ROL_2023-03-06_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:05.800]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[00:05.800 --> 00:09.480]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[00:09.480 --> 00:10.960]  Our liberty depends on it.
[00:10.960 --> 00:14.880]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[00:14.880 --> 00:16.960]  your First Amendment rights.
[00:16.960 --> 00:18.560]  Privacy is under attack.
[00:18.560 --> 00:22.160]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[00:22.160 --> 00:26.920]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:26.920 --> 00:32.040]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[00:32.040 --> 00:34.560]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[00:34.560 --> 00:38.120]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com
[00:38.120 --> 00:42.160]  The private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[00:42.160 --> 00:45.560]  Start over with StartPage.
[00:45.560 --> 00:47.640]  SPAR, it's what fighters do.
[00:47.640 --> 00:51.160]  It's also how I remember the five guarantees of the First Amendment.
[00:51.160 --> 00:54.200]  If you plan to take away my rights, I'm going to SPAR with you.
[00:54.200 --> 01:00.320]  SPAR with an extra P. S for speech, P for press, another P for petition,
[01:00.320 --> 01:02.880]  A for assembly, and R for religion.
[01:02.880 --> 01:06.520]  Most Americans are familiar with the First Amendment guarantees of free speech,
[01:06.520 --> 01:08.440]  press, assembly, and religion.
[01:08.440 --> 01:10.760]  But petition for redress is another matter.
[01:10.760 --> 01:14.480]  We have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[01:14.480 --> 01:17.440]  It means that if we're unhappy with what's going on in our government,
[01:17.440 --> 01:21.280]  we can spell out the reasons without fear of being thrown into jail.
[01:21.280 --> 01:25.840]  I'm Dr. Katharine Albrecht, more news and information at KatharineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31.680 --> 01:35.040]  Pressure, we usually associate it with stress and negativity,
[01:35.040 --> 01:37.600]  but sometimes a bit of pressure can be healing.
[01:37.600 --> 01:41.280]  I'm Dr. Katharine Albrecht, and I'll be back to tell you how conditions like nausea
[01:41.280 --> 01:45.880]  can be cured using the traditional Chinese therapy known as acupressure.
[01:45.880 --> 01:47.880]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:47.880 --> 01:51.480]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:51.480 --> 01:56.280]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:56.280 --> 02:01.520]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[02:01.520 --> 02:04.040]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[02:04.040 --> 02:07.600]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[02:07.600 --> 02:11.560]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[02:11.560 --> 02:15.360]  Start over with StartPage.
[02:15.360 --> 02:19.160]  Acupressure is an ancient practice that uses finger or hand pressure
[02:19.160 --> 02:22.000]  to cure everything from headaches to constipation.
[02:22.000 --> 02:24.400]  The pressure is applied to points known as meridians
[02:24.400 --> 02:27.560]  that are believed to control the flow of energy in the human body.
[02:27.560 --> 02:30.120]  Acupressure offers a simple cure for nausea.
[02:30.120 --> 02:34.440]  You might try the next time you get a queasy stomach or a case of motion sickness.
[02:34.440 --> 02:37.760]  Simply apply moderate pressure to the point known as P6.
[02:37.760 --> 02:42.200]  You'll find it on the inside of your wrist, about two fingers width down from your palm.
[02:42.200 --> 02:48.160]  Placing pressure on the P6 point works on the same principle as those pricey anti-nausea wristbands.
[02:48.160 --> 02:51.640]  But this relief is free and always on hand.
[02:51.640 --> 03:13.120]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:21.640 --> 03:30.640]  All right, folks. Good evening.
[03:30.640 --> 03:32.720]  This is the Monday Night Rural Law Radio Show.
[03:32.720 --> 03:36.080]  Your host, Eddie Craig, it is March 6, 2023.
[03:36.080 --> 03:38.440]  We are live tonight.
[03:38.440 --> 03:42.520]  Now, the phones are on.
[03:42.520 --> 03:48.360]  If anybody wants to call and get in line, the phone number is 512-646-1984.
[03:48.360 --> 03:51.840]  If y'all want to call in and talk, y'all just get in line there.
[03:51.840 --> 03:55.480]  But before we start taking callers, there's something I kind of want to touch on that
[03:55.480 --> 03:59.040]  I'm putting into the new seminar material that I'm still working on.
[03:59.040 --> 04:00.320]  No, it's not ready.
[04:00.320 --> 04:02.960]  No, I can't tell you when it's going to be.
[04:02.960 --> 04:09.440]  I can only tell you I am trying to make it as thorough, in-depth, and bulletproof as
[04:09.440 --> 04:13.600]  absolutely possible, okay?
[04:13.600 --> 04:18.680]  I hope to make you as much of an expert on this issue as I have had to become, just like
[04:18.680 --> 04:23.000]  Dave Champion did on the federal income tax issues when he wrote Income Tax Shattering
[04:23.000 --> 04:24.480]  the Myths.
[04:24.480 --> 04:31.080]  My goal here is to make sure that we leave no stone unturned so that we can never again
[04:31.080 --> 04:37.320]  lose an argument with a public official, even in a court of law, if they are willing to
[04:37.320 --> 04:42.400]  both apply and abide by the law, okay?
[04:42.400 --> 04:48.520]  So that said, what I want to get into for our short discussion tonight is the insufficient
[04:48.520 --> 04:50.800]  evidence problem in criminal traffic courts.
[04:50.800 --> 04:55.760]  And it doesn't really matter what state you're in, though I am going to speak specifically
[04:55.760 --> 05:03.040]  about how it's done in Texas, it essentially works exactly the same way in every state.
[05:03.040 --> 05:08.000]  Having had to fight traffic tickets in multiple states during my military career when I'd
[05:08.000 --> 05:12.360]  get a speeding ticket here and there when I was in the Air Force and so on and so forth
[05:12.360 --> 05:19.680]  I've appeared in courts in multiple states and believe me, they all do the same thing.
[05:19.680 --> 05:27.360]  They ignore the rules to get your money and that's all that matters to them, okay?
[05:27.360 --> 05:34.040]  Now here in Texas, the rules of criminal procedure are in their own code.
[05:34.040 --> 05:37.520]  That code is the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
[05:37.520 --> 05:44.000]  We also have the Texas Rules of Evidence, which while not a code per se, contains the
[05:44.000 --> 05:49.160]  rules that are published by the Texas Supreme Court on everything to do with admissible
[05:49.160 --> 05:52.560]  evidence in our courts of law, okay?
[05:52.560 --> 05:57.240]  The Texas Rules of Evidence are not promulgated by the Texas legislature.
[05:57.240 --> 06:03.680]  They are promulgated by the Texas Supreme Court and only the Texas Supreme Court.
[06:03.680 --> 06:08.880]  The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, even though it's the criminal Supreme Court, does not
[06:08.880 --> 06:11.600]  promulgate these rules.
[06:11.600 --> 06:19.120]  They are bound by them as written by the Texas Supreme Court, okay?
[06:19.120 --> 06:23.920]  As are these lower courts that are also failing to abide by them.
[06:23.920 --> 06:28.360]  Now the rules of criminal procedure and the rules of evidence work hand in hand from the
[06:28.360 --> 06:36.080]  moment you are suspected of criminal conduct until the moment you are found not guilty.
[06:36.080 --> 06:41.640]  Notice that I did not say that this relationship stops once you have been convicted of an
[06:41.640 --> 06:47.120]  offense and that's because the relationship does not stop if you are in the process of
[06:47.120 --> 06:52.960]  appealing your case or you were railroaded or wrongfully convicted and you are trying
[06:52.960 --> 06:57.000]  to fight it, especially on evidentiary issues.
[06:57.000 --> 07:00.120]  That relationship doesn't stop.
[07:00.120 --> 07:07.840]  Although this particular subject is going to be extensive, it's imperative that you
[07:07.840 --> 07:12.520]  understand how this works, okay?
[07:12.520 --> 07:17.680]  So what exactly am I saying the evidence problem is, okay?
[07:17.680 --> 07:22.480]  Well the explanation for that starts in the United States and Texas Constitution's respective
[07:22.480 --> 07:29.760]  Bill of Rights and it culminates in the codification of one specific right into legislatively enacted
[07:29.760 --> 07:31.840]  black letter law.
[07:31.840 --> 07:38.560]  Here in Texas, that law is Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 38.03 which codifies the
[07:38.560 --> 07:44.640]  presumption of innocence clause of both Constitution's Bill of Rights.
[07:44.640 --> 07:50.920]  Now for full context, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 38.03 reads as follows.
[07:50.920 --> 08:03.400]  Well 38.03 presumption of innocence and then it reads, all persons are presumed to be innocent
[08:03.400 --> 08:11.000]  and no person may be convicted of an offense unless each element of the offense is proved
[08:11.000 --> 08:14.320]  beyond a reasonable doubt.
[08:14.320 --> 08:21.040]  Each element folks, all right continue on the statute, the fact that he has been arrested,
[08:21.040 --> 08:29.560]  confined or indicted for or otherwise charged with the offense gives rise to no inference
[08:29.560 --> 08:31.640]  of guilt at his trial.
[08:31.640 --> 08:37.000]  Now this in these traffic courts creates more than a presumption of innocence problem and
[08:37.000 --> 08:43.400]  more than an evidentiary problem because here in Texas we also have the examining trial
[08:43.400 --> 08:52.080]  that they refuse to do but that examining trial is where the presumption of innocence
[08:52.080 --> 09:01.880]  comes to its first acid test and that is through a probable cause determination by a judge.
[09:01.880 --> 09:07.720]  It's not one made by the arresting officer, not by the person who signs the complaint
[09:07.720 --> 09:16.880]  but by an actual judge who is not attached to the case but they don't do the probable
[09:16.880 --> 09:23.480]  cause finding so what they do is they send you directly to trial as if the presumption
[09:23.480 --> 09:28.160]  of innocence does not apply.
[09:28.160 --> 09:35.080]  You now must go to court and defend your innocence against what they have turned into a presumption
[09:35.080 --> 09:39.480]  of guilt by failing to even have a probable cause hearing.
[09:39.480 --> 09:45.400]  The presumption is probable cause must exist, you must be guilty or we would not be going
[09:45.400 --> 09:49.800]  into court to have a trial.
[09:49.800 --> 09:57.080]  That negates the presumption of innocence but even more egregious and provable than that
[09:57.080 --> 10:06.200]  perspective, is the fact that they are not asserting and proving all of the elements
[10:06.200 --> 10:13.320]  of the alleged defense and this statute specifically says that they must do that so what our Texas
[10:13.320 --> 10:21.880]  courts have done is find ways to avoid having to address what all of the required elements
[10:21.880 --> 10:25.120]  of an offense actually are.
[10:25.120 --> 10:28.760]  Now those of you that have listened to this show knows that there's something specific
[10:28.760 --> 10:34.240]  I'm talking about here and that once again boils down to the transportation issue.
[10:34.240 --> 10:40.520]  But we have to look at this from a constitutional protection and a constitutional requirement
[10:40.520 --> 10:48.200]  for how that protection is made to function in order to see why this is such an imperative
[10:48.200 --> 10:53.960]  argument to make and to stand on and force the court to deal with which so far they have
[10:53.960 --> 11:00.480]  refused to do and they have outright avoided it or they've mischaracterized it so they
[11:00.480 --> 11:04.080]  could treat it as if it didn't mean anything.
[11:04.080 --> 11:12.320]  But here's the problem, the courts especially the third quarter criminal appeals has said
[11:12.320 --> 11:16.280]  that the term transportation doesn't mean anything.
[11:16.280 --> 11:21.960]  Now if you've seen cases where the Texas Supreme Court has had to make judicial determinations
[11:21.960 --> 11:26.360]  about how incorrect the criminal courts have been in their interpretation of the law and
[11:26.360 --> 11:31.120]  the Texas Constitution, you will never have an opportunity to stop reading.
[11:31.120 --> 11:35.520]  There are that many cases, okay?
[11:35.520 --> 11:43.160]  The courts on the criminal side are so ignorant of the Constitution and the laws of the state
[11:43.160 --> 11:50.240]  of Texas that how these people even passed the fricking bar to practice in this state
[11:50.240 --> 11:53.320]  is beyond me.
[11:53.320 --> 11:59.320]  But what did again I digress, you would think that the bar exam actually required you to
[11:59.320 --> 12:04.320]  have an understanding of these things, it doesn't.
[12:04.320 --> 12:15.600]  The bar exam only requires you to have an understanding of how a high court decided that law and what
[12:15.600 --> 12:19.160]  they decided it actually means.
[12:19.160 --> 12:26.880]  And they don't bring up the fact of whether or not that opinion conflicted with the Constitution,
[12:26.880 --> 12:32.360]  conflicted with multiple other parts of the law, they don't address any of that.
[12:32.360 --> 12:38.320]  They just say what is the opinion, what is the citation for the opinion where the court
[12:38.320 --> 12:41.440]  determined this specific issue?
[12:41.440 --> 12:47.840]  Or in the case of blah, blah, blah, what is the specific issue that the court was attempting
[12:47.840 --> 12:50.760]  to determine and finally settled on?
[12:50.760 --> 12:55.280]  Those are the kinds of things that are on your bar exam.
[12:55.280 --> 13:00.520]  There's nothing about what does the law actually say in respect to this.
[13:00.520 --> 13:07.440]  No, they simply go by what some higher court said the law said and then they ignore whether
[13:07.440 --> 13:13.880]  that law has even changed since that opinion was originally rendered.
[13:13.880 --> 13:18.480]  For instance, did you know, as I stated in one of the shows I did with some of the other
[13:18.480 --> 13:27.680]  material I looked at, that there is an 18-something case that is still cited by the Texas courts
[13:27.680 --> 13:37.160]  dealing with the rules of criminal procedure that has been dead since 1985 at the very
[13:37.160 --> 13:44.320]  least and yet they're still citing it as a controlling authority and yet the statute
[13:44.320 --> 13:50.320]  that it addresses was amended to make what is found, held to be true in that case, no
[13:50.320 --> 14:00.560]  longer valid and yet the courts of Texas are still citing it as valid authority.
[14:00.560 --> 14:07.880]  And you wonder why you cannot get justice in these courts.
[14:07.880 --> 14:17.520]  So not only do they have a due process problem, but this due process problem directly contributes
[14:17.520 --> 14:23.400]  to the lack of evidence problem and the lack of evidence begins with the loss of the presumption
[14:23.400 --> 14:29.000]  of innocence by the court's failure to provide a proper examining trial to get the facts
[14:29.000 --> 14:32.080]  on the table beforehand.
[14:32.080 --> 14:39.200]  Then they set it up in such a way that the subject matter to which a regulatory statute
[14:39.200 --> 14:46.120]  is attached is not considered an element of the offense that's required to be listed
[14:46.120 --> 14:55.040]  or proven and I'm not sure how that is supposed to work because think about this.
[14:55.040 --> 14:59.360]  Let's compare two products.
[14:59.360 --> 15:04.400]  This is how I'm going to do it in the material, so this is how I'm going to do it with you.
[15:04.400 --> 15:07.880]  In the material for the new book, we have two products.
[15:07.880 --> 15:14.080]  You have the Tootsie Roll Tootsie Pop and you have the Charms Blow Pop.
[15:14.080 --> 15:20.800]  From the outside, they look to be the same product, hard candy shell, stick crammed
[15:20.800 --> 15:24.920]  in one end, you lick it till you get to the middle and in the middle there's a treat.
[15:24.920 --> 15:31.600]  In those respects and the marketing concepts, those two products are identical.
[15:31.600 --> 15:35.760]  It's not until you actually get through the hard candy shell to what's in the middle that
[15:35.760 --> 15:38.560]  you learn for sure that they are different.
[15:38.560 --> 15:43.480]  One is a Tootsie Roll Center and the other is a Bubble Gum Center.
[15:43.480 --> 15:47.480]  Not the same in the middle at all, okay?
[15:47.480 --> 15:53.040]  So even though at first glance they appear to be the same, once you've dug in and you've
[15:53.040 --> 16:00.040]  gotten to the middle of things, you can positively say with 100% certainty they are no longer
[16:00.040 --> 16:08.040]  considered to be the same thing, nor could they be with anyone with disinformation, okay?
[16:08.040 --> 16:13.600]  So that is my metaphorical comparison for how this is going to work.
[16:13.600 --> 16:18.920]  In order, in either product, in order to get to that center, you must penetrate that hard
[16:18.920 --> 16:20.520]  candy shell.
[16:20.520 --> 16:26.960]  For the purposes of our discussion, that hard candy shell is the single subject clause of
[16:26.960 --> 16:30.000]  the Texas Constitution, okay?
[16:30.000 --> 16:36.720]  The single subject requirement that everything in that bill must pertain to, or it's not
[16:36.720 --> 16:39.920]  a valid entry into that bill.
[16:39.920 --> 16:43.360]  That statute's unconstitutional because it violates a single subject clause.
[16:43.360 --> 16:45.680]  All right, we're going to take a quick break.
[16:45.680 --> 16:51.760]  Go ahead and number 512-646-1984, give us a call, get in line, and we will be right
[16:51.760 --> 17:00.960]  back to continue our discussion.
[17:00.960 --> 17:05.240]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better understanding of His
[17:05.240 --> 17:06.240]  Word?
[17:06.240 --> 17:11.480]  Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time for Scripture
[17:11.480 --> 17:17.880]  Talk, where Nana and her guests discuss the Scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15.
[17:17.880 --> 17:22.400]  Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly
[17:22.400 --> 17:24.800]  dividing the word of truth.
[17:24.800 --> 17:28.800]  Starting in January, our first-hour studies are in the book of Mark, where we'll go verse
[17:28.800 --> 17:32.120]  by verse and discuss the true gospel message.
[17:32.120 --> 17:36.760]  Our second-hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound doctrine
[17:36.760 --> 17:39.120]  and Christian character development.
[17:39.120 --> 17:43.680]  We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[17:43.680 --> 17:48.000]  Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the likeness
[17:48.000 --> 17:50.240]  of our Lord and Savior Jesus.
[17:50.240 --> 17:56.680]  So tune into Scripture Talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire
[17:56.680 --> 18:00.680]  and motivate your studies of the Scriptures.
[18:00.680 --> 18:05.760]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.760 --> 18:09.440]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mirras Proven Method.
[18:09.440 --> 18:13.800]  Michael Muiris has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you
[18:13.800 --> 18:14.800]  can win, too.
[18:14.800 --> 18:19.600]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[18:19.600 --> 18:25.360]  civil rights statutes, what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons, how to answer
[18:25.360 --> 18:30.000]  letters and phone calls, how to get debt collectors out of your credit report, how to turn the
[18:30.000 --> 18:34.200]  financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:34.200 --> 18:39.320]  The Michael Mirras Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.320 --> 18:41.480]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.480 --> 18:47.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mirras banner
[18:47.000 --> 18:50.000]  or email [email protected].
[18:50.000 --> 18:59.560]  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
[18:59.560 --> 19:00.560]  net.
[19:00.560 --> 19:07.560]  If you are listening to the Logos Radio Network, LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[19:07.560 --> 19:11.560]  We got it?
[19:11.560 --> 19:21.560]  Yeah, the storm loose, sunroofs in my head, wrap them in cyan, soft circus and dead, can't
[19:21.560 --> 19:26.560]  I be cold, my whole life spins into a brand new day?
[19:26.560 --> 19:31.680]  All right folks, we are back, this is the Monday Night Rule of Law radio show with your host
[19:31.680 --> 19:32.680]  Eddie Craig.
[19:32.680 --> 19:34.920]  It is March 6, 2023.
[19:34.920 --> 19:36.560]  We are live tonight.
[19:36.560 --> 19:41.720]  All right, get in to calling number if you want to call and get in line and talk tonight,
[19:41.720 --> 19:42.720]  512-646-1984.
[19:42.720 --> 19:49.080]  I'm going to have one more segment here, this segment where I'm doing the discussion
[19:49.080 --> 19:52.200]  on this and then we're going to go ahead and start taking calls.
[19:52.200 --> 19:56.200]  So guys that are already on the board, give me this one more section and after that we'll
[19:56.200 --> 19:59.200]  start talking and see what you got.
[19:59.200 --> 20:07.160]  Okay, now besides the single subject matter, there is another problem with how they conduct
[20:07.160 --> 20:13.840]  evidence and make it admissible in these criminal traffic courts, okay?
[20:13.840 --> 20:22.880]  They allow every single element of the offense to be presumed true, okay?
[20:22.880 --> 20:27.840]  It also violates the right to be presumed innocent.
[20:27.840 --> 20:32.760]  Now how do I mean they presume every element to be true, okay?
[20:32.760 --> 20:40.240]  Well, let's look at the things that they would have to prove just again for simplicity's
[20:40.240 --> 20:41.240]  sake.
[20:41.240 --> 20:52.800]  Let's say you're charged with, well, anything, let's say you're just charged with an offense
[20:52.800 --> 20:56.400]  that specifically involves the operation of a motor vehicle.
[20:56.400 --> 21:02.160]  Let's say you fail to change, to signal before the change of a lane or you fail to signal
[21:02.160 --> 21:06.120]  prior to making a turn at an intersection, okay?
[21:06.120 --> 21:12.280]  Some of the things that they must allege in such a complaint is that A, you were operating
[21:12.280 --> 21:18.320]  a motor vehicle, there's two elements operating a motor vehicle or that you were a driver
[21:18.320 --> 21:19.600]  of a motor vehicle.
[21:19.600 --> 21:25.400]  Now remember, driver and operator are two differently defined terms.
[21:25.400 --> 21:30.480]  Which term is in effect at any given point within the statute depends on which one was
[21:30.480 --> 21:36.240]  defined locally for use within that statute and then what the specific offense itself,
[21:36.240 --> 21:44.640]  what term it uses to identify what definition it's relying on to convey its intent, okay?
[21:44.640 --> 21:50.640]  So if this offense statute specifically as a person commits an offense if they were operating
[21:50.640 --> 21:56.560]  a motor vehicle, that would be completely different if operate is the defined term in
[21:56.560 --> 22:06.040]  the statute and drive or driving or driver is not defined in that portion of the statute.
[22:06.040 --> 22:15.920]  The local use of operating a motor vehicle overrides their ability to substitute operator
[22:15.920 --> 22:21.360]  with driver and say that they're the same thing, you get it?
[22:21.360 --> 22:27.280]  They're doing this but it's not following the law, okay?
[22:27.280 --> 22:34.200]  It's actually a misapplication and misinterpretation of the law when they do it that way.
[22:34.200 --> 22:39.240]  Now on top of that, you take motor vehicle.
[22:39.240 --> 22:44.200]  Which definition of motor vehicle applies in this statute?
[22:44.200 --> 22:49.040]  Is it defined locally or are we still using the same definition that's put into the general
[22:49.040 --> 22:53.880]  definition that's in chapter 541 of the transportation code?
[22:53.880 --> 22:58.640]  Which definition is applicable in this particular offense statute?
[22:58.640 --> 23:05.200]  Then they have to have the element that you failed, they have to prove that you did not
[23:05.200 --> 23:09.120]  use your turn signal, okay?
[23:09.120 --> 23:14.640]  To either change the lane, which is an element along with the turn signal, along with the
[23:14.640 --> 23:19.960]  operate, along with the motor vehicle, all right?
[23:19.960 --> 23:25.320]  Or to make the turn, which making a right or left hand turn is also would be an element
[23:25.320 --> 23:27.560]  of the offense, okay?
[23:27.560 --> 23:34.240]  Those are the specific elements other than while engaged in transportation that must
[23:34.240 --> 23:37.680]  be asserted and proven at trial.
[23:37.680 --> 23:42.720]  And the complaint says that on or about this date, so and so person did then in there operate
[23:42.720 --> 23:48.920]  a motor vehicle and failed to use their turn signal to change the lane or to make the right
[23:48.920 --> 23:53.680]  hand turn at an intersection, blah, blah, blah, okay?
[23:53.680 --> 24:01.680]  Now the question is, since each of these terms are term specifically defined within the body
[24:01.680 --> 24:09.360]  of the statute, such as operator or driver or motor vehicle or turn signal or the right
[24:09.360 --> 24:17.480]  or left turn or the changing of a lane or the at an intersection, et cetera, et cetera,
[24:17.480 --> 24:25.680]  who is submitting evidence that that element is actually true?
[24:25.680 --> 24:28.480]  The answer is no one.
[24:28.480 --> 24:35.560]  No one is bringing evidence to court that you were in a motor vehicle.
[24:35.560 --> 24:41.320]  No one is bringing evidence to court to prove that you were an operator or a driver.
[24:41.320 --> 24:48.800]  No one is coming to court with evidence to prove that you used a signal on a motor vehicle
[24:48.800 --> 24:56.640]  or failed to use a signal on a motor vehicle to make a change of lanes or a turn at an intersection.
[24:56.640 --> 25:03.760]  There is no evidence for any of this that is being submitted into the court.
[25:03.760 --> 25:10.240]  What they are doing is they're allowing the police officer to testify to these elements
[25:10.240 --> 25:14.440]  as if they were already true.
[25:14.440 --> 25:22.280]  That they have been stipulated to by the defense and by the prosecution.
[25:22.280 --> 25:26.520]  And that is not the case.
[25:26.520 --> 25:28.480]  It has not been stipulated to.
[25:28.480 --> 25:33.120]  And there is no documentation, documentary evidence to be submitted to the court that
[25:33.120 --> 25:35.520]  proves them to be true.
[25:35.520 --> 25:43.680]  So what this comes down to is they are allowing an unqualified witness to provide expert testimony
[25:43.680 --> 25:51.360]  that it is his opinion that these elements are true without actually getting him sworn
[25:51.360 --> 25:58.320]  in as an expert witness or without actually having him provide evidence that his opinion
[25:58.320 --> 26:00.000]  is correct.
[26:00.000 --> 26:02.320]  Nothing.
[26:02.320 --> 26:07.760]  They're simply sidestepping the presumption of innocence of each of these elements and
[26:07.760 --> 26:14.760]  allowing this witness to testify that these elements are each one true with no evidence
[26:14.760 --> 26:23.800]  of any kind, no expert witness testimony of any kind, thus allowing the cop to make a
[26:23.800 --> 26:33.480]  legal conclusion on the stand as if it is valid evidence.
[26:33.480 --> 26:42.200]  Now if there are any attorneys out there that wish to prove me wrong on this point, I would
[26:42.200 --> 26:50.280]  love it if you would call into this show and explain to all of us exactly how that is an
[26:50.280 --> 26:58.880]  incorrect perspective of what's happening because it is what's happening.
[26:58.880 --> 27:05.440]  So the thing you've got to prove is why it's the correct thing to let happen, how it is
[27:05.440 --> 27:08.480]  justice to allow such a thing to happen.
[27:08.480 --> 27:15.920]  Because in my view, if I'm correct, this creates a two-tiered legal system.
[27:15.920 --> 27:20.080]  Those who have the right to justice through the presumption of innocence and those from
[27:20.080 --> 27:27.120]  whom you are stealing money that have no such presumption on their side.
[27:27.120 --> 27:34.000]  And thus, every element is automatically true and now the presumption of innocence is gone
[27:34.000 --> 27:39.680]  and if they want to win, they have to prove their innocence, which turns our criminal
[27:39.680 --> 27:46.120]  justice system upside down.
[27:46.120 --> 27:58.120]  It reverses the burden of proof, every bit of it completely unconstitutional.
[27:58.120 --> 28:09.160]  Now if there's a hole in my logic, I would really love it if someone would point it out.
[28:09.160 --> 28:17.760]  But show me another case of a different kind where they're allowed to do exactly what I've
[28:17.760 --> 28:30.880]  just described and that does not get overturned as being completely bogus.
[28:30.880 --> 28:34.920]  You are allowing a witness to get on the stand to provide false testimony.
[28:34.920 --> 28:39.680]  In other words, the prosecutor is subordinate perjury from a witness who is unqualified
[28:39.680 --> 28:43.160]  to testify to the things they're testifying to.
[28:43.160 --> 28:52.160]  They're absolutely unqualified and yet the court is letting them do it with no evidence
[28:52.160 --> 28:56.960]  of support, no other expert testimony in support.
[28:56.960 --> 29:01.880]  They're just letting the cop make their own legal conclusions and presuming those conclusions
[29:01.880 --> 29:08.000]  to be 100% true.
[29:08.000 --> 29:16.840]  Thus presuming the person charged is not innocent.
[29:16.840 --> 29:22.440]  That's a problem, okay?
[29:22.440 --> 29:28.600]  So I've tried for years to explain to you that you people are correct when you say that
[29:28.600 --> 29:30.000]  the system is rigged.
[29:30.000 --> 29:33.160]  It is absolutely rigged.
[29:33.160 --> 29:38.480]  The problem is, is you keep coming up with these really inventive ways to try to say
[29:38.480 --> 29:43.760]  how it's rigged that you can't support with evidence.
[29:43.760 --> 29:51.800]  However, everything I've just laid out for you is 100% supported by the existing evidence.
[29:51.800 --> 29:54.960]  It is supported by the very actions taken.
[29:54.960 --> 29:57.640]  It's supported by how they conduct these proceedings.
[29:57.640 --> 30:02.560]  It's supported in the record list.
[30:02.560 --> 30:06.800]  Thousands of Florida motorists convicted of DUI may very well have been driving under
[30:06.800 --> 30:08.280]  the blood alcohol limit.
[30:08.280 --> 30:13.160]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back with a tale of bad breathalysers and a government
[30:13.160 --> 30:15.720]  cover-up in a moment.
[30:15.720 --> 30:17.320]  Privacy is under attack.
[30:17.320 --> 30:20.920]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:20.920 --> 30:25.680]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:25.680 --> 30:30.600]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[30:30.600 --> 30:33.440]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[30:33.440 --> 30:37.760]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[30:37.760 --> 30:41.280]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[30:41.280 --> 30:44.680]  Start over with StartPage.
[30:44.680 --> 30:46.840]  Ever hear the term fine farming?
[30:46.840 --> 30:51.360]  It's when cops find innocent people to bring in revenue and it's apparently big business
[30:51.360 --> 30:53.680]  in the Sunshine State of Florida.
[30:53.680 --> 30:59.560]  This case involves breathalysers used to convict thousands of Florida motorists for DUI violations.
[30:59.560 --> 31:04.240]  Recently, reporters discovered that the devices were improperly calibrated.
[31:04.240 --> 31:07.880]  State officials knew about it for two and a half years, but did nothing.
[31:07.880 --> 31:12.880]  In fact, the head of Florida's breath testing program ordered inspectors not to document
[31:12.880 --> 31:13.880]  the problem.
[31:13.880 --> 31:18.720]  A DUI conviction can ruin somebody's life, but now that the cover-up has been exposed,
[31:18.720 --> 31:21.560]  perhaps Florida drivers can breathe a bit easier.
[31:21.560 --> 31:26.600]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:51.600 --> 31:53.600]  I'm an Air Force pilot.
[31:53.600 --> 31:54.960]  I'm a father who lost his son.
[31:54.960 --> 31:57.560]  We're Americans and we deserve the truth.
[31:57.560 --> 32:25.560]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[32:25.560 --> 32:29.200]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio has put together the
[32:29.200 --> 32:32.960]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[32:32.960 --> 32:35.360]  is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[32:35.360 --> 32:39.360]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[32:39.360 --> 32:40.680]  ordering your copy today.
[32:40.680 --> 32:44.000]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[32:44.000 --> 32:48.440]  The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[32:48.440 --> 32:50.760]  documents and other useful resource material.
[32:50.760 --> 32:54.720]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[32:54.720 --> 33:02.720]  After your copy today and together we can have a free society we all want and deserve.
[33:02.720 --> 33:23.720]  Live free speech radio, LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:23.720 --> 33:25.960]  All right folks, we are back.
[33:25.960 --> 33:33.560]  This is rule of law radio, the call in number 512-646-1984, okay, you want to call and get
[33:33.560 --> 33:34.560]  in line and talk.
[33:34.560 --> 33:35.560]  Let's get that done.
[33:35.560 --> 33:43.320]  Now we're going to start in with our callers, I'm sorry guys, I've got a dog trading thing
[33:43.320 --> 33:48.040]  going on here and I've got a girl that's got a real anxiety issue and she's clinging to
[33:48.040 --> 33:49.520]  me like saran wrap.
[33:49.520 --> 33:53.200]  All right, John in New York, what can we do for you?
[33:53.200 --> 34:01.040]  Well, we've got a situation and here is the situation, traffic ticket or not a traffic
[34:01.040 --> 34:02.040]  ticket.
[34:02.040 --> 34:14.840]  Someone claims that one of my relatives was seen driving erratically and supposedly the
[34:14.840 --> 34:19.480]  cop stopped him but no cop ever stopped him.
[34:19.480 --> 34:28.760]  And all of a sudden in the mail he got a letter that says you didn't answer the letter that
[34:28.760 --> 34:35.720]  we sent you therefore you've just lost your license.
[34:35.720 --> 34:37.480]  No cop stopped him.
[34:37.480 --> 34:43.080]  Well, here's the problem first off, number one, the United States Supreme Court has said
[34:43.080 --> 34:46.720]  can't suspend the license without a hearing.
[34:46.720 --> 34:52.080]  Number two, that hearing could not be conducted by surprise.
[34:52.080 --> 34:57.520]  Number three, no matter what the state law on the subject says, in order for them to
[34:57.520 --> 35:03.480]  have a valid hearing, they have to prove the other party got served.
[35:03.480 --> 35:08.320]  So this mail it and forget it and you don't have to prove you actually mailed it BS from
[35:08.320 --> 35:13.080]  the state doesn't fly even when it's written into statute.
[35:13.080 --> 35:16.840]  Okay, that was wonderful, please repeat that again.
[35:16.840 --> 35:20.840]  No, you'd like to go back and do the archive to get me to repeat it.
[35:20.840 --> 35:25.120]  Remember these things come out, I just feel I don't recall them breath for breath but
[35:25.120 --> 35:33.120]  still the point being that if the state says we sent you something but the state has no
[35:33.120 --> 35:39.320]  evidence such as a signature card or anything else that they sent it and you received it,
[35:39.320 --> 35:46.880]  how do they prove that you were served okay in a civil suit, would they get away with
[35:46.880 --> 35:47.880]  that?
[35:47.880 --> 35:51.640]  Absolutely not.
[35:51.640 --> 35:55.680]  There is no way they could get away with that in a civil suit.
[35:55.680 --> 36:03.360]  They have to prove the other side was served and if it turns out they falsified that proof
[36:03.360 --> 36:07.280]  then they've lost their case before they even got started.
[36:07.280 --> 36:12.960]  All the other side has to do is say, judge that receipt that they claim they have with
[36:12.960 --> 36:18.400]  a signature on it, that's not my client's signature, that's not my law firm's signature.
[36:18.400 --> 36:23.480]  We didn't sign as having received anything, my client never signed as having received
[36:23.480 --> 36:29.200]  anything and his signature looks nothing like the one that's on that piece of paper.
[36:29.200 --> 36:33.960]  Therefore we submit to the court that that receipt is a forgery and that this, the other
[36:33.960 --> 36:43.800]  party has decided to fraudulently pursue a false, a directed verdict in this court because
[36:43.800 --> 36:48.600]  we didn't respond to a service we never received.
[36:48.600 --> 36:59.200]  They want a default judgment claiming they served us and yet that receipt is a forgery.
[36:59.200 --> 37:04.720]  So how does the state prove they sent what they say they sent?
[37:04.720 --> 37:09.440]  If they can't, if there was no little green card or yellow card, whatever color it is.
[37:09.440 --> 37:12.320]  Well, here's what they're going to try to say.
[37:12.320 --> 37:13.640]  We put it in the mail.
[37:13.640 --> 37:18.200]  The statute says it's all we have to do.
[37:18.200 --> 37:23.520]  That's what they're going to try to say, presuming New York has such a statute like
[37:23.520 --> 37:27.320]  Texas does, okay?
[37:27.320 --> 37:34.240]  Yeah, the problem is putting it in the mail and saying you put it in the mail does not
[37:34.240 --> 37:38.400]  prove service on the other party.
[37:38.400 --> 37:39.400]  And they have to prove-
[37:39.400 --> 37:42.400]  And no statute is going to change that.
[37:42.400 --> 37:45.640]  And they have to prove the service, am I right?
[37:45.640 --> 37:52.960]  How can they pursue a suit in court without notifying the other party of the suit?
[37:52.960 --> 37:59.400]  In New York, these are civil, right, they're administrative, but administrative is just
[37:59.400 --> 38:03.680]  another form of civil.
[38:03.680 --> 38:07.800]  And administrative courts are the absolute worst about doing what you're describing.
[38:07.800 --> 38:16.920]  They're the ones that abuse that process constantly.
[38:16.920 --> 38:23.400]  So the bottom line is they've got to be able to prove that they noticed the driver.
[38:23.400 --> 38:26.280]  That they served the driver.
[38:26.280 --> 38:27.440]  They served the driver.
[38:27.440 --> 38:28.440]  Yes.
[38:28.440 --> 38:33.200]  And if they can't, obviously, their case goes to hell.
[38:33.200 --> 38:34.200]  Yeah.
[38:34.200 --> 38:36.480]  Well, yes and no.
[38:36.480 --> 38:42.720]  What happens then is they have to serve them again in a way that they can prove they were
[38:42.720 --> 38:45.640]  served, okay?
[38:45.640 --> 38:50.880]  So that means either a processed server or certified mail, return receipt requested or
[38:50.880 --> 38:57.960]  registered mail, something that requires a signature upon delivery.
[38:57.960 --> 38:59.760]  That's how they would prove service.
[38:59.760 --> 39:00.760]  Yeah.
[39:00.760 --> 39:01.760]  Okay.
[39:01.760 --> 39:11.480]  But the problem for them remains exactly the same, okay?
[39:11.480 --> 39:13.240]  How do they prove it?
[39:13.240 --> 39:16.840]  They're saying it doesn't hold water.
[39:16.840 --> 39:24.960]  I mean, if you were suing them and you couldn't prove you had served them before taking them
[39:24.960 --> 39:28.200]  into court, what would they do?
[39:28.200 --> 39:31.160]  You'll lose.
[39:31.160 --> 39:32.560]  No.
[39:32.560 --> 39:38.440]  They would immediately follow a dismissal request for failure to provide proper service
[39:38.440 --> 39:41.640]  and lack of notice.
[39:41.640 --> 39:44.880]  That's exactly what they would do.
[39:44.880 --> 39:47.520]  So that's exactly what we should do.
[39:47.520 --> 39:48.520]  Exactly.
[39:48.520 --> 39:49.520]  Okay.
[39:49.520 --> 39:52.760]  All right.
[39:52.760 --> 39:56.920]  They can't prove it.
[39:56.920 --> 39:59.160]  They've got no case.
[39:59.160 --> 40:00.160]  That's what it was.
[40:00.160 --> 40:04.520]  Well, what it sounds like you're saying, though, is they've already given pursuit of default
[40:04.520 --> 40:05.520]  judgment.
[40:05.520 --> 40:09.160]  So now he's going to have to sue them to get that judgment overturned.
[40:09.160 --> 40:10.160]  Yeah.
[40:10.160 --> 40:15.000]  Yeah, that's exactly what happened.
[40:15.000 --> 40:19.640]  They had a hearing and they didn't invite him to it is what it boils down to.
[40:19.640 --> 40:20.640]  Yeah.
[40:20.640 --> 40:24.000]  So they could extort money out of him later to get his license back because I guarantee
[40:24.000 --> 40:26.320]  you there's extra fees associated with it.
[40:26.320 --> 40:27.320]  Yeah.
[40:27.320 --> 40:34.200]  Well, you've got a Utica New York, you've got to contact them and you have to...
[40:34.200 --> 40:35.600]  Well, not just that.
[40:35.600 --> 40:41.320]  Whatever it was they were trying to prosecute or to charge him with in order to get to that
[40:41.320 --> 40:50.040]  point of a hearing, such as speeding or DUI or whatever, if they got a default judgment
[40:50.040 --> 40:57.200]  on that, then that's a two-fold problem for him and for them.
[40:57.200 --> 40:58.200]  You know what they said?
[40:58.200 --> 41:05.520]  They said that it was probably a police officer saw him and probably the cop stopped
[41:05.520 --> 41:07.400]  him, which never happened.
[41:07.400 --> 41:08.400]  And probably...
[41:08.400 --> 41:11.560]  Well, there are no probabilities.
[41:11.560 --> 41:14.240]  They either have evidence of it or they don't.
[41:14.240 --> 41:19.200]  And if they're saying, now, are you sure this is from a court or some state agency and not
[41:19.200 --> 41:25.280]  some law firm that's misleading the person it's addressed to?
[41:25.280 --> 41:27.600]  We don't know.
[41:27.600 --> 41:32.480]  He was told, get the Freedom of Information Act and you can find out how they did this
[41:32.480 --> 41:33.480]  to you.
[41:33.480 --> 41:34.480]  What?
[41:34.480 --> 41:36.760]  What are you talking about?
[41:36.760 --> 41:38.880]  Freedom of Information Act.
[41:38.880 --> 41:42.720]  They're claiming that a cop stopped him, saw he was...
[41:42.720 --> 41:43.720]  Wait a minute.
[41:43.720 --> 41:47.280]  Who is making the claim?
[41:47.280 --> 41:52.720]  Well, the Department of Motor Vehicles claims they sent a letter in the mail, which he
[41:52.720 --> 41:53.720]  never got.
[41:53.720 --> 41:59.120]  And you're positive the communication that you have is from the New York Department of
[41:59.120 --> 42:00.720]  Motor Vehicles.
[42:00.720 --> 42:01.960]  Yeah.
[42:01.960 --> 42:07.960]  And then we did get a letter in the mail from the DMV that said, well, you didn't respond
[42:07.960 --> 42:13.280]  to our first letter, so now your license goes bye-bye.
[42:13.280 --> 42:14.400]  Which they can't do.
[42:14.400 --> 42:20.080]  They can't do an administrative license revocation without a judicial intervention.
[42:20.080 --> 42:21.080]  They can't do it.
[42:21.080 --> 42:22.080]  That's what I...
[42:22.080 --> 42:27.040]  There's Supreme Court case law on that that says they can't do it, especially if that
[42:27.040 --> 42:32.200]  license is attached to an occupation.
[42:32.200 --> 42:34.640]  Well, there's no occupation, but...
[42:34.640 --> 42:39.960]  Well, if you have a license, the presumption is that it's for an occupation, no matter
[42:39.960 --> 42:42.320]  what kind of license it is.
[42:42.320 --> 42:48.800]  Because a license can only be applied to a privilege, not a right.
[42:48.800 --> 42:49.800]  I got you.
[42:49.800 --> 42:50.800]  I got you.
[42:50.800 --> 42:51.800]  Yeah.
[42:51.800 --> 42:58.600]  And then what they're trying to say is we sent you a letter, you didn't respond to it,
[42:58.600 --> 43:03.160]  now we're going to take your license away because you didn't respond to it, and he never
[43:03.160 --> 43:05.320]  got the letter to begin with.
[43:05.320 --> 43:06.320]  We got a letter that says...
[43:06.320 --> 43:10.640]  Well, again, they cannot prove receipt of the letter, so he's going to have to sue them
[43:10.640 --> 43:12.440]  and that's what he needs to do.
[43:12.440 --> 43:13.440]  Gotcha.
[43:13.440 --> 43:14.440]  Okay.
[43:14.440 --> 43:15.440]  All right.
[43:15.440 --> 43:16.440]  Okay.
[43:16.440 --> 43:17.840]  I think you just nailed it down.
[43:17.840 --> 43:19.840]  I think you nailed it down.
[43:19.840 --> 43:20.840]  Okay.
[43:20.840 --> 43:21.840]  Yes.
[43:21.840 --> 43:22.840]  Okay.
[43:22.840 --> 43:30.520]  Now, just one last thing, is there an administrative process for bad judgments that you have to
[43:30.520 --> 43:34.280]  exhaust before you pursue a suit?
[43:34.280 --> 43:38.960]  That's another question that has to be asked, okay?
[43:38.960 --> 43:43.600]  Remember the thing about that you did not attempt to reconcile all administrative remedies
[43:43.600 --> 43:45.400]  to the issue before filing suit?
[43:45.400 --> 43:49.400]  Well, that applies everywhere.
[43:49.400 --> 43:53.560]  Make sure there's not some appeals process for this that he has to go through first and
[43:53.560 --> 43:54.560]  be turned down.
[43:54.560 --> 44:00.800]  All right, folks, we'll be right back after the break.
[44:00.800 --> 44:04.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[44:04.000 --> 44:09.960]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand four-CD
[44:09.960 --> 44:14.680]  course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[44:14.680 --> 44:18.920]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[44:18.920 --> 44:23.160]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[44:23.160 --> 44:28.440]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can, too.
[44:28.440 --> 44:34.360]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[44:34.360 --> 44:38.880]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the
[44:38.880 --> 44:43.200]  principles and practices that control our American courts.
[44:43.200 --> 44:48.880]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[44:48.880 --> 44:52.160]  prosay tactics, and much more.
[44:52.160 --> 45:01.240]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[45:01.240 --> 45:02.240]  I love logos.
[45:02.240 --> 45:05.760]  Without the shows on this network, I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends.
[45:05.760 --> 45:08.400]  I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going back.
[45:08.400 --> 45:09.600]  I need my truth fix.
[45:09.600 --> 45:14.240]  I'd be lost without logos, and I really want to help keep this network on the air.
[45:14.240 --> 45:17.760]  I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite, and I really
[45:17.760 --> 45:21.400]  don't have any money to give because I spent it all on supplements.
[45:21.400 --> 45:22.960]  How can I help logos?
[45:22.960 --> 45:24.920]  Well, I'm glad you asked.
[45:24.920 --> 45:27.920]  Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[45:27.920 --> 45:30.480]  You can order them in your supplies or holiday gifts.
[45:30.480 --> 45:32.480]  First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[45:32.480 --> 45:38.600]  Now, go to LogosRadioNetwork.com, click on the Amazon logo, and bookmark it.
[45:38.600 --> 45:44.480]  Now, when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link, and Logos gets a few pesos.
[45:44.480 --> 45:45.480]  Do I pay extra?
[45:45.480 --> 45:46.480]  No.
[45:46.480 --> 45:48.240]  Do I have anything different when I order?
[45:48.240 --> 45:49.240]  No.
[45:49.240 --> 45:50.240]  Can I use my Amazon Prime?
[45:50.240 --> 45:51.240]  No.
[45:51.240 --> 45:52.240]  I mean, yes.
[45:52.240 --> 45:56.960]  Wow, giving without doing anything or spending any money, this is perfect.
[45:56.960 --> 45:57.960]  Thank you so much.
[45:57.960 --> 45:59.440]  You're welcome.
[45:59.440 --> 46:17.400]  Happy holidays, Logos.
[46:17.400 --> 46:30.280]  All right, folks, we are packed, this is the London Outroom of All Radio Show with your
[46:30.280 --> 46:31.280]  host, Eddie Craig.
[46:31.280 --> 46:34.760]  It is March 6, 2023.
[46:34.760 --> 46:38.280]  We are live tonight, and they give me a call.
[46:38.280 --> 46:44.960]  All right, let's get this thing to work.
[46:44.960 --> 46:45.960]  I'm leaving.
[46:45.960 --> 46:47.800]  Let's get the button there we go.
[46:47.800 --> 46:53.160]  All right, now, I see John in New York is still on the line.
[46:53.160 --> 46:55.480]  John, was there something else you wanted to ask?
[46:55.480 --> 46:57.480]  No, I think that's it.
[46:57.480 --> 46:58.880]  Thanks an awful lot, Eddie.
[46:58.880 --> 47:00.680]  Okay, not a problem.
[47:00.680 --> 47:02.320]  Okay, I'm gone.
[47:02.320 --> 47:03.320]  Thank you very much.
[47:03.320 --> 47:04.320]  All right, have a good night.
[47:04.320 --> 47:05.320]  Yes, sir.
[47:05.320 --> 47:07.920]  All right, now we have Jerry in Pennsylvania.
[47:07.920 --> 47:10.640]  Jerry, what can we do for you?
[47:10.640 --> 47:12.640]  Yeah, Eddie.
[47:12.640 --> 47:13.640]  Yes?
[47:13.640 --> 47:28.280]  Yeah, the thing is, when the public official gets off the stand and is not testifying a
[47:28.280 --> 47:41.680]  line against you, and you go to the court, the upper court, they give you all this baloney
[47:41.680 --> 47:49.040]  about absolute immunity, qualified immunity, sovereign immunity.
[47:49.040 --> 47:56.760]  I've got a couple of them here, remember, from the circuit court and the U.S. court,
[47:56.760 --> 48:03.960]  where the judge keeps telling me that these public officials, like I say, when the trial
[48:03.960 --> 48:09.120]  is over to get done lying, that they've got immunity on all this stuff.
[48:09.120 --> 48:14.120]  Now, the thing is, if they keep telling me this case, I don't know what he might be
[48:14.120 --> 48:23.960]  going with it, Bosco versus LaHue, and that was the case there, where the cop lied on
[48:23.960 --> 48:30.640]  the stand, and then after the trial was over and everything, the guy went to the appeals
[48:30.640 --> 48:41.680]  court, and they got it out of the 7th circuit there, and they said that they had absolute
[48:41.680 --> 48:42.680]  immunity.
[48:42.680 --> 48:48.120]  Here's the deal.
[48:48.120 --> 48:52.960]  The qualified immunity BS is exactly that, it's BS.
[48:52.960 --> 48:57.360]  But here's the way it's working at the moment.
[48:57.360 --> 49:03.760]  You have every court below the Supreme Court of the United States that is attempting to
[49:03.760 --> 49:13.000]  pass the buck instead of render an opinion on virtually any case that involves public
[49:13.000 --> 49:14.880]  officials.
[49:14.880 --> 49:19.520]  They don't want to be the one that holds the public official accountable.
[49:19.520 --> 49:28.120]  So they throw out qualified or official immunity at every turn of the hat in order to not have
[49:28.120 --> 49:34.080]  to render that opinion, and then they use the excuse that the particular facts of this
[49:34.080 --> 49:42.680]  case are not 100% on point with the facts of a case already decided, either at this
[49:42.680 --> 49:51.360]  level or a higher level court to make what you're alleging an actual rights violation
[49:51.360 --> 49:52.960]  in and of itself.
[49:52.960 --> 49:58.280]  Now that's what the lower courts are all doing, every last one of them.
[49:58.280 --> 50:04.160]  However, I forget which case it is, but it wasn't all that long ago, the United States
[50:04.160 --> 50:11.080]  Supreme Court finally handed down an opinion that says that is not how the qualified immunity
[50:11.080 --> 50:14.680]  doctrine is supposed to work.
[50:14.680 --> 50:19.080]  The case does not have to be 100% on point.
[50:19.080 --> 50:24.680]  It just has to have a similar fact pattern and elements.
[50:24.680 --> 50:33.320]  If it can be associated fact wise and circumstance wise, then it's on point enough to make a
[50:33.320 --> 50:38.520]  determination about qualified or official immunity.
[50:38.520 --> 50:46.720]  Now the only people that have absolute immunity for their acts in their official capacities
[50:46.720 --> 50:48.600]  are judges.
[50:48.600 --> 50:52.240]  Right or wrong, it's judges and they gave it to themselves.
[50:52.240 --> 50:58.160]  There's no law that gives it to them, they gave it to themselves.
[50:58.160 --> 51:07.080]  Not even a prosecutor is 100% immune for his actions in his official capacity if it is shown
[51:07.080 --> 51:12.120]  that his actions actually constituted a violation of the rights of the unknowing and willful
[51:12.120 --> 51:15.880]  violation of the rights of the individual.
[51:15.880 --> 51:20.800]  We know this because of the recent cases where these prosecutors who sent people to prison
[51:20.800 --> 51:27.080]  on trumped up charges they knew to be false are now being prosecuted and sued and it's
[51:27.080 --> 51:29.520]  allowed to happen.
[51:29.520 --> 51:34.840]  Now it doesn't happen often, not nearly as much as it probably needs to happen and should
[51:34.840 --> 51:41.000]  happen but it is happening from time to time.
[51:41.000 --> 51:49.160]  That doesn't happen with judges, okay, and they gave themselves that immunity.
[51:49.160 --> 51:56.120]  So therein lies the problem that you're dealing with, however, the claim of immunity without
[51:56.120 --> 52:04.360]  proof that they've looked at the other cases that are similar, not just exactly the same
[52:04.360 --> 52:13.000]  but are at least similar enough to be applicable, then that's an appeal that can be made that
[52:13.000 --> 52:18.600]  the court abused its discretion in holding that qualified or absolute or official immunity
[52:18.600 --> 52:20.840]  even applied.
[52:20.840 --> 52:23.040]  And you go from there.
[52:23.040 --> 52:32.160]  Well, that's what I usually do anyway when they throw a case in that, I usually go through
[52:32.160 --> 52:38.360]  the case, read the whole thing, decipher it, then sit down and write it up and throw it
[52:38.360 --> 52:44.360]  right back at him and point out what the problem was with the case in the first place.
[52:44.360 --> 52:50.680]  It takes a lot of time to do but that's the only way you're going to do it.
[52:50.680 --> 52:58.640]  I know for a fact that one case here where the guy was playing his radio too loud and
[52:58.640 --> 53:04.240]  he went to court and everything, he lost the case, they keep throwing that thing at me
[53:04.240 --> 53:08.800]  and I keep, I already know the neighborhood, I even know the town.
[53:08.800 --> 53:16.120]  I know how crooked the shrub is in that town and I'm playing so I know firsthand, I don't
[53:16.120 --> 53:21.400]  know the people in the case but I know about the case and the vicinity is different so
[53:21.400 --> 53:26.080]  I have some idea of what these circuit judges are doing.
[53:26.080 --> 53:33.840]  And what I did is like this one here, what's the same thing but here you go again if they're
[53:33.840 --> 53:42.400]  outside of scope and I've got the testimony of the witness on the witness stand lying
[53:42.400 --> 53:45.720]  and then I have documents where...
[53:45.720 --> 53:48.440]  How are you proving the witnesses lying?
[53:48.440 --> 53:55.160]  The statement, the declaratory statement.
[53:55.160 --> 54:00.480]  When they get these public officials in office, they're not all that bright, they're somebody's
[54:00.480 --> 54:01.480]  relative.
[54:01.480 --> 54:06.160]  That's the whole problem with most of these cops running around, they have no idea what
[54:06.160 --> 54:10.440]  the tax is going on, their brother-in-law or something, they won the election and they
[54:10.440 --> 54:14.080]  call them over and say, hey, Harry, come on over, give me the uniform, give me the gun,
[54:14.080 --> 54:16.240]  go to work, you know you got a job.
[54:16.240 --> 54:19.720]  Well, you can see that even right now in that circuit.
[54:19.720 --> 54:23.400]  That doesn't help what we're trying to figure out here.
[54:23.400 --> 54:25.400]  What declaratory statement?
[54:25.400 --> 54:32.120]  Well, no, no, in a declaratory statement, right, didn't coincide with the testimony
[54:32.120 --> 54:36.240]  that was given on the stand, you know what I mean?
[54:36.240 --> 54:41.000]  Is the declaratory statement signed under oath and penalty of perjury?
[54:41.000 --> 54:44.400]  Yeah, it's signed in a...
[54:44.400 --> 54:50.400]  No, is it signed under oath and penalty of perjury?
[54:50.400 --> 54:54.200]  It says that right on there.
[54:54.200 --> 54:55.440]  Okay.
[54:55.440 --> 55:02.400]  If that's the case, then how are you using it to prove that the testimony is false?
[55:02.400 --> 55:10.280]  Well, I think declaratory judgment, it doesn't go out, everything that was just on that.
[55:10.280 --> 55:20.960]  A declaratory judgment and a declaratory statement are not the same thing.
[55:20.960 --> 55:23.920]  Okay, I got it here.
[55:23.920 --> 55:27.640]  I can't put my fingers on it right away.
[55:27.640 --> 55:32.040]  The declaratory statement, you're right, the declaratory statement, that's what it
[55:32.040 --> 55:33.040]  is.
[55:33.040 --> 55:34.040]  Okay.
[55:34.040 --> 55:38.480]  I don't know, I haven't seen it, I'm assuming you're right, you should know you're the
[55:38.480 --> 55:39.480]  one reading it.
[55:39.480 --> 55:43.720]  I'm just telling you that a judgment and a statement are not the same thing.
[55:43.720 --> 55:47.360]  I didn't know there was a declaratory judgment.
[55:47.360 --> 55:52.040]  Yes, that's what happens in a civil suit when one side defaults, they get a declaratory
[55:52.040 --> 55:54.440]  judgment in their favor.
[55:54.440 --> 55:55.440]  Yeah.
[55:55.440 --> 55:59.480]  The court declares them the winner, hence declaratory judgment.
[55:59.480 --> 56:00.480]  No.
[56:00.480 --> 56:02.760]  Okay, you've caught me off guard.
[56:02.760 --> 56:08.800]  I know what the difference has been, so okay, so you take the testimony and you take the
[56:08.800 --> 56:13.800]  transcript and you put the whole thing together and write it up, right?
[56:13.800 --> 56:14.800]  Okay.
[56:14.800 --> 56:15.800]  Right.
[56:15.800 --> 56:22.480]  Well, that's how you prove that they're lying.
[56:22.480 --> 56:30.960]  And then they come back and they say, well, we got absolute immunity from a 1983 suit
[56:30.960 --> 56:35.800]  for damages based upon the performance of the testimony.
[56:35.800 --> 56:40.400]  Well, who is the witness that provided the testimony?
[56:40.400 --> 56:44.320]  The public official, the township.
[56:44.320 --> 56:53.320]  I had the code enforcement officer come in here and tell me that this place was a you-know-what
[56:53.320 --> 56:58.320]  and gave me 40 tickets, like patients.
[56:58.320 --> 57:00.320]  So we were caught over.
[57:00.320 --> 57:01.320]  What place?
[57:01.320 --> 57:02.320]  And I sued him.
[57:02.320 --> 57:03.320]  No.
[57:03.320 --> 57:04.320]  Where I live.
[57:04.320 --> 57:12.720]  I got junk vehicles, my car is junk, the grass is too high, there's no lid on the trash
[57:12.720 --> 57:21.240]  town, you know, all that stuff, whatever they could find, you know, you've got a dog, you've
[57:21.240 --> 57:27.040]  got a cat, you've got chickens, you've got a goldfish, I mean, you name it, you know.
[57:27.040 --> 57:31.400]  Are the things they're charging you with things that are enacted by the state legislature
[57:31.400 --> 57:34.480]  or are these local ordinance policies?
[57:34.480 --> 57:36.680]  There's some local ordinance.
[57:36.680 --> 57:37.680]  Okay.
[57:37.680 --> 57:44.000]  Then where do they have jurisdiction to apply them to private property and private people?
[57:44.000 --> 57:49.560]  Does your state constitution give municipalities and counties the ability to create local ordinances
[57:49.560 --> 57:54.320]  as if they're the same as binding public law or does your constitution only give your
[57:54.320 --> 57:59.240]  legislature the power to create binding public law?
[57:59.240 --> 58:06.320]  When I sat in the courtroom, I told Judd that he did not have rhetoric matters, he ignored
[58:06.320 --> 58:09.960]  me and right to the city attorney to start.
[58:09.960 --> 58:10.960]  Okay.
[58:10.960 --> 58:11.960]  Hold on.
[58:11.960 --> 58:12.960]  Stop, stop, stop.
[58:12.960 --> 58:13.960]  Hang on.
[58:13.960 --> 58:16.960]  Let me take this break and we'll continue this conversation on the other side.
[58:16.960 --> 58:17.960]  All right.
[58:17.960 --> 58:18.960]  512-646-1984.
[58:18.960 --> 58:22.280]  I need some callers to talk to.
[58:22.280 --> 58:26.680]  I got an hour left in this show and I would really like to talk to some folks.
[58:26.680 --> 58:29.560]  We're going to try to get this thing rolling back in the way it used to be.
[58:29.560 --> 58:32.240]  So please get in line, give us a call and let's talk.
[58:32.240 --> 58:33.240]  Y'all hang on.
[58:33.240 --> 58:50.240]  We'll be right back after this break.
[58:50.240 --> 58:55.680]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated
[58:55.680 --> 58:58.480]  because they struggle to understand it.
[58:58.480 --> 59:03.880]  Some new translations try to help by simplifying the text, but in the process can compromise
[59:03.880 --> 59:07.120]  the profound meaning of the Scripture.
[59:07.120 --> 59:08.920]  Enter the recovery version.
[59:08.920 --> 59:14.840]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more
[59:14.840 --> 59:18.560]  than 9,000 explanatory footnotes.
[59:18.560 --> 59:23.520]  Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance
[59:23.520 --> 59:28.240]  into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:28.240 --> 59:33.400]  Bibles for America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:33.400 --> 59:43.840]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102
[59:43.840 --> 59:47.880]  or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:47.880 --> 59:49.880]  That's freestudybible.com.
[59:49.880 --> 59:56.760]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network, LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[59:56.760 --> 01:00:04.480]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[01:00:04.480 --> 01:00:07.920]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:00:07.920 --> 01:00:09.440]  Our liberty depends on it.
[01:00:09.440 --> 01:00:13.320]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[01:00:13.320 --> 01:00:16.000]  one of your constitutional rights.
[01:00:16.000 --> 01:00:18.040]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:00:18.040 --> 01:00:21.640]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:00:21.640 --> 01:00:26.440]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:00:26.440 --> 01:00:31.680]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:00:31.680 --> 01:00:34.200]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:00:34.200 --> 01:00:38.520]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[01:00:38.520 --> 01:00:42.000]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:00:42.000 --> 01:00:45.600]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:00:45.600 --> 01:00:49.960]  When I think of the Second Amendment, I visualize myself wrapping my two arms around the Bill
[01:00:49.960 --> 01:00:52.040]  of Rights in a big old bear hug.
[01:00:52.040 --> 01:00:56.520]  It's how I remember that the Second Amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms.
[01:00:56.520 --> 01:01:00.400]  Arms that embrace our freedoms and won't let anyone take them away without a fight.
[01:01:00.400 --> 01:01:01.400]  Get it?
[01:01:01.400 --> 01:01:02.400]  Two arms?
[01:01:02.400 --> 01:01:03.400]  Bear hug?
[01:01:03.400 --> 01:01:04.400]  Bear arms?
[01:01:04.400 --> 01:01:07.360]  The late Senator Hubert Humphrey captured the spirit of the Second Amendment so well
[01:01:07.360 --> 01:01:12.080]  when he said, the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against
[01:01:12.080 --> 01:01:17.240]  arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America,
[01:01:17.240 --> 01:01:20.240]  but which historically has proved to always be possible.
[01:01:20.240 --> 01:01:33.400]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:01:33.400 --> 01:01:37.880]  You may think our brains deteriorate with age, but new research shows that as brains get
[01:01:37.880 --> 01:01:40.160]  older, they actually work more efficiently.
[01:01:40.160 --> 01:01:45.600]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, back with new research on how aging makes the mind sharper
[01:01:45.600 --> 01:01:47.360]  after this.
[01:01:47.360 --> 01:01:49.080]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:01:49.080 --> 01:01:52.680]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:01:52.680 --> 01:01:57.680]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:01:57.680 --> 01:01:59.200]  So protect your rights.
[01:01:59.200 --> 01:02:02.880]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:02:02.880 --> 01:02:05.440]  Privacy, it's worth hanging onto.
[01:02:05.440 --> 01:02:11.160]  This message is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[01:02:11.160 --> 01:02:12.760]  Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:02:12.760 --> 01:02:16.400]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:02:16.400 --> 01:02:20.920]  It's a widely held notion that the older people get, the more doddering they become.
[01:02:20.920 --> 01:02:26.640]  But new research shows that even as our brains age, they can actually become more efficient.
[01:02:26.640 --> 01:02:33.600]  Scientists ask two groups of volunteers, one age 18 to 35 and the other 55 to 75, to associate
[01:02:33.600 --> 01:02:35.880]  different words with given topics.
[01:02:35.880 --> 01:02:39.040]  At one point, they told everyone they'd made a mistake.
[01:02:39.040 --> 01:02:42.600]  When that happened, the younger groups' brains lit up and lost focus.
[01:02:42.600 --> 01:02:47.000]  But the older groups' brains didn't even flinch, and they stayed focused on solving
[01:02:47.000 --> 01:02:48.320]  the next task.
[01:02:48.320 --> 01:02:49.320]  The moral?
[01:02:49.320 --> 01:02:51.040]  There's something to be said for experience.
[01:02:51.040 --> 01:03:18.040]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:03:18.040 --> 01:03:23.040]  All right folks, we are back, this is Rule of Law Radio, Monday Night Show, with your host,
[01:03:23.040 --> 01:03:25.600]  Eddie Craig, and it's March 6, 2023.
[01:03:25.600 --> 01:03:29.120]  We are live tonight, and we are going good.
[01:03:29.120 --> 01:03:31.760]  Right now, we are talking to Jerry in Pennsylvania.
[01:03:31.760 --> 01:03:38.080]  All right, Jerry, let's continue this on and see if we can wrap it up.
[01:03:38.080 --> 01:03:41.760]  What exactly is your question for me?
[01:03:41.760 --> 01:03:49.240]  Well, they keep throwing this qualified immunity at me, so I thought I'd call you and see if
[01:03:49.240 --> 01:03:51.840]  you could explain it.
[01:03:51.840 --> 01:04:00.200]  But like you say, I read someplace for what you said, it hit me just now, that there was
[01:04:00.200 --> 01:04:07.840]  something at the seventh circuit over there on a case that somebody was trying to, a lawyer
[01:04:07.840 --> 01:04:15.040]  or something, was trying to explain what you were saying, and I started looking for just
[01:04:15.040 --> 01:04:22.320]  Supreme Court cases now, so that I'd avoid any circuit cases, you know what I mean?
[01:04:22.320 --> 01:04:27.480]  So if I spend the time reading the circuit case and find out it's no good anyway, they're
[01:04:27.480 --> 01:04:28.880]  trying to dodge it.
[01:04:28.880 --> 01:04:29.880]  Exactly.
[01:04:29.880 --> 01:04:35.200]  The Supreme Court case will overrule the circuit case no matter what the circuit case is.
[01:04:35.200 --> 01:04:42.280]  Yeah, but the Supreme Court is held to a higher standard, so they'd have to...
[01:04:42.280 --> 01:04:43.280]  No, they're not.
[01:04:43.280 --> 01:04:46.120]  Who holds the Supreme Court to a higher standard?
[01:04:46.120 --> 01:04:48.280]  Who's above them?
[01:04:48.280 --> 01:04:49.720]  Absolutely nobody.
[01:04:49.720 --> 01:04:52.400]  And they're appointed for life in good behavior.
[01:04:52.400 --> 01:04:58.360]  So unless they get impeached for bad behavior, they're not held to any standard other than
[01:04:58.360 --> 01:05:06.000]  public opinion that doesn't get them out of office and doesn't affect how they do things.
[01:05:06.000 --> 01:05:10.200]  Well I figured the Congress put some pressure on it because the voters...
[01:05:10.200 --> 01:05:14.640]  The only thing Congress can do is impeach them for bad behavior.
[01:05:14.640 --> 01:05:19.080]  Can you tell me how many times in our nation's history that has actually happened to a United
[01:05:19.080 --> 01:05:22.360]  States Supreme Court justice?
[01:05:22.360 --> 01:05:23.960]  No matter how bad they were?
[01:05:23.960 --> 01:05:28.480]  I've never heard of it, I've never heard of one of the judges getting kicked off.
[01:05:28.480 --> 01:05:29.480]  I've heard of it.
[01:05:29.480 --> 01:05:31.360]  It ain't happened in my lifetime.
[01:05:31.360 --> 01:05:32.360]  Louisiana.
[01:05:32.360 --> 01:05:34.800]  But I don't know what...
[01:05:34.800 --> 01:05:42.480]  I got it here someplace, they kicked a circuit judge off the bench in Louisiana circuit.
[01:05:42.480 --> 01:05:43.480]  What circuit that is?
[01:05:43.480 --> 01:05:48.840]  I don't know, but instead of Louisiana, I don't know, seven, I don't know which one
[01:05:48.840 --> 01:05:49.840]  that was.
[01:05:49.840 --> 01:05:54.840]  Louisiana is at least part of it, it's under the fifth circuit, I think.
[01:05:54.840 --> 01:06:01.800]  Well, I put it on the side, but I got so much stuff here that I didn't really know who
[01:06:01.800 --> 01:06:04.760]  the heck cares what a judge does his job.
[01:06:04.760 --> 01:06:09.640]  But I guess I'm going to have to find it and find out why they kicked me out, what was
[01:06:09.640 --> 01:06:10.640]  the reason.
[01:06:10.640 --> 01:06:12.960]  There might be something interesting there.
[01:06:12.960 --> 01:06:15.400]  In fact, maybe I could use it.
[01:06:15.400 --> 01:06:21.920]  I know a couple of times, stuff that's down to, you know, regardless, you can use in
[01:06:21.920 --> 01:06:25.720]  some of these cases, you know?
[01:06:25.720 --> 01:06:29.920]  If you can show that the case is at least somewhat on point with how you're trying to
[01:06:29.920 --> 01:06:31.320]  use it, yes.
[01:06:31.320 --> 01:06:35.360]  Otherwise, the opposing counsel is going to bring up the fact that it's not relevant
[01:06:35.360 --> 01:06:40.080]  to this case because the issues in that case are not the same as the issues in this case.
[01:06:40.080 --> 01:06:43.600]  Oh, yeah, I'll make sure they're pretty close.
[01:06:43.600 --> 01:06:50.320]  So here's the thing is that every time these judges send me something, it's always something
[01:06:50.320 --> 01:06:52.760]  that has nothing to do with the case anyway.
[01:06:52.760 --> 01:06:54.600]  Yeah, and that part's true.
[01:06:54.600 --> 01:06:57.800]  They do that a lot, but they sure won't let you get away with it.
[01:06:57.800 --> 01:06:58.800]  Oh, yeah.
[01:06:58.800 --> 01:07:03.480]  If they can do it, that's fine, but they don't want you, a layman or anybody else, getting
[01:07:03.480 --> 01:07:07.440]  away with it and proving that they don't know what the hell they're doing because that's
[01:07:07.440 --> 01:07:09.640]  exactly what it would prove.
[01:07:09.640 --> 01:07:13.960]  Well, this is what I'm trying to write now.
[01:07:13.960 --> 01:07:15.720]  I got like 12 pages here.
[01:07:15.720 --> 01:07:19.480]  I spent two, three weeks on stupid things.
[01:07:19.480 --> 01:07:27.760]  I sent in a complaint disability on this judge, right, in fact, two or three judges
[01:07:27.760 --> 01:07:28.760]  over there.
[01:07:28.760 --> 01:07:34.920]  Anyway, so I figured I'd get one, I took the worst one, and that's when I was writing
[01:07:34.920 --> 01:07:35.920]  it up.
[01:07:35.920 --> 01:07:42.680]  This is what I was working on, was disqualified immunity to keep doing.
[01:07:42.680 --> 01:07:48.360]  I got all the other ones that they said, I pretty much tore them all apart and everything.
[01:07:48.360 --> 01:07:51.560]  So this is not going as a motion or anything.
[01:07:51.560 --> 01:07:57.560]  This is going to a complaint against a judge, a U.S. judge.
[01:07:57.560 --> 01:08:00.600]  So it's going over to the chief circuit judge.
[01:08:00.600 --> 01:08:01.600]  Okay.
[01:08:01.600 --> 01:08:08.880]  So if he buys it, if he buys it, then I guess what is he going to do, kick the judge off
[01:08:08.880 --> 01:08:09.880]  the bench?
[01:08:09.880 --> 01:08:15.280]  Well, they'll put it under a judicial review hearing probably, but yeah, they'll do something
[01:08:15.280 --> 01:08:17.880]  if they find it noteworthy to do something.
[01:08:17.880 --> 01:08:26.760]  Yeah, they always, the three judges are always on the paperwork here, and I always, I always
[01:08:26.760 --> 01:08:32.040]  follow on them anyway, you know, to make sure that they know that I'm out here.
[01:08:32.040 --> 01:08:33.040]  Okay.
[01:08:33.040 --> 01:08:34.040]  You know what I'm saying?
[01:08:34.040 --> 01:08:36.040]  Well, give it a shot and see what happens.
[01:08:36.040 --> 01:08:37.040]  Okay.
[01:08:37.040 --> 01:08:38.040]  All right.
[01:08:38.040 --> 01:08:39.040]  All right.
[01:08:39.040 --> 01:08:40.040]  Thank you.
[01:08:40.040 --> 01:08:41.040]  You're welcome, Jerry.
[01:08:41.040 --> 01:08:42.040]  Thanks for calling.
[01:08:42.040 --> 01:08:43.040]  All right.
[01:08:43.040 --> 01:08:45.040]  Have a good night.
[01:08:45.040 --> 01:08:46.200]  All right.
[01:08:46.200 --> 01:08:49.480]  Our next caller up is Reina in Utah.
[01:08:49.480 --> 01:08:50.480]  It looks like.
[01:08:50.480 --> 01:08:52.000]  Reina, what can I do for you?
[01:08:52.000 --> 01:08:53.000]  Hey, Eddie.
[01:08:53.000 --> 01:08:54.000]  How are you?
[01:08:54.000 --> 01:08:55.000]  I'm good.
[01:08:55.000 --> 01:08:56.000]  And you?
[01:08:56.000 --> 01:08:57.000]  I'm good.
[01:08:57.000 --> 01:08:58.000]  Good.
[01:08:58.000 --> 01:08:59.000]  Welcome back to the airwaves.
[01:08:59.000 --> 01:09:00.000]  I missed you.
[01:09:00.000 --> 01:09:01.000]  Well, thank you.
[01:09:01.000 --> 01:09:02.000]  A couple of Mondays there.
[01:09:02.000 --> 01:09:05.000]  I didn't know I was that popular in Utah.
[01:09:05.000 --> 01:09:06.000]  Well, yeah.
[01:09:06.000 --> 01:09:11.640]  Well, you just, everything that you have on your website and everything applies specifically
[01:09:11.640 --> 01:09:16.640]  to my case, it seems like, so I like it when you're, when you come on live.
[01:09:16.640 --> 01:09:21.400]  So the case, my case, I don't know if you remember.
[01:09:21.400 --> 01:09:25.440]  There were three cops that pulled me and my brother over.
[01:09:25.440 --> 01:09:27.960]  I had a dog did a search and all that.
[01:09:27.960 --> 01:09:33.880]  So I submitted for a FOIA request and I know it could have been part of my discovery, or
[01:09:33.880 --> 01:09:37.600]  at least I think it could have been, but I didn't know that at the time, but I still
[01:09:37.600 --> 01:09:38.600]  got the information.
[01:09:38.600 --> 01:09:48.000]  So I asked for the, the dog's certification and training like you told me to, and his
[01:09:48.000 --> 01:09:52.800]  is expired two years prior.
[01:09:52.800 --> 01:09:59.360]  And then all three of the cops, I asked for their oath of office and their surety bonds
[01:09:59.360 --> 01:10:05.160]  and the reply was, we don't have any oath of office on record and we don't know what
[01:10:05.160 --> 01:10:07.240]  you mean by surety bond.
[01:10:07.240 --> 01:10:09.840]  Who did you ask for that information?
[01:10:09.840 --> 01:10:16.720]  Well, they have a, you do it online here and it's a site just called, it's called
[01:10:16.720 --> 01:10:23.920]  grandma, government record, something, something, something, management.
[01:10:23.920 --> 01:10:30.920]  Okay, but understand something that system may only cover statewide records.
[01:10:30.920 --> 01:10:37.080]  It may not cover local records and depending upon how your state constitution or your state
[01:10:37.080 --> 01:10:44.440]  law requires certain kinds of records to be kept, like for example, here in Texas, local
[01:10:44.440 --> 01:10:51.880]  cops, oath of office are kept by the municipality.
[01:10:51.880 --> 01:11:00.320]  And the secretary, the city secretary is the custodian of record for the municipality.
[01:11:00.320 --> 01:11:06.240]  She's the one that has their oath of offices, not their police department, not the state,
[01:11:06.240 --> 01:11:13.000]  not the district, but that city that employs that cop has their oath of office.
[01:11:13.000 --> 01:11:17.640]  They're the ones that had to administer it and they're the ones that keep it on file.
[01:11:17.640 --> 01:11:23.800]  Then when you have people like say, for instance, district judges here in the state of Texas,
[01:11:23.800 --> 01:11:30.920]  a district judge's oath of office is actually held at the secretary of state's office.
[01:11:30.920 --> 01:11:36.600]  Whereas the county judges, the county courts of law and the justices of the peace and
[01:11:36.600 --> 01:11:45.560]  municipal court judges, the municipal court judges records are held by the municipal municipality,
[01:11:45.560 --> 01:11:46.840]  just like the cops.
[01:11:46.840 --> 01:11:53.200]  The justice of the pieces records are held by the county clerk, as are the county court
[01:11:53.200 --> 01:11:55.960]  judges such as the constitutional county court.
[01:11:55.960 --> 01:12:04.320]  But the county court at law, they're, yeah, I'm sorry, the county court at law is also
[01:12:04.320 --> 01:12:07.440]  held by the county clerk if I'm not mistaken here in Texas.
[01:12:07.440 --> 01:12:12.120]  So again, who you ask for that record can directly impact about whether or not they
[01:12:12.120 --> 01:12:14.600]  have it and you find it.
[01:12:14.600 --> 01:12:19.160]  So don't presume that a cop's records are kept in this database you're talking about
[01:12:19.160 --> 01:12:24.440]  if you have not specifically gone to the municipality that employs them and made the same request.
[01:12:24.440 --> 01:12:25.440]  Okay.
[01:12:25.440 --> 01:12:32.760]  Well, one of the things that they do is they publish every request they make it public.
[01:12:32.760 --> 01:12:38.000]  And so I just, you know, scrolled through the list and I saw a few other sheriffs both
[01:12:38.000 --> 01:12:40.800]  of office within this list.
[01:12:40.800 --> 01:12:48.400]  But the sheriff is a county wide official, which still differentiates them from a municipality,
[01:12:48.400 --> 01:12:54.120]  which is only a local area official, right.
[01:12:54.120 --> 01:13:00.720]  And so the request that I submitted was to the county actually, and it has been a sheriff's
[01:13:00.720 --> 01:13:01.720]  deputy.
[01:13:01.720 --> 01:13:02.720]  Yes.
[01:13:02.720 --> 01:13:03.720]  Okay.
[01:13:03.720 --> 01:13:04.720]  Yeah.
[01:13:04.720 --> 01:13:09.200]  And the county said they didn't have any such records.
[01:13:09.200 --> 01:13:10.200]  Yeah.
[01:13:10.200 --> 01:13:11.200]  Yep.
[01:13:11.200 --> 01:13:12.200]  They said they didn't have any.
[01:13:12.200 --> 01:13:18.560]  And does the state constitution and state law require such an oath to exist and be kept?
[01:13:18.560 --> 01:13:20.520]  I believe so.
[01:13:20.520 --> 01:13:25.520]  And who does the constitution or state law identify as the peer as the person responsible
[01:13:25.520 --> 01:13:29.200]  for the maintenance of that record?
[01:13:29.200 --> 01:13:32.440]  What was that last part again?
[01:13:32.440 --> 01:13:38.520]  What does the constitution or the state law say about who is responsible, the custodian
[01:13:38.520 --> 01:13:42.920]  for that specific record for that specific level?
[01:13:42.920 --> 01:13:43.920]  Okay.
[01:13:43.920 --> 01:13:49.360]  Does it say who has to maintain it and where?
[01:13:49.360 --> 01:13:50.360]  And then for how long?
[01:13:50.360 --> 01:13:51.360]  I believe it does.
[01:13:51.360 --> 01:13:52.360]  I just don't know.
[01:13:52.360 --> 01:13:53.360]  Okay.
[01:13:53.360 --> 01:13:57.860]  And does it, and does your state constitution or your state law state what does the state
[01:13:57.860 --> 01:14:06.480]  law, what are the consequences for such an oath or document not existing?
[01:14:06.480 --> 01:14:13.200]  For instance, here in Texas, the state constitution says no person can assume the capacity of
[01:14:13.200 --> 01:14:19.160]  their, and affect any of the duties of their official office until that oath has been filed.
[01:14:19.160 --> 01:14:26.000]  And that oath cannot be filed until the anti bribery statement has been filed.
[01:14:26.000 --> 01:14:33.960]  So here they have to actually have two under oath statements on file before they can even
[01:14:33.960 --> 01:14:37.800]  begin to act in an official capacity.
[01:14:37.800 --> 01:14:41.160]  What does your state say about that?
[01:14:41.160 --> 01:14:42.280]  That's a very good question.
[01:14:42.280 --> 01:14:48.680]  I don't know entirely and I should have taken a look at that before I jumped on, but I will
[01:14:48.680 --> 01:14:53.400]  now and just make sure that I cover all my bases.
[01:14:53.400 --> 01:14:59.280]  Now be aware that this is an argument that the courts tend to ignore, but the problem
[01:14:59.280 --> 01:15:06.360]  is for by them ignoring it, they're never addressing the issue of the individual in question acting
[01:15:06.360 --> 01:15:09.000]  without lawful legitimate authority.
[01:15:09.000 --> 01:15:13.080]  They're simply presuming the existence of that authority because the person's committing
[01:15:13.080 --> 01:15:20.920]  the acts and wearing the uniform and therefore are considered disure rightful officers.
[01:15:20.920 --> 01:15:25.280]  The problem is that the state constitution or state law says that they cannot perform
[01:15:25.280 --> 01:15:29.160]  those duties without that paperwork having been filed.
[01:15:29.160 --> 01:15:31.760]  They can't be disure.
[01:15:31.760 --> 01:15:39.760]  There is no legitimately legal way to hold them as being disure and they are only de facto
[01:15:39.760 --> 01:15:42.520]  meaning they are actually an officer.
[01:15:42.520 --> 01:15:51.560]  In fact, when those documents that are required by constitution law or both have been filed
[01:15:51.560 --> 01:15:58.520]  to complete the cycle that delegates that power into their hands.
[01:15:58.520 --> 01:16:04.740]  If that hasn't happened, they're acting illegally without lawful authority and a disure declaration
[01:16:04.740 --> 01:16:09.480]  by the court is a violation of state law and the state constitution if and when they
[01:16:09.480 --> 01:16:12.800]  do that.
[01:16:12.800 --> 01:16:21.400]  Okay, so I'll look those things up and verify for sure.
[01:16:21.400 --> 01:16:27.480]  Now if you know it says that they have to have those and and all of that or they haven't
[01:16:27.480 --> 01:16:34.760]  completed their duties to have that authority, do I have remedy against them?
[01:16:34.760 --> 01:16:41.120]  Sure, you can if they if you've got a conviction, you can seek to have it overturned because
[01:16:41.120 --> 01:16:44.580]  the initial seizure was illegal and unconstitutional.
[01:16:44.580 --> 01:16:47.680]  There's all kinds of ways to a collateral the attack it on those grounds.
[01:16:47.680 --> 01:16:48.680]  Hang on just a second.
[01:16:48.680 --> 01:16:50.960]  Let me take this break and then we'll finish up.
[01:16:50.960 --> 01:16:51.960]  Okay.
[01:16:51.960 --> 01:16:52.960]  All right, folks, 512-646-1984.
[01:16:52.960 --> 01:16:53.960]  Give us a call.
[01:16:53.960 --> 01:16:54.960]  Get in line.
[01:16:54.960 --> 01:16:55.960]  Let's have somebody to talk to.
[01:16:55.960 --> 01:17:00.960]  We'll be right back.
[01:17:00.960 --> 01:17:05.400]  Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and a better understanding of His
[01:17:05.400 --> 01:17:06.400]  Word?
[01:17:06.400 --> 01:17:11.520]  Then tune in to LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. central time for scripture
[01:17:11.520 --> 01:17:17.920]  talk where Nana and her guests discuss the scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15.
[01:17:17.920 --> 01:17:22.440]  Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needed not to be ashamed, rightly
[01:17:22.440 --> 01:17:24.840]  dividing the word of truth.
[01:17:24.840 --> 01:17:28.800]  Starting in January, our first hour studies are in the book of Mark where we'll go verse
[01:17:28.800 --> 01:17:32.160]  by verse and discuss the true gospel message.
[01:17:32.160 --> 01:17:36.800]  Our second hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions on sound doctrine
[01:17:36.800 --> 01:17:39.160]  and Christian character development.
[01:17:39.160 --> 01:17:43.680]  We wish to reflect God's light and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear.
[01:17:43.680 --> 01:17:48.000]  Our goal is to strengthen our faith and to transform ourselves more into the likeness
[01:17:48.000 --> 01:17:50.240]  of our Lord and Savior Jesus.
[01:17:50.240 --> 01:17:56.680]  So tune into scripture talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire
[01:17:56.680 --> 01:18:00.720]  and motivate your studies of the scriptures.
[01:18:00.720 --> 01:18:05.720]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[01:18:05.720 --> 01:18:09.480]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mirras Proven Method.
[01:18:09.480 --> 01:18:13.840]  Michael Mirras has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you
[01:18:13.840 --> 01:18:14.840]  can win too.
[01:18:14.840 --> 01:18:19.640]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal
[01:18:19.640 --> 01:18:21.320]  civil rights statutes.
[01:18:21.320 --> 01:18:24.960]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons?
[01:18:24.960 --> 01:18:27.000]  How to answer letters and phone calls?
[01:18:27.000 --> 01:18:29.600]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report?
[01:18:29.600 --> 01:18:34.240]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away?
[01:18:34.240 --> 01:18:39.040]  The Michael Mirras Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:18:39.040 --> 01:18:41.520]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:18:41.520 --> 01:18:47.040]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mirras banner
[01:18:47.040 --> 01:18:50.040]  or email [email protected].
[01:18:50.040 --> 01:18:57.760]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com.
[01:18:57.760 --> 01:19:25.440]  To learn how to stop debt collectors now, as I walk through the valley of the shadow
[01:19:25.440 --> 01:19:30.680]  of the sun, I take a look at my life and realize it's not a step, because I've been blasting
[01:19:30.680 --> 01:19:37.000]  and laughing so low and bad, even my mama thinks that my mind is gonna fly.
[01:19:37.000 --> 01:19:38.000]  Alright folks, we are back.
[01:19:38.000 --> 01:19:39.000]  This is rule of law radio.
[01:19:39.000 --> 01:19:43.000]  The call in number 512-646-1984 gives a call.
[01:19:43.000 --> 01:19:44.000]  Get in line.
[01:19:44.000 --> 01:19:45.000]  Let's have some conversation.
[01:19:45.000 --> 01:19:47.000]  Meanwhile, let's give back to Reina.
[01:19:47.000 --> 01:19:50.000]  Alright, Reina, please continue.
[01:19:50.000 --> 01:19:55.360]  Okay, well that's pretty much what I had.
[01:19:55.360 --> 01:19:58.720]  You know, I get conflicting stories depending on who I ask.
[01:19:58.720 --> 01:20:04.200]  Some people say that the oath of office doesn't matter, even if they don't have it.
[01:20:04.200 --> 01:20:05.200]  You know, you're...
[01:20:05.200 --> 01:20:09.200]  Well, if your state constitution says they cannot assume their official duties until
[01:20:09.200 --> 01:20:15.840]  it's filed, then whoever's making that statement is a moron, especially if they're a public
[01:20:15.840 --> 01:20:21.400]  official.
[01:20:21.400 --> 01:20:26.280]  If the state law says the same thing, whoever's making that statement is a moron, especially
[01:20:26.280 --> 01:20:29.080]  if they're a public official.
[01:20:29.080 --> 01:20:34.320]  But what you've got to have is that information in your hands to prove you don't know what
[01:20:34.320 --> 01:20:36.280]  the hell you're talking about.
[01:20:36.280 --> 01:20:37.280]  Yeah.
[01:20:37.280 --> 01:20:43.520]  So right here it says in Utah, state officers are required by both the federal and state
[01:20:43.520 --> 01:20:46.000]  constitutions to take an oath of office.
[01:20:46.000 --> 01:20:47.240]  The Constitution of the United States.
[01:20:47.240 --> 01:20:51.760]  The caveat there is it specifically says state officers.
[01:20:51.760 --> 01:20:52.760]  Okay.
[01:20:52.760 --> 01:20:53.760]  Alright.
[01:20:53.760 --> 01:20:54.760]  So that's...
[01:20:54.760 --> 01:21:01.240]  See, here in Texas it simply says any elected or appointed official.
[01:21:01.240 --> 01:21:07.800]  Okay.
[01:21:07.800 --> 01:21:09.280]  So if the...
[01:21:09.280 --> 01:21:16.040]  It does further say that all executive and judicial officers of the states could be bound
[01:21:16.040 --> 01:21:21.400]  by oath or affirmation to support the federal constitution.
[01:21:21.400 --> 01:21:24.720]  And the Constitution of the state of Utah?
[01:21:24.720 --> 01:21:29.320]  Utah specifies the wording of the oath to be taken by all officers made effective or
[01:21:29.320 --> 01:21:32.800]  appointed by this Constitution or by the laws made.
[01:21:32.800 --> 01:21:33.800]  Yes.
[01:21:33.800 --> 01:21:38.920]  Now what you have to do is find case law in Utah that specifically says that clause of
[01:21:38.920 --> 01:21:42.800]  the Constitution applies to local officials.
[01:21:42.800 --> 01:21:48.400]  You get a binding court case from your state that says it applies to local officials.
[01:21:48.400 --> 01:21:54.320]  And now you've got evidence that the lack of that oath disqualifies these individuals
[01:21:54.320 --> 01:21:56.800]  from performing the acts they perform.
[01:21:56.800 --> 01:22:01.000]  So they would be acting out of scope, right?
[01:22:01.000 --> 01:22:03.960]  They have no scope without that oath.
[01:22:03.960 --> 01:22:07.040]  There are moron pretending to be a cop.
[01:22:07.040 --> 01:22:10.800]  They're basically just citizens like you and I.
[01:22:10.800 --> 01:22:11.800]  No.
[01:22:11.800 --> 01:22:12.800]  No.
[01:22:12.800 --> 01:22:18.000]  They're criminals, not citizens.
[01:22:18.000 --> 01:22:20.280]  I love it.
[01:22:20.280 --> 01:22:25.640]  If they're acting without lawful authority to act, that's called impersonating a peace
[01:22:25.640 --> 01:22:27.760]  officer.
[01:22:27.760 --> 01:22:33.400]  That's a crime in every state of the union.
[01:22:33.400 --> 01:22:39.040]  If they have facilitated an arrest with no lawful authority to do so, they have committed
[01:22:39.040 --> 01:22:43.000]  aggravated assault and aggravated kidnapping.
[01:22:43.000 --> 01:22:50.120]  God knows how many times since the day they got employed.
[01:22:50.120 --> 01:22:53.280]  Look up the elements of aggravated assault and aggravated kidnapping.
[01:22:53.280 --> 01:22:58.840]  I guarantee you they met every single one of them.
[01:22:58.840 --> 01:23:02.480]  That's what that lack of oath of office actually means.
[01:23:02.480 --> 01:23:11.960]  If you get case law for Utah that says that applies to local officials.
[01:23:11.960 --> 01:23:17.320]  If you can find one that says it specifically applies to county and municipal police officers
[01:23:17.320 --> 01:23:20.360]  and deputies, even better.
[01:23:20.360 --> 01:23:21.360]  Right.
[01:23:21.360 --> 01:23:22.360]  Okay.
[01:23:22.360 --> 01:23:23.360]  Perfect.
[01:23:23.360 --> 01:23:24.760]  All right.
[01:23:24.760 --> 01:23:32.120]  What about as far as the dog and his paperwork being expired, just file that as part of motion
[01:23:32.120 --> 01:23:33.120]  to this.
[01:23:33.120 --> 01:23:36.800]  Is that any different than the cop not having an oath of office?
[01:23:36.800 --> 01:23:43.660]  If he's not a certified drug dog, why is he being used in the capacity of a certified
[01:23:43.660 --> 01:23:44.920]  drug dog?
[01:23:44.920 --> 01:23:48.880]  The dog is being used to impersonate a police canine.
[01:23:48.880 --> 01:23:51.440]  Oh, I love it.
[01:23:51.440 --> 01:23:57.120]  That's fraud by the sheriff's department.
[01:23:57.120 --> 01:24:02.280]  Do I go after the sheriff's department for fraud or the handler of the canine?
[01:24:02.280 --> 01:24:08.600]  Get evidence of this applying and that it doesn't actually exist and that that certification
[01:24:08.600 --> 01:24:10.800]  was actually expired at the time.
[01:24:10.800 --> 01:24:17.960]  Then you have all of the elements to sue the whole damn department, not just the officers
[01:24:17.960 --> 01:24:23.040]  because the department could have known and should have known these officers had no oath
[01:24:23.040 --> 01:24:24.040]  of office.
[01:24:24.040 --> 01:24:29.040]  If they were using an uncertified dog in a league, in a capacity, it was not authorized
[01:24:29.040 --> 01:24:35.760]  to be used in to perpetrate arrests that they had no legitimate authority to make based upon
[01:24:35.760 --> 01:24:39.920]  a dog that's not qualified to make it.
[01:24:39.920 --> 01:24:42.920]  Nice.
[01:24:42.920 --> 01:24:45.880]  And these guys are the strike force around here.
[01:24:45.880 --> 01:24:50.800]  Of course they are, which means they think they can do whatever they want.
[01:24:50.800 --> 01:24:52.000]  They do.
[01:24:52.000 --> 01:24:53.000]  They're very arrogant.
[01:24:53.000 --> 01:24:54.680]  They're more arrogant.
[01:24:54.680 --> 01:24:59.520]  That is every drug interdiction team in every police department and sheriff's department
[01:24:59.520 --> 01:25:07.000]  in this entire country, if not the world.
[01:25:07.000 --> 01:25:08.400]  Oh, I just, I love it.
[01:25:08.400 --> 01:25:10.680]  I just love the information that you've given me.
[01:25:10.680 --> 01:25:11.680]  So.
[01:25:11.680 --> 01:25:17.400]  Well, again, if there are any attorneys listening, criminal or otherwise that would like to call
[01:25:17.400 --> 01:25:22.400]  in and point out the error of my statements, please feel free to do so.
[01:25:22.400 --> 01:25:30.120]  But logically, constitutionally, morally and ethically, you will never ever prove I'm incorrect.
[01:25:30.120 --> 01:25:31.120]  You can't.
[01:25:31.120 --> 01:25:32.120]  It's impossible.
[01:25:32.120 --> 01:25:33.120]  Right.
[01:25:33.120 --> 01:25:36.240]  Now, the law may give them a special pass.
[01:25:36.240 --> 01:25:40.120]  That doesn't make the law right and it doesn't make their actions right.
[01:25:40.120 --> 01:25:41.120]  Right.
[01:25:41.120 --> 01:25:46.720]  Well, if I threatened to take it public in the newspaper, just, you know.
[01:25:46.720 --> 01:25:47.720]  No, no, no.
[01:25:47.720 --> 01:25:48.920]  Stop, stop, stop.
[01:25:48.920 --> 01:25:56.160]  Never ever use the word threaten about the things we're talking about and never ever
[01:25:56.160 --> 01:26:00.040]  give them advance notice that you're going to do it.
[01:26:00.040 --> 01:26:06.560]  Once you have all of the facts and you can prove that those facts are true, then you
[01:26:06.560 --> 01:26:14.640]  simply go to the local media and give them a pre-packaged gift wrap story that they can
[01:26:14.640 --> 01:26:20.120]  then go through and verify everything themselves and jump on it that much quicker because you've
[01:26:20.120 --> 01:26:23.320]  given them a springboard to start with.
[01:26:23.320 --> 01:26:28.920]  But don't ever tell anybody that you're going to be using this against that you're going
[01:26:28.920 --> 01:26:33.440]  to use it because what does that look like you're attempting to do?
[01:26:33.440 --> 01:26:40.760]  Bride or threaten or or influence of the outcome of an investigation or the behavior
[01:26:40.760 --> 01:26:42.360]  of a public official.
[01:26:42.360 --> 01:26:48.280]  In other words, it reflects and can seriously damage you personally.
[01:26:48.280 --> 01:26:49.280]  Right.
[01:26:49.280 --> 01:26:51.280]  So, don't do it.
[01:26:51.280 --> 01:26:52.280]  Just go do it.
[01:26:52.280 --> 01:26:54.800]  Retaliate either, right?
[01:26:54.800 --> 01:26:55.800]  And so.
[01:26:55.800 --> 01:26:56.800]  Say again.
[01:26:56.800 --> 01:27:02.200]  They're not supposed to retaliate either if I do go to that extreme, correct?
[01:27:02.200 --> 01:27:07.040]  Sure, they're not supposed to, but before you do it, make damn sure you understand it's
[01:27:07.040 --> 01:27:09.040]  still 100% possible.
[01:27:09.040 --> 01:27:10.040]  Right.
[01:27:10.040 --> 01:27:14.320]  Remember, these are people that think they're immune to consequences and they're the only
[01:27:14.320 --> 01:27:18.520]  ones that get to decide what those consequences are.
[01:27:18.520 --> 01:27:21.040]  And they're above the law in their mind.
[01:27:21.040 --> 01:27:22.040]  Yes.
[01:27:22.040 --> 01:27:23.040]  Yeah.
[01:27:23.040 --> 01:27:26.040]  Oh, this is exciting.
[01:27:26.040 --> 01:27:30.880]  I'm telling you if there's a completely different feel when you're the defendant and then all
[01:27:30.880 --> 01:27:34.760]  of a sudden you do just a little bit of work, you put in a little bit of effort and you
[01:27:34.760 --> 01:27:39.000]  find out just the minor things like this or they appear, they seem minor, but they're
[01:27:39.000 --> 01:27:40.840]  really not.
[01:27:40.840 --> 01:27:46.240]  And the way that you carry yourself in the courtroom or, you know, it's pretty funny.
[01:27:46.240 --> 01:27:51.080]  I've done a couple of bar grievances and some FOIA requests and these guys are completely
[01:27:51.080 --> 01:27:53.520]  afraid of me at this point.
[01:27:53.520 --> 01:27:55.200]  It's really kind of funny to.
[01:27:55.200 --> 01:27:57.400]  It's empowering, isn't it?
[01:27:57.400 --> 01:27:58.640]  It is very much so.
[01:27:58.640 --> 01:27:59.640]  Yeah.
[01:27:59.640 --> 01:28:03.080]  Just like Randy said, this could get to be a lot of fun.
[01:28:03.080 --> 01:28:04.080]  It can be.
[01:28:04.080 --> 01:28:10.320]  As long as you understand, yes, it's a serious thing, but at the same time, nobody will fight
[01:28:10.320 --> 01:28:12.300]  harder for you than you will.
[01:28:12.300 --> 01:28:16.360]  You just have to understand how to fight.
[01:28:16.360 --> 01:28:23.080]  And there, there is very, very few people I've ever met in my life or know about in
[01:28:23.080 --> 01:28:30.880]  history that were natural born fighters, physical or otherwise, as far as they just knew how
[01:28:30.880 --> 01:28:38.120]  without any training, without anything beyond just, it just came to them out of the blue.
[01:28:38.120 --> 01:28:40.720]  Well, this is absolutely no different.
[01:28:40.720 --> 01:28:45.240]  This is not the kind of fighting that just comes to you out of the blue.
[01:28:45.240 --> 01:28:46.240]  It takes time.
[01:28:46.240 --> 01:28:47.240]  It takes experience.
[01:28:47.240 --> 01:28:52.880]  It takes knowledge and information and a strategy on how to use all that combined to
[01:28:52.880 --> 01:28:55.680]  make something with it.
[01:28:55.680 --> 01:28:57.360]  Lawyers are trained to do it.
[01:28:57.360 --> 01:29:01.520]  We have to figure it out for ourselves, but it's not as hard as they would like you to
[01:29:01.520 --> 01:29:03.520]  believe it is.
[01:29:03.520 --> 01:29:04.520]  Right.
[01:29:04.520 --> 01:29:09.840]  But just as the satisfaction of knowing that they are going to feel the exact way that
[01:29:09.840 --> 01:29:15.720]  me and my brother did that night when they did their whole bracket, you know, their whole
[01:29:15.720 --> 01:29:21.800]  scripted little thing that they did to us that night and the fear and the worry and
[01:29:21.800 --> 01:29:26.680]  the panic and, and everything, it just is really gratifying to know that they're going
[01:29:26.680 --> 01:29:28.440]  to feel the same way.
[01:29:28.440 --> 01:29:29.840]  It's entirely possible.
[01:29:29.840 --> 01:29:33.880]  If you can, if you get the court to do its job, it's entirely possible.
[01:29:33.880 --> 01:29:36.000]  You get a grand jury to do their job.
[01:29:36.000 --> 01:29:38.000]  It's entirely possible.
[01:29:38.000 --> 01:29:39.480]  Yeah.
[01:29:39.480 --> 01:29:45.960]  Especially considering the consensus of how people feel about cops.
[01:29:45.960 --> 01:29:48.040]  Especially when they're informed the cop is dirty.
[01:29:48.040 --> 01:29:52.920]  Hang on just a second, Raina, let me finish this break and we'll get right this up for
[01:29:52.920 --> 01:29:53.920]  you.
[01:29:53.920 --> 01:29:54.920]  Okay.
[01:29:54.920 --> 01:29:56.920]  I'm going to call you 646-1984.
[01:29:56.920 --> 01:29:57.920]  This is my last caller.
[01:29:57.920 --> 01:29:58.920]  I need to talk to somebody.
[01:29:58.920 --> 01:29:59.920]  Give me a call.
[01:29:59.920 --> 01:30:04.560]  It seems like everywhere you turn nowadays, someone wants your name, social security number
[01:30:04.560 --> 01:30:05.560]  and date of birth.
[01:30:05.560 --> 01:30:08.360]  But you should think twice before giving away your personal data.
[01:30:08.360 --> 01:30:12.280]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll say more in just a moment.
[01:30:12.280 --> 01:30:16.880]  Google is watching you, recording everything you've ever searched for and creating a massive
[01:30:16.880 --> 01:30:19.520]  database of your personal information.
[01:30:19.520 --> 01:30:20.520]  That's creepy.
[01:30:20.520 --> 01:30:22.520]  But it doesn't have to be that way.
[01:30:22.520 --> 01:30:25.640]  StartPage.com is the world's most private search engine.
[01:30:25.640 --> 01:30:30.400]  StartPage.com doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches or use tracking
[01:30:30.400 --> 01:30:32.480]  cookies, and they're third party certified.
[01:30:32.480 --> 01:30:36.960]  If you don't like big brother spying on you, start over with StartPage.
[01:30:36.960 --> 01:30:39.560]  Great search results and total privacy.
[01:30:39.560 --> 01:30:43.080]  StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:30:43.080 --> 01:30:45.320]  Forms, forms, forms, they're everywhere.
[01:30:45.320 --> 01:30:48.880]  But just because a piece of paper asks for information doesn't mean you have to give
[01:30:48.880 --> 01:30:49.880]  it.
[01:30:49.880 --> 01:30:54.800]  I make spaces on forms all the time, or I write N slash A for not applicable, and usually
[01:30:54.800 --> 01:30:56.600]  nobody notices or cares.
[01:30:56.600 --> 01:31:01.160]  I never give my social security number or date of birth unless it's absolutely mandatory
[01:31:01.160 --> 01:31:05.480]  for employment or a government requirement, and I won't give my phone number to a company
[01:31:05.480 --> 01:31:09.640]  or an organization unless I actually want them to call me, and that's pretty rare.
[01:31:09.640 --> 01:31:14.760]  To preserve our vanishing privacy, we need to practice saying no to random data requests.
[01:31:14.760 --> 01:31:16.400]  It's like exercising a muscle.
[01:31:16.400 --> 01:31:18.200]  It gets easier the more you do it.
[01:31:18.200 --> 01:31:20.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:20.000 --> 01:31:31.520]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:31:31.520 --> 01:31:32.520]  I lost my son.
[01:31:32.520 --> 01:31:33.520]  My nephew.
[01:31:33.520 --> 01:31:34.520]  My uncle.
[01:31:34.520 --> 01:31:35.520]  My son.
[01:31:35.520 --> 01:31:36.520]  On September 11, 2001.
[01:31:36.520 --> 01:31:39.760]  Most people don't know that a third tower fell on September 11.
[01:31:39.760 --> 01:31:43.920]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane.
[01:31:43.920 --> 01:31:47.760]  Although the official explanation is that fire brought down building 7.
[01:31:47.760 --> 01:31:52.560]  Over 1,200 architects and engineers has looked into the evidence and believed there is more
[01:31:52.560 --> 01:31:53.560]  to the story.
[01:31:53.560 --> 01:31:54.960]  Bring justice to my son.
[01:31:54.960 --> 01:31:55.960]  My uncle.
[01:31:55.960 --> 01:31:56.960]  My nephew.
[01:31:56.960 --> 01:31:57.960]  My son.
[01:31:57.960 --> 01:31:58.960]  Go to buildingwhat.org.
[01:31:58.960 --> 01:31:59.960]  Why it fell.
[01:31:59.960 --> 01:32:00.960]  Why it matters.
[01:32:00.960 --> 01:32:01.960]  And what you can do.
[01:32:01.960 --> 01:32:05.960]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar.
[01:32:05.960 --> 01:32:09.600]  In today's America, we live in a us against them society, and if we, the people, are ever
[01:32:09.600 --> 01:32:13.680]  going to have a free society, then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights.
[01:32:13.680 --> 01:32:16.760]  Among those rights are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to
[01:32:16.760 --> 01:32:21.000]  act in our own private capacity, and most importantly, the right to due process of law.
[01:32:21.000 --> 01:32:24.880]  Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve
[01:32:24.880 --> 01:32:26.760]  our rights through due process.
[01:32:26.760 --> 01:32:30.240]  Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig, in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the
[01:32:30.240 --> 01:32:34.000]  most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand what due process
[01:32:34.000 --> 01:32:36.400]  is and how to hold courts to the rule of law.
[01:32:36.400 --> 01:32:40.400]  You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and
[01:32:40.400 --> 01:32:41.760]  ordering your copy today.
[01:32:41.760 --> 01:32:45.040]  By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book, The Texas Transportation Code,
[01:32:45.040 --> 01:32:49.480]  The Law vs. the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009 seminar, hundreds of research
[01:32:49.480 --> 01:32:51.800]  documents and other useful resource material.
[01:32:51.800 --> 01:32:55.760]  Learn how to fight for your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com.
[01:32:55.760 --> 01:33:04.760]  Order your copy today and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:33:04.760 --> 01:33:33.760]  You're listening to The Logos Radio Network at LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:34.760 --> 01:33:45.600]  Alright, we are back, this is Monday Night Rule of Law Radio Show with your host Eddie
[01:33:45.600 --> 01:33:46.600]  Craig.
[01:33:46.600 --> 01:33:49.160]  It is March 6th, 2023.
[01:33:49.160 --> 01:33:53.560]  We are live tonight and we are currently talking with Raina in Utah.
[01:33:53.560 --> 01:34:01.880]  Okay, Raina, you, as I was saying, these cops and these attorneys and these judges all look
[01:34:01.880 --> 01:34:08.000]  at you like, what makes you think that you can understand what this is and what it means
[01:34:08.000 --> 01:34:10.440]  and everything you're trying to make an argument about here?
[01:34:10.440 --> 01:34:12.880]  They think they're the only ones that can do this.
[01:34:12.880 --> 01:34:16.440]  Do you remember the movie Blue Thunder with Roy Shiter?
[01:34:16.440 --> 01:34:19.880]  Can't say that I do.
[01:34:19.880 --> 01:34:22.600]  It's the big military helicopter that he's flying.
[01:34:22.600 --> 01:34:30.040]  It's kind of a movie version of Airwolf kind of deal, but Roy Shiter's playing an LA cop
[01:34:30.040 --> 01:34:36.880]  that is put on a project where this secret military group is trying to use this military
[01:34:36.880 --> 01:34:37.880]  helicopter.
[01:34:37.880 --> 01:34:45.320]  They're trying to make, build up its reputation so they can sell it for domestic use to municipalities
[01:34:45.320 --> 01:34:51.080]  as a police helicopter when in fact it's a truly heavily armed military helicopter.
[01:34:51.080 --> 01:34:57.480]  So they're starting problems in the city to try to make the use of this helicopter acceptable,
[01:34:57.480 --> 01:34:59.480]  so to speak.
[01:34:59.480 --> 01:35:12.080]  So in one part of the movie, let's see, McDowell, I forget, yeah, anyway, he's playing a bad
[01:35:12.080 --> 01:35:17.160]  guy in this and he's asking Roy Shiter if he thinks he can actually fly this big military
[01:35:17.160 --> 01:35:21.000]  helicopter and Roy Shiter just goes, well you flew it, didn't you, because they knew
[01:35:21.000 --> 01:35:25.440]  each other from when they flew together in Vietnam during the war.
[01:35:25.440 --> 01:35:28.800]  So they don't like each other and so on and so forth.
[01:35:28.800 --> 01:35:33.400]  But the fact that McDowell's character was challenging him is that do you really think
[01:35:33.400 --> 01:35:40.480]  that you can fly this and he just shot or just shot back, well you flew it, didn't you.
[01:35:40.480 --> 01:35:43.920]  That's the approach I have when it comes to an attorney telling me I don't know what I'm
[01:35:43.920 --> 01:35:46.720]  talking about and that I'm misunderstanding something.
[01:35:46.720 --> 01:35:51.720]  I said, wait a minute, you're telling me that I misunderstand it when I'm the one who's
[01:35:51.720 --> 01:35:54.000]  actually read it and researched it.
[01:35:54.000 --> 01:35:57.040]  How much reading and research of it have you actually done?
[01:35:57.040 --> 01:35:58.520]  Well I read the court opinion.
[01:35:58.520 --> 01:36:00.400]  The court didn't do the research.
[01:36:00.400 --> 01:36:05.320]  I guarantee you the court didn't do the research because the opinion you're talking about only
[01:36:05.320 --> 01:36:11.560]  addressed this one specific thing and did not look at all this other cornucopia of related
[01:36:11.560 --> 01:36:17.720]  statutes and information that shows the court got it completely wrong.
[01:36:17.720 --> 01:36:20.880]  And you're going to tell me I don't know what I'm doing.
[01:36:20.880 --> 01:36:26.800]  You're going to ask me, do I really think I can make this fly?
[01:36:26.800 --> 01:36:32.200]  That's the whole reason I'm on this show is to try to empower people to learn how to do
[01:36:32.200 --> 01:36:37.160]  this so they can stand on their own two feet and beat these people black and blue with their
[01:36:37.160 --> 01:36:42.160]  own rule book.
[01:36:42.160 --> 01:36:45.080]  And so hopefully that's something you're getting out of this show.
[01:36:45.080 --> 01:36:48.320]  Oh hang on, she's muted and she's not supposed to be.
[01:36:48.320 --> 01:36:49.320]  Go ahead, I'm sorry.
[01:36:49.320 --> 01:36:53.640]  That's okay, I actually dropped off for a second there on Acti.
[01:36:53.640 --> 01:36:54.640]  Oh okay, alright.
[01:36:54.640 --> 01:37:00.160]  No, I would love nothing more than to take these guys to task because I hate deception
[01:37:00.160 --> 01:37:06.400]  at the level that they are doing it.
[01:37:06.400 --> 01:37:12.800]  Yeah, and they are, they know that what they're doing is wrong.
[01:37:12.800 --> 01:37:14.320]  They simply do not care.
[01:37:14.320 --> 01:37:19.920]  The rule of law does not apply to them in their eyes and in their minds.
[01:37:19.920 --> 01:37:28.680]  And the problem is our system has now become one great huge criminal enterprise operating
[01:37:28.680 --> 01:37:31.440]  under the guise of legitimate authority.
[01:37:31.440 --> 01:37:38.080]  And there is no worse kind of criminal organization to have, believe me, than one that holds the
[01:37:38.080 --> 01:37:42.400]  power to make itself appear to be legitimate.
[01:37:42.400 --> 01:37:43.400]  Right.
[01:37:43.400 --> 01:37:51.200]  Well, and everyone that I know thinks that I'm crazy for doing this to them when I'm
[01:37:51.200 --> 01:37:58.920]  the one that got in trouble and I just thought, that's what's wrong with the system, is...
[01:37:58.920 --> 01:38:00.440]  That's exactly what's wrong with the system.
[01:38:00.440 --> 01:38:04.440]  They have to pose a line and I said, I'm not going to be a sheeple.
[01:38:04.440 --> 01:38:07.120]  I'm not going to be a follower like everybody else.
[01:38:07.120 --> 01:38:11.720]  They violated my rights and I have rights and I'm going to stand up for them.
[01:38:11.720 --> 01:38:17.240]  And the worst thing that they can do is make me do some classes for a year or something
[01:38:17.240 --> 01:38:18.240]  like that.
[01:38:18.240 --> 01:38:19.240]  Big deal.
[01:38:19.240 --> 01:38:20.240]  If I lose, I lose.
[01:38:20.240 --> 01:38:21.240]  So what?
[01:38:21.240 --> 01:38:29.440]  Well, now, keep in mind that depending upon how big a threat you become to their interest,
[01:38:29.440 --> 01:38:31.680]  that may or may not be true.
[01:38:31.680 --> 01:38:37.760]  They could come back and try to do something that will make matters a lot worse for you.
[01:38:37.760 --> 01:38:42.400]  Never count that out when you're talking about people with this kind of power.
[01:38:42.400 --> 01:38:44.320]  Never count that out.
[01:38:44.320 --> 01:38:46.320]  Right.
[01:38:46.320 --> 01:38:50.560]  I kind of encourage it because I like to do that dance with them because I know I'm not
[01:38:50.560 --> 01:38:51.560]  a follower.
[01:38:51.560 --> 01:38:55.640]  Well, be real careful because you're encouraging the wrong kind of people to follow up on something
[01:38:55.640 --> 01:39:00.840]  that most of them are all too willing to follow up on and have far too many people willing
[01:39:00.840 --> 01:39:03.000]  to help them follow up on it.
[01:39:03.000 --> 01:39:04.000]  Yeah.
[01:39:04.000 --> 01:39:09.800]  So if you have a vast network, that's for sure, of people to help them with the deceit.
[01:39:09.800 --> 01:39:13.400]  So anything you do, I'm not saying don't do it.
[01:39:13.400 --> 01:39:20.280]  I'm just saying be fully prepared and fully capable of covering your backside for every
[01:39:20.280 --> 01:39:26.160]  single thing that happens so that it is that much harder for them to get away with pulling
[01:39:26.160 --> 01:39:28.080]  something like that.
[01:39:28.080 --> 01:39:29.280]  Absolutely.
[01:39:29.280 --> 01:39:35.840]  And I know that if everything shakes out the way I hope it does, that I'll have a target
[01:39:35.840 --> 01:39:37.120]  on my back.
[01:39:37.120 --> 01:39:46.360]  And so, yeah, I will have to operate and not give them a reason for anything.
[01:39:46.360 --> 01:39:50.920]  Even though they'll still try, you know, they'll create a reason, but if I don't give them
[01:39:50.920 --> 01:39:56.280]  reason, then I'm in that much better of a position.
[01:39:56.280 --> 01:39:57.280]  You're right.
[01:39:57.280 --> 01:40:01.960]  And do what I've said for many years on this show, never again leave your house without
[01:40:01.960 --> 01:40:04.640]  something that audio and video records.
[01:40:04.640 --> 01:40:06.040]  Right.
[01:40:06.040 --> 01:40:11.080]  And anytime you even so much as see a cop in the vicinity, have that recording running
[01:40:11.080 --> 01:40:12.880]  and ready to go as a just in case.
[01:40:12.880 --> 01:40:15.680]  You can always delete it if it turned out to be nothing.
[01:40:15.680 --> 01:40:19.920]  But if something happens in short order and it's not recording, you may never get the
[01:40:19.920 --> 01:40:22.400]  opportunity to turn it on.
[01:40:22.400 --> 01:40:23.400]  Right.
[01:40:23.400 --> 01:40:29.840]  Well, you know, and they love to publicize just anything about, you know, anything that
[01:40:29.840 --> 01:40:36.560]  you do as quote unquote criminals, you know, they post your mug shots, they put them on
[01:40:36.560 --> 01:40:40.600]  Facebook, they put them in the paper, they put them everywhere, you know, and if you
[01:40:40.600 --> 01:40:47.120]  Google my name right now, it already says, shows that I have this criminal record now.
[01:40:47.120 --> 01:40:52.720]  And I haven't even been convicted of anything yet, but you're innocent until proven guilty.
[01:40:52.720 --> 01:40:57.000]  You know, they like to just mirror your name through mud nonstop.
[01:40:57.000 --> 01:41:01.840]  But the second that, you know, the tables turn and you do it to them, they will retaliate.
[01:41:01.840 --> 01:41:02.840]  I know they will.
[01:41:02.840 --> 01:41:08.120]  There's no way that guys that are that cocky and arrogant won't.
[01:41:08.120 --> 01:41:10.840]  But I'm not afraid of it.
[01:41:10.840 --> 01:41:14.760]  Well, good luck to you.
[01:41:14.760 --> 01:41:15.880]  Hey, thanks.
[01:41:15.880 --> 01:41:18.440]  I appreciate it.
[01:41:18.440 --> 01:41:22.960]  And if I have a victory, I will call back and let you know.
[01:41:22.960 --> 01:41:23.960]  All right.
[01:41:23.960 --> 01:41:24.960]  Well, please do.
[01:41:24.960 --> 01:41:25.960]  Okay.
[01:41:25.960 --> 01:41:26.960]  Thanks.
[01:41:26.960 --> 01:41:27.960]  Yes, ma'am.
[01:41:27.960 --> 01:41:28.960]  All right.
[01:41:28.960 --> 01:41:31.120]  Well, she was my last caller.
[01:41:31.120 --> 01:41:36.880]  If anybody else is out there, 512-646-1984 is the call in number, give us a call.
[01:41:36.880 --> 01:41:41.320]  And I've got a little over 20 minutes left in the show.
[01:41:41.320 --> 01:41:44.160]  Well, a little less than 20 minutes, actually.
[01:41:44.160 --> 01:41:48.600]  But still, there are things we've got time to talk about if you call.
[01:41:48.600 --> 01:41:52.080]  But in the meantime, I'm going to go back to the other stuff I was talking about at
[01:41:52.080 --> 01:41:54.000]  the beginning of the show.
[01:41:54.000 --> 01:42:01.960]  So, and that's dealing with the lack of evidence for everything that's going on in these criminal
[01:42:01.960 --> 01:42:03.920]  traffic courts.
[01:42:03.920 --> 01:42:11.600]  But remember that the cop is the one testifying against you and he's testifying based upon
[01:42:11.600 --> 01:42:15.640]  his perception and opinion of the facts.
[01:42:15.640 --> 01:42:18.640]  He's not doing it based upon actual evidence.
[01:42:18.640 --> 01:42:24.040]  See, he is taking what he thinks he knows about the statute.
[01:42:24.040 --> 01:42:29.320]  He's comparing it to what he thinks he saw and that he's drawing a conclusion about
[01:42:29.320 --> 01:42:34.840]  the legality of those two things combined.
[01:42:34.840 --> 01:42:41.640]  But he is not qualified to make that conclusion.
[01:42:41.640 --> 01:42:47.600]  He can allege that you did it, but he can't get on the stand and testify to the fact that
[01:42:47.600 --> 01:42:55.440]  you did it because he does not have the capability and the qualifications to make that determination
[01:42:55.440 --> 01:42:56.880]  of law.
[01:42:56.880 --> 01:43:01.040]  That's a legal conclusion beyond his ability to make.
[01:43:01.040 --> 01:43:08.200]  Now, he can say, I believe this is true, but where's the evidence that they have to present
[01:43:08.200 --> 01:43:10.080]  to support it?
[01:43:10.080 --> 01:43:19.760]  His belief is nothing without the evidence and they don't ever have it.
[01:43:19.760 --> 01:43:24.840]  To prove a motor vehicle, they would have to prove that the automobile in question meets
[01:43:24.840 --> 01:43:27.880]  all the statutory criteria of a motor vehicle.
[01:43:27.880 --> 01:43:28.880]  It's registered.
[01:43:28.880 --> 01:43:30.720]  It's insured.
[01:43:30.720 --> 01:43:35.920]  It was being driven for the purpose of whatever the single subject matter clause is, which
[01:43:35.920 --> 01:43:43.000]  in this particular case is transportation, and that the person behind the wheel was a
[01:43:43.000 --> 01:43:46.200]  driver of such a motor vehicle.
[01:43:46.200 --> 01:43:49.040]  They have to prove all of those things.
[01:43:49.040 --> 01:43:55.320]  They have to have documents that show it was insured, it was registered, it was inspected,
[01:43:55.320 --> 01:44:00.480]  and it was registered for use as a motor vehicle.
[01:44:00.480 --> 01:44:05.120]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved, except in the area
[01:44:05.120 --> 01:44:06.520]  of nutrition.
[01:44:06.520 --> 01:44:11.280]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves, and it's time we changed all that.
[01:44:11.280 --> 01:44:16.920]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[01:44:16.920 --> 01:44:22.360]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated, and mutilated, young
[01:44:22.360 --> 01:44:25.760]  Jevity can provide the nutrients you need.
[01:44:25.760 --> 01:44:31.560]  Logos Radio Network gets many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject.
[01:44:31.560 --> 01:44:36.800]  We have come to trust Jevity so much, we became a marketing distributor along with
[01:44:36.800 --> 01:44:40.000]  Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[01:44:40.000 --> 01:44:45.960]  When you order from LogosRadioNetwork.com, your health will improve as you help support
[01:44:45.960 --> 01:44:47.560]  quality radio.
[01:44:47.560 --> 01:44:51.880]  As you realize the benefits of Youngjevity, you may want to join us.
[01:44:51.880 --> 01:44:57.160]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family, and
[01:44:57.160 --> 01:44:59.040]  increase your income.
[01:44:59.040 --> 01:45:01.040]  Order now.
[01:45:01.040 --> 01:45:04.240]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:04.240 --> 01:45:10.960]  Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course
[01:45:10.960 --> 01:45:14.960]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:14.960 --> 01:45:18.760]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.760 --> 01:45:23.000]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:23.000 --> 01:45:27.880]  Thousands have won with our step by step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.880 --> 01:45:34.440]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience.
[01:45:34.440 --> 01:45:39.080]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about
[01:45:39.080 --> 01:45:43.440]  the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.440 --> 01:45:49.560]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:49.560 --> 01:45:52.240]  prosa tactics, and much more.
[01:45:52.240 --> 01:45:56.320]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:45:56.320 --> 01:46:21.600]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:21.600 --> 01:46:28.480]  We are back, this is the Monday Night Rule of Law radio show with your host, Eddie Craig,
[01:46:28.480 --> 01:46:32.160]  we are now in the last segment of the show for tonight, I don't have any callers up
[01:46:32.160 --> 01:46:37.520]  on the board at the moment, so I'm going to finish up this discussion on my own.
[01:46:37.520 --> 01:46:47.760]  Now because they don't have any actual evidence to support the legal conclusions of this officer,
[01:46:47.760 --> 01:46:57.280]  why, how can they allow this to be the basis of a conviction?
[01:46:57.280 --> 01:47:05.720]  Well, legally speaking, they can't, but they don't care about the legality of it.
[01:47:05.720 --> 01:47:09.760]  If they did, there wouldn't be two different sets of rules, okay?
[01:47:09.760 --> 01:47:11.360]  And there are two different sets of rules.
[01:47:11.360 --> 01:47:16.600]  For instance, as I said, the rules of evidence come into play here, but do you know that
[01:47:16.600 --> 01:47:23.760]  the Texas Supreme Court has a specific rule of evidence, now it doesn't say anything about
[01:47:23.760 --> 01:47:30.120]  it applying to municipal courts, but there is a specific rule of evidence that exempts
[01:47:30.120 --> 01:47:38.080]  justice of the peace courts from having to provide evidence in the, in the manners required
[01:47:38.080 --> 01:47:39.680]  by the rules of evidence.
[01:47:39.680 --> 01:47:44.280]  In other words, the rules of evidence do not apply at all in a, in a judicial court.
[01:47:44.280 --> 01:47:47.080]  And here's exactly what the rule is and what it says.
[01:47:47.080 --> 01:47:56.000]  Rule 101, and it's titled, Title, Scope, and Applicability of the Rules, Definitions.
[01:47:56.000 --> 01:48:03.040]  And under subsection F, it has exception for justice courts.
[01:48:03.040 --> 01:48:12.240]  And it specifically says, these rules do not apply to justice court cases except as authorized
[01:48:12.240 --> 01:48:16.560]  by Texas rule of civil procedure 500.3.
[01:48:16.560 --> 01:48:18.600]  Now think about that.
[01:48:18.600 --> 01:48:25.120]  Since justice of the peace courts have criminal jurisdiction over Class C fine only offenses,
[01:48:25.120 --> 01:48:32.800]  just as municipal courts do, they are saying that in a justice court, the rules of evidence
[01:48:32.800 --> 01:48:35.560]  do not have to be followed.
[01:48:35.560 --> 01:48:41.920]  That means they can use hearsay evidence, they can use legal conclusions made by a witness
[01:48:41.920 --> 01:48:45.840]  that's not qualified to make them.
[01:48:45.840 --> 01:48:52.280]  That means that they don't have to have any evidentiary support for anything a witness
[01:48:52.280 --> 01:48:56.080]  gets up there to testify to.
[01:48:56.080 --> 01:49:02.200]  Because the judge is free to accept or reject anything that's offered by either side any
[01:49:02.200 --> 01:49:10.880]  damn time and way they want to, because they're not bound by the rules of evidence.
[01:49:10.880 --> 01:49:15.880]  That's a double standard on criminal justice.
[01:49:15.880 --> 01:49:24.880]  All because one is used to steal money from the general population in huge quantities.
[01:49:24.880 --> 01:49:29.520]  And they get away with it under the premise that since it doesn't require imprisonment
[01:49:29.520 --> 01:49:34.520]  as a part of the punishment, we can do it differently.
[01:49:34.520 --> 01:49:38.640]  I don't see that in the Texas constitution anywhere.
[01:49:38.640 --> 01:49:43.080]  I know that the state and federal constitution have equal application and protection of the
[01:49:43.080 --> 01:49:50.640]  laws clauses, i.e. everyone must be treated the same under the same circumstances.
[01:49:50.640 --> 01:49:56.160]  Well, if you're charging me with a crime and the criminal rules apply, then you don't get
[01:49:56.160 --> 01:50:02.960]  to make exceptions for the criminal rules relative to a certain type of offense or offenses
[01:50:02.960 --> 01:50:07.120]  or based upon a particular court that's being done in.
[01:50:07.120 --> 01:50:11.240]  Because if you're doing that, then you're changing the rules for one class of people
[01:50:11.240 --> 01:50:17.200]  versus those of another class of people.
[01:50:17.200 --> 01:50:27.680]  It's not fair, it's not right, it's not constitutional, and yet it is exactly what they're doing.
[01:50:27.680 --> 01:50:32.800]  And we are letting them get away with it.
[01:50:32.800 --> 01:50:38.160]  Our juries are comprised of ignorant sheeple that don't know any better and don't want
[01:50:38.160 --> 01:50:42.960]  to be there and could care less about justice being done because they don't even know what
[01:50:42.960 --> 01:50:45.800]  the hell justice even is.
[01:50:45.800 --> 01:50:50.280]  They just know that the person over there is accused by some cop of doing something.
[01:50:50.280 --> 01:50:54.200]  The cop got up on the stand, raised their hand and said they accused them and that they were
[01:50:54.200 --> 01:50:56.280]  doing these things.
[01:50:56.280 --> 01:51:01.080]  And that because the judge and the prosecutor allowed the answers to go forward and all
[01:51:01.080 --> 01:51:08.200]  that, then all the dots must be, all the eyes must be dotted and all the T's must be crossed.
[01:51:08.200 --> 01:51:12.320]  Everything must be right with the world and thus we're going to go ahead and rule according
[01:51:12.320 --> 01:51:19.200]  to what we've been allowed to see when the fact of the matter is the case was rigged
[01:51:19.200 --> 01:51:23.120]  from the get-go.
[01:51:23.120 --> 01:51:30.080]  Because the defendant was not presumed innocent, the defendant was not confronted by any actual
[01:51:30.080 --> 01:51:36.920]  evidence, the defendant was not confronted by a witness with personal firsthand knowledge
[01:51:36.920 --> 01:51:44.720]  of the facts and the witness was prosecuted based entirely upon statements and legal conclusions
[01:51:44.720 --> 01:51:50.920]  made by a witness that was not qualified to make them or to testify to their veracity
[01:51:50.920 --> 01:51:54.000]  in the first place.
[01:51:54.000 --> 01:51:59.960]  And yet the judge and the prosecutor are working hand in hand to ensure that that outcome
[01:51:59.960 --> 01:52:08.280]  that preconceived outcome of guilty is achieved.
[01:52:08.280 --> 01:52:11.080]  And the jury is none the wiser.
[01:52:11.080 --> 01:52:15.480]  The general population is none the wiser.
[01:52:15.480 --> 01:52:26.360]  This just goes on and on and on in utter perpetuity and has for decades.
[01:52:26.360 --> 01:52:31.680]  This is the problem with not knowing your rights, not knowing your constitution and
[01:52:31.680 --> 01:52:38.160]  not knowing the laws of the state you live in, especially those that deal with the required
[01:52:38.160 --> 01:52:43.400]  procedures in a given set of circumstances and types of case.
[01:52:43.400 --> 01:52:47.840]  You have to know the rules and when the rules aren't being followed you have to be able
[01:52:47.840 --> 01:52:54.280]  to point out how and why they're not and how and who is not following them.
[01:52:54.280 --> 01:52:57.960]  So why is always left up to interpretation?
[01:52:57.960 --> 01:53:03.760]  And they can always lie about the why, but what they cannot do is lie about the violation
[01:53:03.760 --> 01:53:12.000]  when the facts of the violation are clearly evident.
[01:53:12.000 --> 01:53:20.080]  We have got to become better educated on these things.
[01:53:20.080 --> 01:53:26.040]  That's the whole reason for this show's existence because I got tired of people getting railroaded
[01:53:26.040 --> 01:53:31.680]  by a system that could care less that they were doing it to either innocent or plainly
[01:53:31.680 --> 01:53:34.520]  ignorant people.
[01:53:34.520 --> 01:53:39.000]  They don't care.
[01:53:39.000 --> 01:53:46.240]  So the only way we fix it is to make them care.
[01:53:46.240 --> 01:53:54.960]  Now as of right now, we don't have a multitude of ways to accomplish that, unfortunately.
[01:53:54.960 --> 01:53:58.480]  For example, we can't fire the judge directly.
[01:53:58.480 --> 01:54:03.120]  We can petition to have the judge fire, but that doesn't mean anybody will do it.
[01:54:03.120 --> 01:54:06.320]  Remember they have a very good track record of protecting their own.
[01:54:06.320 --> 01:54:10.880]  Judges in every state of the union do some really egregious crap and they're allowed
[01:54:10.880 --> 01:54:16.600]  to remain on the bench and act as a judge when they should literally be in jail for
[01:54:16.600 --> 01:54:23.120]  the things they did and they should never, ever be allowed to hold a public office again
[01:54:23.120 --> 01:54:28.760]  and will power over anyone when they're willing to abuse their office and their power in such
[01:54:28.760 --> 01:54:36.480]  a capacity in the first place and yet they're still there.
[01:54:36.480 --> 01:54:46.440]  I mean, the Chief Justice of our Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused to take a phone
[01:54:46.440 --> 01:55:01.960]  call on a death sentence case because the phone call came in after regular business hours.
[01:55:01.960 --> 01:55:11.080]  Now this was a death sentence case and the guy was executed, but the Chief Justice of
[01:55:11.080 --> 01:55:17.520]  the Court of Criminal Appeals refused to act on the phone call they received because it
[01:55:17.520 --> 01:55:25.760]  was outside of normal office hours for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
[01:55:25.760 --> 01:55:37.120]  That ladies and gentlemen is a level of arrogance and immorality in a public official that I
[01:55:37.120 --> 01:55:44.120]  have never seen surpassed to this day with the possible exception of Abraham Lincoln
[01:55:44.120 --> 01:55:58.360]  in the war on Northern Aggression, okay? They do not care until it hits them personally.
[01:55:58.360 --> 01:56:05.400]  So we've got to change things so that it can hit them personally.
[01:56:05.400 --> 01:56:12.600]  We need to be taking away immunity from any and every public official regardless of their
[01:56:12.600 --> 01:56:16.100]  office, regardless of what they do.
[01:56:16.100 --> 01:56:24.600]  If their action a, violates the rights of an individual, b, violates the state or federal
[01:56:24.600 --> 01:56:35.000]  laws in how it was done or what was done, or if they violate their oath of office to
[01:56:35.000 --> 01:56:42.160]  the Constitution and uphold the rights of the people and the laws of the state or federal
[01:56:42.160 --> 01:56:47.200]  area in which they work, they shouldn't be allowed to be judges.
[01:56:47.200 --> 01:56:52.160]  They shouldn't be allowed to hold public office anywhere of any kind ever for the rest of
[01:56:52.160 --> 01:56:54.160]  their lives.
[01:56:54.160 --> 01:57:00.080]  If they violate any of those things, they're not trustworthy.
[01:57:00.080 --> 01:57:09.560]  Why would you give an untrustworthy person power over you, your property, and your life?
[01:57:09.560 --> 01:57:17.080]  Why would a reasonable person with all of their cognitive abilities ever choose willingly
[01:57:17.080 --> 01:57:18.720]  to do that?
[01:57:18.720 --> 01:57:22.680]  Well, the answer is they wouldn't.
[01:57:22.680 --> 01:57:28.440]  So the powers that be, including these judges and your legislators that are also part and
[01:57:28.440 --> 01:57:38.480]  parcel of the same little union of bar attorneys, have given such power to themselves without
[01:57:38.480 --> 01:57:45.000]  our approval, without our consent, they have given it to themselves.
[01:57:45.000 --> 01:57:46.000]  We need to take it away.
[01:57:46.000 --> 01:57:53.800]  We need to organize, we need to learn, we need to educate, and we need to take action
[01:57:53.800 --> 01:57:58.920]  to get the laws and the Constitution fixed in such a way as to take this power out of
[01:57:58.920 --> 01:57:59.920]  their hands forever.
[01:57:59.920 --> 01:58:03.600]  All right, folks, that's the end of our show for tonight.
[01:58:03.600 --> 01:58:05.720]  I want to thank all the callers who called in.
[01:58:05.720 --> 01:58:10.680]  I want to thank all the listeners who are out there paying attention, and most of all,
[01:58:10.680 --> 01:58:11.680]  thanks for having me back.
[01:58:11.680 --> 01:58:14.920]  I'm sorry I was gone for so long and so often.
[01:58:14.920 --> 01:58:18.240]  Things haven't worked out the way I'd hoped in that regard, but they're getting better.
[01:58:18.240 --> 01:58:21.040]  So now that things have, I'm back to stake.
[01:58:21.040 --> 01:58:23.400]  All right, folks, y'all have a great week.
[01:58:23.400 --> 01:58:50.520]  Have a great week, good night, and God bless.
[01:58:50.520 --> 01:58:56.560]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament
[01:58:56.560 --> 01:58:57.760]  Recovery Version.
[01:58:57.760 --> 01:59:02.760]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain what the Bible
[01:59:02.760 --> 01:59:08.400]  says verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.400 --> 01:59:11.720]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America.
[01:59:11.720 --> 01:59:20.680]  Call us toll-free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:20.680 --> 01:59:26.200]  This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000 cross references, plus
[01:59:26.200 --> 01:59:30.240]  charts and maps, and an outline for every book of the Bible.
[01:59:30.240 --> 01:59:32.760]  This is truly a Bible you can understand.
[01:59:32.760 --> 01:59:41.160]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version, call us toll-free at 888-551-0102.
[01:59:41.160 --> 01:59:51.320]  Call us toll-free at 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:59:51.320 --> 01:59:52.960]  Looking for some truth?
[01:59:52.960 --> 01:59:53.960]  You found it.
[01:59:53.960 --> 02:00:11.720]  LogosRadioNetwork.com.