> 01:38:57.520]  He hasn't done it yet.
[01:38:57.520 --> 01:39:08.520]  That brings up one other question then, being that there is a problem with the sexual assault charge, possible charges.
[01:39:08.520 --> 01:39:14.520]  How about, is it official oppression because they violated the Fourth Amendment?
[01:39:14.520 --> 01:39:21.520]  No. Official oppression says they have to violate a statute related to their office.
[01:39:21.520 --> 01:39:28.520]  You can't charge them with official oppression just based on some generic Fourth Amendment violation.
[01:39:28.520 --> 01:39:33.520]  I thought under official oppression, doesn't it read that you can't violate any right?
[01:39:33.520 --> 01:39:41.520]  I think it mirrors the Fourteenth Amendment. Does it not say that an officer can't, under the color of law, violate any right?
[01:39:41.520 --> 01:39:51.520]  There's a problem with that even if you try to go there. You are on your own willfully traveling.
[01:39:51.520 --> 01:40:00.520]  You have made a contract, you bought a plane ticket, you are on your own doing this and going through the airport.
[01:40:00.520 --> 01:40:09.520]  Now when you get to the security gate, it is your decision as to whether or not you want to proceed.
[01:40:09.520 --> 01:40:17.520]  If you don't like the terms and conditions of the security protocol, then you don't have to agree to it.
[01:40:17.520 --> 01:40:23.520]  This is a lot different of a scenario than getting pulled over with an illegal search.
[01:40:23.520 --> 01:40:32.520]  You make the decision whether or not you want to agree to their security protocol when you approach the gate.
[01:40:32.520 --> 01:40:38.520]  This is what Harman Taylor always talks about. Everything is by commercial agreement.
[01:40:38.520 --> 01:40:47.520]  If you agree to go through that gate, then you've just agreed to whatever security protocol they want to inflict upon you,
[01:40:47.520 --> 01:40:51.520]  and you can't go back after the fact and say they violated your right.
[01:40:51.520 --> 01:40:58.520]  What you have to do in order to have a proper standing for a proper lawsuit, if this House Bill 1937 doesn't pass,
[01:40:58.520 --> 01:41:09.520]  what the only legitimate remedy is to refuse to agree and then yes, you'll miss your flight, yes, you won't be able to travel,
[01:41:09.520 --> 01:41:15.520]  you'll miss your flight, your bags will probably get put on the plane and they'll have to get shipped back to you.
[01:41:15.520 --> 01:41:18.520]  This happened to a friend of mine, we already interviewed him about this a year ago.
[01:41:18.520 --> 01:41:24.520]  He refused to agree to the security protocol and so he missed the flight, he couldn't travel,
[01:41:24.520 --> 01:41:30.520]  and then you go back and you sue them for denying you in your right to travel.
[01:41:30.520 --> 01:41:37.520]  That's the best kind of lawsuit that we can do at this point, but once you agree, you've agreed it's too late.
[01:41:37.520 --> 01:41:45.520]  Yeah, but you're missing my question. A minor child does not have the authority to over his mom,
[01:41:45.520 --> 01:41:57.520]  in particular the mom sending child A to dad who lives in Cleveland to get to the airport, that child doesn't have the authority to say,
[01:41:57.520 --> 01:42:01.520]  hey, I don't want to give up. Yeah, they can. Yeah, they can.
[01:42:01.520 --> 01:42:04.520]  Well, if mom puts them on the plane, they're on the plane.
[01:42:04.520 --> 01:42:07.520]  Well, wait a minute, what do you mean his mom puts them on the plane?
[01:42:07.520 --> 01:42:15.520]  Mom takes them to the airport. She says, okay, I want to send this kid to Cleveland. The kid, he or she is just kind of stuck with...
[01:42:15.520 --> 01:42:22.520]  Well, that's too bad then. Then the proper response in that situation is for the other parents to call CPS on the first one.
[01:42:22.520 --> 01:42:27.520]  So therefore, okay, so then it would be, okay, I got you.
[01:42:27.520 --> 01:42:35.520]  Okay, it's remember, everything's by agreement. And yes, can you please, the beeping on the car?
[01:42:35.520 --> 01:42:39.520]  Yeah. Okay, thanks. Yeah, remember, everything's by agreement.
[01:42:39.520 --> 01:42:48.520]  Now a child cannot, doesn't, now if it's an adolescent that's traveling alone, yeah, they can say, no, I'm not going to do it.
[01:42:48.520 --> 01:42:56.520]  But if you've got a small child, a smaller child, and the parent is passing through security with the small child and saying,
[01:42:56.520 --> 01:43:05.520]  you have to do this, then yes, sorry, the child doesn't have a choice. They don't have rights in that situation. And too bad, all right,
[01:43:05.520 --> 01:43:14.520]  the mother consented or the father consented or whoever the guardian was consented to a sexual assault or whatever of their child.
[01:43:14.520 --> 01:43:22.520]  And so the appropriate response in that situation is for the other parents to file lawsuit and criminal charges against the other parents.
[01:43:22.520 --> 01:43:29.520]  I say, yeah, but see, I just didn't know how that worked because I haven't flown since 2001 because I refuse to go through all that.
[01:43:29.520 --> 01:43:33.520]  Well, I just think it's a bad idea to send your kids traveling alone anyway.
[01:43:33.520 --> 01:43:34.520]  No kids.
[01:43:34.520 --> 01:43:43.520]  But the bottom line is you have, the only real strong remedy we have for this right now is to just not agree to it and then you sue them
[01:43:43.520 --> 01:43:47.520]  for denying your right to travel. But once you agree to it, it's too late.
[01:43:47.520 --> 01:43:52.520]  Hopefully enough folks will get to that rally and maybe Perry will listen to the people. I doubt it, but hopefully.
[01:43:52.520 --> 01:43:59.520]  All right, we've got to go to break. We've got one more segment left, folks. We've got open phone lines 512-646-1984.
[01:43:59.520 --> 01:44:08.520]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM, but finding things on the Internet isn't so easy, and neither is finding like-minded people to share it with.
[01:44:08.520 --> 01:44:11.520]  Oh, well, I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books, then.
[01:44:11.520 --> 01:44:12.520]  Brave New Books?
[01:44:12.520 --> 01:44:19.520]  Yes. Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, and Gilbert Griffin.
[01:44:19.520 --> 01:44:23.520]  They even stock inner food, Berkey products, and Calvin Soaps.
[01:44:23.520 --> 01:44:25.520]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[01:44:25.520 --> 01:44:31.520]  Go check it out for yourself. It's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street, just south of UT.
[01:44:31.520 --> 01:44:35.520]  Oh, by UT? There's never anywhere to park down there.
[01:44:35.520 --> 01:44:43.520]  Actually, they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking facility just behind the bookstore.
[01:44:43.520 --> 01:44:46.520]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[01:44:46.520 --> 01:44:51.520]  Monday through Saturday, 11 a.m. to 9 p.m., and 1 to 6 p.m. on Sundays.
[01:44:51.520 --> 01:45:00.520]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503, or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[01:45:00.520 --> 01:45:06.520]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[01:45:06.520 --> 01:45:14.520]  the affordable, easy-to-understand four-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step.
[01:45:14.520 --> 01:45:18.520]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.520 --> 01:45:22.520]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.520 --> 01:45:27.520]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can, too.
[01:45:27.520 --> 01:45:33.520]  This Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:33.520 --> 01:45:42.520]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.520 --> 01:45:51.520]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:51.520 --> 01:46:00.520]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-E-V.
[01:46:22.520 --> 01:46:30.520]  Some things in this world I will never understand. Some things I realize fully.
[01:46:30.520 --> 01:46:39.520]  Somebody's on a police, that police man. Somebody's on a police, a police.
[01:46:39.520 --> 01:46:48.520]  There's always room out the top of the head. I hear things are great, fine, and it's lonely left too.
[01:46:48.520 --> 01:46:56.520]  They're wishing it with more than I've positioned to fail. They know that if they don't do it, somebody will.
[01:46:56.520 --> 01:47:04.520]  Some things in this world I will never understand. Some things I realize fully.
[01:47:04.520 --> 01:47:12.520]  Somebody's on a police, that police man. Somebody's on a police, a police.
[01:47:12.520 --> 01:47:21.520]  I know they will. Yeah, they're gonna put the best, the best I see. So much in God's hands.
[01:47:21.520 --> 01:47:30.520]  I know they will. Never fast, put your back to the scale. I know they will. Never fast, put your back to the scale.
[01:47:30.520 --> 01:47:36.520]  I know they will. I know they will. I know they will.
[01:47:36.520 --> 01:47:45.520]  I know they will. I know they will.
[01:47:45.520 --> 01:47:51.520]  Okay folks, we are back. We got one more segment left and we are running an archive tomorrow night.
[01:47:51.520 --> 01:48:01.520]  So please call in if you want to speak with us on the air tonight. The call in number is 512-646-1984.
[01:48:01.520 --> 01:48:07.520]  We're going now to Chuck in Ohio. Chuck, thank you for calling in. What is your question for us tonight?
[01:48:07.520 --> 01:48:17.520]  Yes, I live in Ohio and I want to put a land patent on my property. The problem is you have a land patent borough, I guess in Texas.
[01:48:17.520 --> 01:48:23.520]  We don't have anything like that in Ohio. I call the federal courthouse that I have no clue what's going on.
[01:48:23.520 --> 01:48:34.520]  I want to put in, I have 10 acres of my property. They want to put a store line through right through my property. I know a land patent is the only thing I know if I have no leads on my property that would checkmate them on that deal.
[01:48:34.520 --> 01:48:39.520]  So please help me. What I can do about that?
[01:48:39.520 --> 01:48:48.520]  Well, the issue here is you should have some form of office or bureau of land management.
[01:48:48.520 --> 01:48:55.520]  Someone in Ohio is responsible for that. I'm sure you've got an agency for it. Every state does.
[01:48:55.520 --> 01:49:09.520]  Okay. They would be the ones that you would go through to file the proper paperwork to establish and enforce the land patent provided you've got all the necessary information to establish the land patent.
[01:49:09.520 --> 01:49:16.520]  Now, the problem is I can guarantee you what they're using to do this is imminent domain.
[01:49:16.520 --> 01:49:26.520]  Correct. And so the way they're getting away with that is just as Harmon puts it, the nexus you placed yourself in.
[01:49:26.520 --> 01:49:37.520]  If you bought and paid for that land using funny money, then you've given them particular power and authority over that land because it's not truly yours.
[01:49:37.520 --> 01:49:42.520]  It's not yours because you never actually had to pay for it.
[01:49:42.520 --> 01:49:48.520]  You discharged the debt associated with the loan or mortgage on it.
[01:49:48.520 --> 01:49:50.520]  No loan.
[01:49:50.520 --> 01:49:52.520]  I bought the property.
[01:49:52.520 --> 01:49:54.520]  How'd you buy it?
[01:49:54.520 --> 01:49:56.520]  I could cash. I understand what you're saying.
[01:49:56.520 --> 01:49:57.520]  Yeah, but it was still funny money.
[01:49:57.520 --> 01:50:00.520]  What cash did you use?
[01:50:00.520 --> 01:50:04.520]  Could I sell the property for gold to my wife?
[01:50:04.520 --> 01:50:06.520]  Yes.
[01:50:06.520 --> 01:50:10.520]  And would that establish then gold was done, right? Would that establish real money?
[01:50:10.520 --> 01:50:14.520]  That would establish as long as it's in the proper value.
[01:50:14.520 --> 01:50:27.520]  Yeah, as long as it's an honest system of weights and measures, but the subject there gets a little theoretical and esoteric into how to establish it.
[01:50:27.520 --> 01:50:39.520]  But once you've actually purchased it for something of real value, instead of just discharged the debt associated with it, then you can make the argument that imminent domain
[01:50:39.520 --> 01:50:43.520]  can't be used.
[01:50:43.520 --> 01:50:49.520]  And that goes beyond just the land patent.
[01:50:49.520 --> 01:50:51.520]  Okay, because I have a thousand ounces of silver.
[01:50:51.520 --> 01:50:53.520]  I mean, we collect silver eagles.
[01:50:53.520 --> 01:50:55.520]  I mean, so I have a thousand ounces.
[01:50:55.520 --> 01:50:58.520]  So why couldn't I give my thousand ounces to my wife?
[01:50:58.520 --> 01:50:59.520]  And here you go.
[01:50:59.520 --> 01:51:01.520]  She would have it.
[01:51:01.520 --> 01:51:03.520]  Is her name already on the property?
[01:51:03.520 --> 01:51:05.520]  Yes.
[01:51:05.520 --> 01:51:08.520]  Okay, then how can you sell it to someone that already owns it?
[01:51:08.520 --> 01:51:11.520]  Okay, what if she signs me off or I sign her off?
[01:51:11.520 --> 01:51:14.520]  She takes her, somebody could sign off on it.
[01:51:14.520 --> 01:51:17.520]  Would that help her? No.
[01:51:17.520 --> 01:51:25.520]  Well, the problem is is right now both of you are on it as having purchased it using funny money.
[01:51:25.520 --> 01:51:26.520]  Okay.
[01:51:26.520 --> 01:51:27.520]  All right.
[01:51:27.520 --> 01:51:35.520]  In order to clear it, it would have to be sold to someone that has no interest in it tied to funny money.
[01:51:35.520 --> 01:51:37.520]  How about my daughter?
[01:51:37.520 --> 01:51:40.520]  Is your daughter old enough to own land?
[01:51:40.520 --> 01:51:42.520]  Yeah, she's 22.
[01:51:42.520 --> 01:51:46.520]  Okay, then yes, that's entirely possible.
[01:51:46.520 --> 01:51:48.520]  You could sell it to her.
[01:51:48.520 --> 01:51:54.520]  She could then, you know, hold it for you and so on and so forth.
[01:51:54.520 --> 01:52:02.520]  But again, once you do that, you have to establish that it was paid for and it is not subject to imminent domain and get your land patent on it.
[01:52:02.520 --> 01:52:06.520]  The land patent does not remove it from the tax rolls, however.
[01:52:06.520 --> 01:52:17.520]  The issue here becomes that if you successfully get it removed from the tax rolls, you successfully remove it from their ability to use imminent domain.
[01:52:17.520 --> 01:52:24.520]  If they can't tax it, they can't take it under imminent domain.
[01:52:24.520 --> 01:52:34.520]  See, right now they have the claim of a vested financial interest because you use funny money to purchase it.
[01:52:34.520 --> 01:52:46.520]  Okay, so I've already gone to the Bureau of Land Management and asked for it and I've got the actual copies, three parts of the papers of the actual, you know, original, you know, land patent.
[01:52:46.520 --> 01:52:49.520]  And I'm pretty sure I know how to write this thing up.
[01:52:49.520 --> 01:52:52.520]  But my next problem, my next one, I need to find it.
[01:52:52.520 --> 01:52:54.520]  Real careful with that, pretty sure.
[01:52:54.520 --> 01:52:57.520]  A land patent is a pretty tricky thing to make sure you've got correct.
[01:52:57.520 --> 01:53:01.520]  Well, I will hire you if you want to, you know.
[01:53:01.520 --> 01:53:06.520]  Well, land patents are not my forte. I know of them. I haven't done them.
[01:53:06.520 --> 01:53:13.520]  Well, at the end of 21, they gave me a pretty, they gave me case law and all that on that.
[01:53:13.520 --> 01:53:14.520]  Okay.
[01:53:14.520 --> 01:53:16.520]  Well, I'm not saying you can't do it.
[01:53:16.520 --> 01:53:19.520]  I'm just saying be real, real careful.
[01:53:19.520 --> 01:53:20.520]  Okay.
[01:53:20.520 --> 01:53:31.520]  So, well, then who else would you recommend that could help me do this? That I could, you know, even if I had to pay to make sure this is exactly worded properly.
[01:53:31.520 --> 01:53:36.520]  I mean, I have jurisdictionary and all that, but, you know, I'm not, you know, I don't do it every day.
[01:53:36.520 --> 01:53:40.520]  You know, when you do something every day, you become good at what you do.
[01:53:40.520 --> 01:53:49.520]  Well, Chuck, if you'll send me an email, I will send it to someone who has gotten a land patent and can give you information about who helped them get it.
[01:53:49.520 --> 01:53:50.520]  Okay.
[01:53:50.520 --> 01:53:51.520]  All right.
[01:53:51.520 --> 01:53:52.520]  Really?
[01:53:52.520 --> 01:53:59.520]  And I can't promise they'll contact you, but I will send them your information and if they are willing, they can contact you.
[01:53:59.520 --> 01:54:05.520]  But they did use a company that helped them establish all the paperwork necessary to get the land patent filed.
[01:54:05.520 --> 01:54:06.520]  Great.
[01:54:06.520 --> 01:54:07.520]  Great.
[01:54:07.520 --> 01:54:08.520]  That'll help me out a lot.
[01:54:08.520 --> 01:54:10.520]  Hey, Eddie, thank you very, very much.
[01:54:10.520 --> 01:54:11.520]  You're welcome.
[01:54:11.520 --> 01:54:13.520]  We still have a good night tonight, then.
[01:54:13.520 --> 01:54:14.520]  All right.
[01:54:14.520 --> 01:54:15.520]  All right.
[01:54:15.520 --> 01:54:17.520]  Well, thank you very much for calling in, Chuck.
[01:54:17.520 --> 01:54:19.520]  Okay, bye.
[01:54:19.520 --> 01:54:20.520]  Bye-bye.
[01:54:20.520 --> 01:54:24.520]  All right, folks, we got about four and a half minutes left in the show.
[01:54:24.520 --> 01:54:27.520]  Chuck was our last caller on the board there.
[01:54:27.520 --> 01:54:32.520]  So if you have any last minute issues, you've got like four minutes to get it in here.
[01:54:32.520 --> 01:54:38.520]  If not, then you're just going to sit here and listen to me talk about something which may not be the most pleasant thing in the world.
[01:54:38.520 --> 01:54:41.520]  I did get some good news this week, however.
[01:54:41.520 --> 01:54:50.520]  There is an opportunity that's been presented to me that I may actually get to do a traffic seminar for some very well-known individuals.
[01:54:50.520 --> 01:54:53.520]  Deborah, you might be familiar with a few of these individuals, even.
[01:54:53.520 --> 01:54:55.520]  Who's that?
[01:54:55.520 --> 01:55:08.520]  I've been invited to appear at a barbecue at Ray Price's house and Ray Price, Willie Nelson, Geach Cook, and quite a few other people.
[01:55:08.520 --> 01:55:15.520]  And possibly present a traffic seminar at Ray's birthday bash at his house.
[01:55:15.520 --> 01:55:16.520]  That's awesome.
[01:55:16.520 --> 01:55:17.520]  Good for you.
[01:55:17.520 --> 01:55:20.520]  It may very well be.
[01:55:20.520 --> 01:55:30.520]  It gives me a chance to meet some of these folks and expose them to things they probably are familiar with but don't know in depth.
[01:55:30.520 --> 01:55:38.520]  I did get to meet Geach Cook down at the Driscoll in downtown and got to sit there and talk with him for a couple of hours.
[01:55:38.520 --> 01:55:44.520]  And in case I don't know who that is, Geach Cook, he's a television and movie actor.
[01:55:44.520 --> 01:55:50.520]  He's been in several dozen various films and TV shows.
[01:55:50.520 --> 01:55:51.520]  You might remember him.
[01:55:51.520 --> 01:55:57.520]  He played one of the sheriff's deputies in Carter Country, the old TV show.
[01:55:57.520 --> 01:56:01.520]  And what's his name?
[01:56:01.520 --> 01:56:04.520]  Francis that played on Highway to Heaven with Michael Landon.
[01:56:04.520 --> 01:56:07.520]  He played the sheriff in that show.
[01:56:07.520 --> 01:56:09.520]  I think that was him.
[01:56:09.520 --> 01:56:13.520]  But let's see.
[01:56:13.520 --> 01:56:26.520]  Now, if this pans out, then hopefully they'll be mentioning this in mass out there and getting people to talk about it.
[01:56:26.520 --> 01:56:30.520]  To talk to us about putting on more seminars.
[01:56:30.520 --> 01:56:36.520]  If they help us make it known, you know, sort of advertise for us as far as word of mouth and things of that nature.
[01:56:36.520 --> 01:56:38.520]  Hey, we did pick up another caller.
[01:56:38.520 --> 01:56:40.520]  Okay, we got about two and a half minutes.
[01:56:40.520 --> 01:56:42.520]  We have Jeff in Florida.
[01:56:42.520 --> 01:56:46.520]  Ian and Jeff, what can we do for you?
[01:56:46.520 --> 01:56:50.520]  Oh, Jeff disappeared just as fast as he got here.
[01:56:50.520 --> 01:56:51.520]  Okay.
[01:56:51.520 --> 01:56:53.520]  Well, I was trying to bring him in.
[01:56:53.520 --> 01:56:55.520]  There he is.
[01:56:55.520 --> 01:56:56.520]  All right, go ahead, Jeff.
[01:56:56.520 --> 01:56:57.520]  What you got?
[01:56:57.520 --> 01:56:58.520]  Hey there.
[01:56:58.520 --> 01:57:07.520]  I was wondering if you could let me know what you know about the older Florida laws you had brought up one time about traffic.
[01:57:07.520 --> 01:57:15.520]  You mentioned that at one point they had changed and I went down to my legal law library and I couldn't find anything.
[01:57:15.520 --> 01:57:20.520]  I went back to the 1920s.
[01:57:20.520 --> 01:57:22.520]  They were missing a couple.
[01:57:22.520 --> 01:57:30.520]  And I'm not sure if you're talking about the statutory law or the actual session law or do you remember anything about that?
[01:57:30.520 --> 01:57:33.520]  Well, a lot of it is dealing with court cases.
[01:57:33.520 --> 01:57:36.520]  But yeah, there are some old Florida statutes.
[01:57:36.520 --> 01:57:42.520]  I do know I have them in the resources folder in the seminar material.
[01:57:42.520 --> 01:57:48.520]  I can and I believe they're in the if you have it, it's in the unsorted folder.
[01:57:48.520 --> 01:57:50.520]  I believe is where it is.
[01:57:50.520 --> 01:58:02.520]  But at one time I had a lot of information on Florida law, the very old Florida law regarding transportation versus travel.
[01:58:02.520 --> 01:58:12.520]  So if you have the seminar, I know it's in there, but I haven't read it in a very long time and I can't quote any of that to you out of memory.
[01:58:12.520 --> 01:58:14.520]  I just know I've got it.
[01:58:14.520 --> 01:58:19.520]  But I've got 23 gigs of material I had to go through to find it.
[01:58:19.520 --> 01:58:21.520]  All right.
[01:58:21.520 --> 01:58:22.520]  Okay, I appreciate it.
[01:58:22.520 --> 01:58:24.520]  And thank you guys for the show.
[01:58:24.520 --> 01:58:25.520]  All right, thank you, Jeff.
[01:58:25.520 --> 01:58:27.520]  All right, Jeff, nice to call in.
[01:58:27.520 --> 01:58:29.520]  All right, thank you, folks.
[01:58:29.520 --> 01:58:34.520]  This has been another edition of the rule of law here on ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:58:34.520 --> 01:58:39.520]  We will be running an archive tomorrow night, June 3rd.
[01:58:39.520 --> 01:58:41.520]  So please tune in on Monday.
[01:58:41.520 --> 01:58:46.520]  We will be back Monday at 8 p.m. central time.
[01:58:46.520 --> 01:58:49.520]  Everyone have a very good night and God bless.
[01:59:17.520 --> 01:59:20.520]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:20.520 --> 01:59:29.520]  Call us toll free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:29.520 --> 01:59:39.520]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references, plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:39.520 --> 01:59:41.520]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:41.520 --> 01:59:49.520]  To get your free copy of the New Testament recovery version, call us toll free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:49.520 --> 02:00:13.520]  That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.