ROL_2023-03-17_16k_Hr3-4.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:05.680]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[00:05.680 --> 00:09.360]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[00:09.360 --> 00:10.840]  Our liberty depends on it.
[00:10.840 --> 00:14.760]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember
[00:14.760 --> 00:16.840]  your First Amendment rights.
[00:16.840 --> 00:18.440]  Privacy is under attack.
[00:18.440 --> 00:22.040]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[00:22.040 --> 00:26.800]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[00:26.800 --> 00:31.880]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[00:31.880 --> 00:34.440]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[00:34.440 --> 00:38.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com
[00:38.000 --> 00:42.040]  The private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[00:42.040 --> 00:45.440]  Start over with StartPage.
[00:45.440 --> 00:47.560]  SPAR, it's what fighters do.
[00:47.560 --> 00:51.040]  It's also how I remember the five guarantees of the First Amendment.
[00:51.040 --> 00:54.120]  If you plan to take away my rights, I'm going to spar with you.
[00:54.120 --> 01:00.280]  SPAR with an extra P. S for speech, P for press, another P for petition,
[01:00.280 --> 01:02.800]  A for assembly, and R for religion.
[01:02.800 --> 01:06.440]  Most Americans are familiar with the First Amendment guarantees of free speech,
[01:06.440 --> 01:08.360]  press, assembly, and religion.
[01:08.360 --> 01:10.720]  But petition for redress is another matter.
[01:10.720 --> 01:14.440]  We have the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
[01:14.440 --> 01:17.400]  It means that if we're unhappy with what's going on in our government,
[01:17.400 --> 01:21.240]  we can spell out the reasons without fear of being thrown into jail.
[01:21.240 --> 01:25.840]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:30.960 --> 01:34.680]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[01:34.680 --> 01:38.080]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect.
[01:38.080 --> 01:39.800]  Our liberty depends on it.
[01:39.800 --> 01:43.080]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way
[01:43.080 --> 01:46.200]  to remember one of your constitutional rights.
[01:46.200 --> 01:48.200]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:48.200 --> 01:51.800]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:51.800 --> 01:56.600]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:56.600 --> 02:01.840]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[02:01.840 --> 02:04.360]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[02:04.360 --> 02:07.920]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[02:07.920 --> 02:11.880]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[02:11.880 --> 02:15.760]  Start over with StartPage.
[02:15.760 --> 02:19.720]  When I think of the Second Amendment, I visualize myself wrapping my two arms
[02:19.720 --> 02:22.160]  around the Bill of Rights in a big old bear hug.
[02:22.160 --> 02:26.480]  It's how I remember that the Second Amendment guarantees us the right to bear arms.
[02:26.480 --> 02:30.440]  Arms that embrace our freedoms and won't let anyone take them away without a fight.
[02:30.440 --> 02:33.880]  Get it? Two arms, bear hug, bear arms?
[02:33.880 --> 02:37.680]  The late Senator Hubert Humphrey captured the spirit of the Second Amendment so well
[02:37.680 --> 02:43.600]  when he said, the right of the citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government,
[02:43.600 --> 02:47.640]  one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America,
[02:47.640 --> 02:51.080]  but which historically has proved to always be possible.
[02:51.080 --> 03:17.080]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[03:17.080 --> 03:43.760]  OK, we are back. Randy Kelkin, Brett Fountain, Rue Levoire Radio, and we're talking to Jessica
[03:43.760 --> 03:52.120]  in Texas. OK, point of all this is, Jessica, if you sue them, there is all kind of stuff
[03:52.120 --> 03:59.560]  you can do to them. You can beat them up. You can beat up the judge. You can have everybody
[03:59.560 --> 04:11.000]  in an uproar wanting you out of that court. So if that's what you choose to do, there's
[04:11.000 --> 04:17.360]  a lot of things you can do. If you're not stuck to this company, then you...
[04:17.360 --> 04:25.480]  I think I've been here, the only reason I'm here is because of what I make. And I've been
[04:25.480 --> 04:30.480]  looking and looking, and if I could get a settlement that would be enough to just give
[04:30.480 --> 04:35.600]  me time and I wouldn't have to make enough money, it would give me enough that if I made
[04:35.600 --> 04:43.400]  a little bit less than myself, then I'd be OK. You know? You should be able to sue them
[04:43.400 --> 04:49.680]  and get a restraining order to keep them from firing you, to keep them from trashing your
[04:49.680 --> 04:56.800]  career, retaliating against you, and then get them to come to the table, write you a
[04:56.800 --> 05:02.400]  check. They wanted to get rid of you. See how bad they want to get rid of you. Yeah,
[05:02.400 --> 05:07.840]  I mean, I thought that with HR, that would do it, but it's not going to do anything because
[05:07.840 --> 05:14.200]  HR is just going to protect themselves, you know, you know, internal, you know, what I
[05:14.200 --> 05:20.760]  filed internally. Yeah, they'll do all that stuff until they get a nice, well-written
[05:20.760 --> 05:29.640]  tort letter. What I like to do with the tort letters, I like to write my lawsuit and then
[05:29.640 --> 05:36.920]  take the header off, the lawsuit header off, the court header, and the prayer, change prayer
[05:36.920 --> 05:46.320]  to make me whole or be sued and send it as a business letter. So when you tell them you're
[05:46.320 --> 05:53.240]  going to sue them, their legal department will look at it and say, oh yeah, she's gonna
[05:53.240 --> 05:59.720]  sue you because she already got the suit written. I just read one, wrote one that's 160 pages
[05:59.720 --> 06:12.200]  for Kara. Oh my goodness. So they don't have any doubt they're going to get sued. So it's
[06:12.200 --> 06:24.280]  all poker. You build your best poker hand and the insurance company, they're playing poker.
[06:24.280 --> 06:33.280]  Will, is there a chance they'll get a settlement higher than the limits of our coverage? You
[06:33.280 --> 06:44.680]  want your suit to look like they will because they have caused you extreme emotional stress.
[06:44.680 --> 06:49.960]  Even your kids, they're having a bad effect on you. Oh, it's horrible what they've done
[06:49.960 --> 06:57.640]  to me. They don't nice and tick. Yeah. So what do you think my next steps like, like
[06:57.640 --> 07:01.240]  a few things, like I know I'm going to do like I wrote down, like I'm going to do the
[07:01.240 --> 07:06.840]  timeline. I mean, I do have a pretty good timeline already, but I'll just, you know, kind of
[07:06.840 --> 07:15.840]  maybe a little more in depth. Okay. My suggestion is before you do anything. Yeah. Do your homework.
[07:15.840 --> 07:22.760]  Get out the contract and read it carefully and make notes about it. And where are they
[07:22.760 --> 07:30.200]  violating the contract? Or where have they added unconscionable tenants to the contract?
[07:30.200 --> 07:36.600]  Where are there things that have been added to the contract which gave benefit to the
[07:36.600 --> 07:46.760]  company and not to you? And then what have, what have they done to harm you that's not
[07:46.760 --> 07:53.800]  within the scope of the contract? Like retaliating against you?
[07:53.800 --> 08:02.680]  I think, you know what, the more I think about it, I think it is California laws. Because
[08:02.680 --> 08:09.040]  when I was looking at, when I was reading it and when I went to go file, there is, I'm
[08:09.040 --> 08:14.800]  like, oh my gosh, I can put it under somebody. There's so much in there that they violated.
[08:14.800 --> 08:24.120]  There's, you know, even the core values of Gilead, it's inclusion, integrity. I'm like,
[08:24.120 --> 08:29.200]  gosh, it's too, you've already violated, you know, accountability, you know, just a simple
[08:29.200 --> 08:30.200]  one.
[08:30.200 --> 08:36.200]  Good. You will, you will be much better off using California law than Texas law. Texas
[08:36.200 --> 08:46.080]  law is the right work state. No unions. You have unions, but the unions are binding. California
[08:46.080 --> 08:53.240]  law is probably going to give you a lot more protection. But do your homework first. Make
[08:53.240 --> 08:57.920]  sure you know where you're going to go before you start down that road.
[08:57.920 --> 09:02.160]  And I don't know, we said to find out what the insurance, I don't know where to find
[09:02.160 --> 09:08.840]  that limit to the insurance. Just ask them. Tell them you want to see if they give you
[09:08.840 --> 09:16.240]  a, you know, that's kind of a poker play. If they've been sued, look at some of their
[09:16.240 --> 09:21.440]  lawsuits. You'll be in there.
[09:21.440 --> 09:26.360]  Okay. Look at pass up soon.
[09:26.360 --> 09:34.080]  Pull as many of the, pull a few of their lawsuits and see what they are sensitive to.
[09:34.080 --> 09:39.520]  Well, there's a class actions right now. There's a few class actions against them.
[09:39.520 --> 09:46.640]  So, no, look for, look for employment suits, looks for, for suits of this nature.
[09:46.640 --> 09:49.680]  Okay. Same. Similar. Okay.
[09:49.680 --> 09:53.640]  The class actions are going to have to do with the drugs that they're selling.
[09:53.640 --> 09:59.560]  Yeah, but look, look, you know, do run them on Pacer.
[09:59.560 --> 10:05.640]  And you can sign up to Pacer. It's really, I don't think it costs anything to sign up.
[10:05.640 --> 10:10.400]  It costs so much a page to download the documents, but you can read them on Pacer and it don't
[10:10.400 --> 10:14.680]  cost anything. It's not, it's not very expensive at all.
[10:14.680 --> 10:21.680]  And look up cases that go to employment and good chance you'll find a case real close
[10:21.680 --> 10:26.960]  to yours and see what they did, see what they either settled for, or did they take it all
[10:26.960 --> 10:32.880]  the way through trial. You can find out all you need to know by studying your cases.
[10:32.880 --> 10:37.200]  Wrongfully terminated. I didn't ask her how much she sued for, but she was wrongfully
[10:37.200 --> 10:42.080]  terminated from this company and she sued and she did get a settlement, but it didn't
[10:42.080 --> 10:44.080]  ask how much.
[10:44.080 --> 10:47.440]  Okay. Good.
[10:47.440 --> 10:55.680]  Now, often the settlement part of the agreement is, is that it's sealed, but no problem. You
[10:55.680 --> 10:59.720]  can read the suits and see what they asked for and it'll tell you what the range in which
[10:59.720 --> 11:00.720]  they settled.
[11:00.720 --> 11:09.560]  I wonder if I can look her name up, I wonder, versus Gilead. I look it up like that.
[11:09.560 --> 11:13.360]  Wait, Brett, can you understand that I'm having more trouble understanding that?
[11:13.360 --> 11:19.080]  No, that kind of cut a little bit. Is it online? Is it, as the stuff, where do I...
[11:19.080 --> 11:21.400]  Yeah, you can go online to Pacer.
[11:21.400 --> 11:24.160]  Okay. So Pacer is a...
[11:24.160 --> 11:27.160]  Just go to Google and Google their name and lawsuit.
[11:27.160 --> 11:30.080]  You think that'll be right there, really?
[11:30.080 --> 11:32.640]  Oh, yeah. It'll all be on there.
[11:32.640 --> 11:33.640]  Really?
[11:33.640 --> 11:39.680]  So when you're on Pacer trying to look at documents on there, they charge you 10 cents per page
[11:39.680 --> 11:45.000]  to download the different motions and things that are going on in there. And they don't
[11:45.000 --> 11:53.800]  charge you anything if your 10 cents a page doesn't rack up to being $30 for a whole quarter.
[11:53.800 --> 11:58.400]  So if you just use it a little bit, don't run up a big bill, then that you won't get
[11:58.400 --> 11:59.400]  any bill.
[11:59.400 --> 12:03.360]  How do you spell Pacers? It's like it sounds P-A-Y-C-E-R.
[12:03.360 --> 12:05.360]  P-A-C-E-R, yeah.
[12:05.360 --> 12:07.920]  P-O-G-S-P-A-C-E-R. Okay.
[12:07.920 --> 12:15.400]  Yeah. It's the federal document site, the federal court site.
[12:15.400 --> 12:17.400]  Oh, okay.
[12:17.400 --> 12:20.760]  But not all of these would be in the federal court. Probably most of these kind of suits
[12:20.760 --> 12:30.080]  would be in the state. So wherever their primary office is, if they're out of California, California
[12:30.080 --> 12:33.880]  is probably the best place to look, especially if you're under California law.
[12:33.880 --> 12:34.880]  Right.
[12:34.880 --> 12:35.880]  Yeah.
[12:35.880 --> 12:40.520]  That'll be great. If you sue them in Texas, you'll be suing them under California law.
[12:40.520 --> 12:46.080]  So the Texas judge will have to rule on California law and they're going to hate that.
[12:46.080 --> 12:54.160]  Oh, wow. That would be really good. That would be really good.
[12:54.160 --> 12:55.160]  Okay.
[12:55.160 --> 12:59.360]  Yeah. You guys are awesome.
[12:59.360 --> 13:03.440]  Do your homework and then keep us up to date.
[13:03.440 --> 13:07.240]  Okay. You guys gave me a lot to do. I'll get busy.
[13:07.240 --> 13:17.440]  Okay. Thank you, Jessica. Now we're going to go to Valerie in Alabama. Hello, Valerie.
[13:17.440 --> 13:29.440]  Hello, Valerie. Did we put Valerie to sleep? I tend to have that effect on people.
[13:29.440 --> 13:30.440]  Here we go.
[13:30.440 --> 13:31.440]  Okay.
[13:31.440 --> 13:33.640]  I think she was muted. Let's try that again.
[13:33.640 --> 13:37.440]  Yeah. Okay. Valerie, you're there.
[13:37.440 --> 13:42.760]  Yeah. One time we had Tina, she had hung on the line a while. You remember this Brett
[13:42.760 --> 13:43.760]  when she was snoring?
[13:43.760 --> 13:49.160]  Oh, no, I don't remember that. That would be Tina as a lady.
[13:49.160 --> 13:50.160]  Tina.
[13:50.160 --> 13:54.360]  Planes don't snore, do they? That's impossible.
[13:54.360 --> 13:57.240]  Do you snore, Tina?
[13:57.240 --> 14:02.640]  I think she probably had somebody over at her house and she had told them to hold the
[14:02.640 --> 14:04.120]  phone for her.
[14:04.120 --> 14:06.320]  That's probably what it was.
[14:06.320 --> 14:07.320]  Yeah.
[14:07.320 --> 14:08.320]  Hello, Tina.
[14:08.320 --> 14:13.400]  My partner has a tendency to snore. That is for sure.
[14:13.400 --> 14:17.040]  See, I knew there had to be some explanation.
[14:17.040 --> 14:23.720]  Yes, and I'm always in the same room with him while I'm waiting for you to come on the
[14:23.720 --> 14:24.720]  phone.
[14:24.720 --> 14:29.240]  Probably, yeah, I'm sure that's what it was.
[14:29.240 --> 14:37.440]  Well, I have a quick comment to make. Brett, you were talking earlier about the e-file
[14:37.440 --> 14:43.720]  and you don't like that and you want to regular the file. Well, I actually had some experience
[14:43.720 --> 14:52.480]  with what you're talking about and in the appeal court here and I filed my appeal electronically
[14:52.480 --> 14:58.600]  because it's so much easier and especially if you're running into a deadline, you really
[14:58.600 --> 15:04.120]  want to get it in on time because as Randy always teaches us, if there's a deadline,
[15:04.120 --> 15:11.040]  just file any old crap and then you can finish it later and amend it.
[15:11.040 --> 15:13.640]  But don't be late because that is the worst thing.
[15:13.640 --> 15:21.320]  Well, I filed what I thought was a really good appeal brief and it was denied because
[15:21.320 --> 15:28.320]  it didn't follow the formatting guides with electronic filers to comply with rule 8.74,
[15:28.320 --> 15:30.000]  blah, blah, blah.
[15:30.000 --> 15:35.880]  And you have to do it for everything. It's got to be text to searchable. They must be
[15:35.880 --> 15:40.360]  in text searchable, portable, document format, pagination number.
[15:40.360 --> 15:46.440]  I said to the lady, I said, I'll be two months trying to figure this out and how to do this.
[15:46.440 --> 15:53.160]  And I said, this is for the technical people, not for people who are over 60 who don't have
[15:53.160 --> 15:54.160]  a clue.
[15:54.160 --> 15:58.720]  Yeah, law firms hire teams of paralegals to handle that.
[15:58.720 --> 15:59.720]  Once you've done it.
[15:59.720 --> 16:00.720]  And they have templates.
[16:00.720 --> 16:07.320]  Yeah, once you've done it one time, then you can turn it into a template.
[16:07.320 --> 16:14.600]  Well, somebody would have to walk me through it about five times one by one for me to even
[16:14.600 --> 16:15.600]  get that.
[16:15.600 --> 16:22.720]  The template's real easy. You take the template and you know, you take somebody else's lawsuit
[16:22.720 --> 16:28.400]  and you'll have all the sections in there. Just pull a suit that's been filed in the
[16:28.400 --> 16:37.560]  same court and keep the structure, just take out the content, replace it with your content.
[16:37.560 --> 16:46.080]  Yes, don't run me up the cliff, Randy, because that's very childish of you.
[16:46.080 --> 16:50.200]  Okay, hang on. We got a pretty well empty call aboard right now.
[16:50.200 --> 17:00.080]  So if you have a question or comment, give us a call, 512-646-1984, we'll be right back.
[17:00.080 --> 17:05.400]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[17:05.400 --> 17:09.800]  How to get debt collectors now with the Michael Meares Proven Method. Michael Meares has won
[17:09.800 --> 17:15.400]  six cases in federal court against debt collectors and now you can win two. You'll get step-by-step
[17:15.400 --> 17:20.680]  instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[17:20.680 --> 17:25.640]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons? How to answer letters and phone
[17:25.640 --> 17:30.320]  calls? How to get debt collectors out of your credit report? How to turn the financial tables
[17:30.320 --> 17:33.640]  on them and make them pay you to go away?
[17:33.640 --> 17:38.760]  The Michael Meares Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors. Personal
[17:38.760 --> 17:44.160]  consultation is available as well. For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[17:44.160 --> 17:49.520]  and click on the blue Michael Meares banner or email Michael Meares at yahoo.com. That's
[17:49.520 --> 17:59.000]  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
[17:59.000 --> 18:00.000]  now.
[18:00.000 --> 18:05.520]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar. In today's America
[18:05.520 --> 18:08.880]  we live in a us against them society and if we the people are ever going to have a free
[18:08.880 --> 18:12.960]  society then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those rights
[18:12.960 --> 18:16.160]  are the right to travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private
[18:16.160 --> 18:20.160]  capacity and most importantly the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford
[18:20.160 --> 18:24.000]  us the least expensive opportunity to learn how to enforce and preserve our rights through
[18:24.000 --> 18:27.960]  due process. Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio
[18:27.960 --> 18:31.680]  has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool available that will help you understand
[18:31.680 --> 18:35.720]  what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule of law. You can get your own copy
[18:35.720 --> 18:40.560]  of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com and ordering your copy today. By ordering
[18:40.560 --> 18:44.160]  now you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus
[18:44.160 --> 18:48.440]  the Lie. Video and audio of the original 2009 seminar. Hundreds of research documents
[18:48.440 --> 18:51.720]  and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight for your rights with the help
[18:51.720 --> 18:55.960]  of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today and together we can
[18:55.960 --> 19:02.960]  have free society we all want and deserve.
[19:25.960 --> 19:32.960]  Okay, we are back, ready to go.
[19:55.960 --> 20:04.600]  We've only got one caller on the board, well we've got two, but I think Valerie is either
[20:04.600 --> 20:10.240]  asleep or her phone line went dead or something. So if you have a question or comment, give
[20:10.240 --> 20:20.000]  us a call. We're talking to sweet, sweet Tina. There you go, that's the right thing to say.
[20:20.000 --> 20:26.520]  Sweet doesn't snore, never Charlie's, Tina. There you go. Well, we were talking about
[20:26.520 --> 20:32.600]  this list of rules and I've got this list in front of me. It's so onerous. I just, my
[20:32.600 --> 20:37.960]  eyes glaze over and I'm like, okay, stop enough. I don't want to hear it unless you're sitting
[20:37.960 --> 20:43.760]  in front of me taking me step by step with this technical stuff. I don't want to do it.
[20:43.760 --> 20:48.480]  So when I talked to the lady at the appeals court, she called me, you know, and well they
[20:48.480 --> 20:56.520]  denied my thing and so I called and she said, well, you know, I told her I said it'll take
[20:56.520 --> 21:03.080]  me months to do this. She said, if you mail it in you don't have to do that. I said, okay,
[21:03.080 --> 21:09.000]  so you're saying I can mail the change in because there was one heading they didn't
[21:09.000 --> 21:15.640]  like and I said, I don't have to follow all those silly rules. She said, yeah. So the
[21:15.640 --> 21:22.880]  thing I took from that is if you're in a time crunch, you know, you file it and then just
[21:22.880 --> 21:28.480]  mail in the copy without all these technical things they're asking for because that will
[21:28.480 --> 21:35.560]  overrule whatever they, you know, reject and they have time. They have to reject it and
[21:35.560 --> 21:41.560]  give you time to correct it before they default you.
[21:41.560 --> 21:45.800]  That's a great idea. That's like a, that's best of both worlds there because then you
[21:45.800 --> 21:53.720]  get your time of filing. You get the fast file stamp and you don't have to follow all
[21:53.720 --> 22:01.440]  of their attorney rules. Be careful with the feds because they'll say they won't file it
[22:01.440 --> 22:02.440]  until it's right.
[22:02.440 --> 22:07.720]  Well, they filed it. Yeah, that's what they did to me. They sent it back. They didn't
[22:07.720 --> 22:09.800]  file it until I had it right.
[22:09.800 --> 22:18.120]  Yeah, mine was state. So you're right. They could be right on the feds. But technically,
[22:18.120 --> 22:27.400]  if you filed it on time, they shouldn't be able to deny it. You may have to file an appeal,
[22:27.400 --> 22:31.320]  but they have to give you time to make the correction.
[22:31.320 --> 22:39.360]  Well, I've had them do it in the fed both mail and email. They haven't construed it
[22:39.360 --> 22:43.200]  to be filed until it was correct.
[22:43.200 --> 22:47.320]  That was the fed. I like to fit a lot better, but that's a problem with the feds sometimes
[22:47.320 --> 22:53.800]  until I got the forms down with my electronic lawyer. That's one of the things I want to
[22:53.800 --> 23:00.800]  get to. Instead of building a template for the lawsuit, I build a questionnaire and I
[23:00.800 --> 23:07.960]  ask them, you know, who are the parties? What is the venue? And you put in the venue section
[23:07.960 --> 23:15.880]  and it'll take the venue section and it'll drop it into the document. The template for
[23:15.880 --> 23:21.320]  the document will be in the database. And I'll just ask you for the information and
[23:21.320 --> 23:26.160]  then it'll take the information and put it into the document the way it, where it goes
[23:26.160 --> 23:31.560]  and how it's supposed to be in there. You don't have to worry about all that nonsense.
[23:31.560 --> 23:40.640]  But surely under Trindy V. Pagliaro and a few other pro say case law, they can't deny
[23:40.640 --> 23:50.400]  you for want of form. Unless they say that, but they don't actually do that.
[23:50.400 --> 23:51.400]  So call them on it.
[23:51.400 --> 23:53.720]  They're not following the law?
[23:53.720 --> 23:57.720]  When they don't follow their own rules, call them on that.
[23:57.720 --> 24:04.360]  The problem I had with it is I had so much I was fighting and there were so many battles
[24:04.360 --> 24:10.800]  I could have. That wasn't one I wanted to take on. But yeah, you could certainly call
[24:10.800 --> 24:18.680]  them on it. If I would complain against the clerk and once you complain against the clerk,
[24:18.680 --> 24:21.600]  then she's going to bend over backwards to help you get it right because she doesn't
[24:21.600 --> 24:28.080]  want another one. Yeah, you can do all that. But it'd be easier if you get a form down.
[24:28.080 --> 24:33.560]  Once you got the template down, then you just go in and fill in the sections.
[24:33.560 --> 24:40.000]  I'm just like, you know, it just glazes over me these technical, you know, complex details.
[24:40.000 --> 24:47.320]  No, there's there's a big set of generally a fixed set of sections. You've got the generally
[24:47.320 --> 24:54.760]  an introduction, plaintiff, now comes plaintiff and will prove the following. And you tell
[24:54.760 --> 25:00.280]  the court what you're going to what this case is going to be about. And then you have parties,
[25:00.280 --> 25:05.320]  then you have jurisdiction, then you have statement of facts, then you have argument
[25:05.320 --> 25:12.360]  in support or statement of factual factual accusations, then causes of action, conclusion,
[25:12.360 --> 25:22.240]  prayer. That's it. Now, the statement of facts and the argument in support can get long,
[25:22.240 --> 25:27.720]  but it sits in a spot in the document. And if you have the document format, then that's
[25:27.720 --> 25:37.520]  easy enough. So if you have done this already with a document, take that document and just
[25:37.520 --> 25:45.080]  delete the content, save it as a template. Then I don't I just take a document that I've
[25:45.080 --> 25:52.960]  already written to a particular jurisdiction and I go in and jurisdiction, I'll leave in
[25:52.960 --> 25:57.840]  there and there are certain things you can you don't have to mess with much. And just
[25:57.840 --> 26:04.920]  replace the information is relatively simple. The first in plain English, the first time
[26:04.920 --> 26:13.520]  I built a an appellate brief pleading for both the Fed and the state, both of them were
[26:13.520 --> 26:20.400]  a real pain in the neck, but they're actually pretty close to one another. You know, I mentioned
[26:20.400 --> 26:27.040]  sections earlier, it wasn't just sections. I had a heck of a time getting that number
[26:27.040 --> 26:33.160]  right. But once I got it down, I never had to do it again. I just go get that document.
[26:33.160 --> 26:41.000]  Take the old information out, add new information and boom, it's all done. And you save it as
[26:41.000 --> 26:49.120]  a PDF. The word will save as a PDF. And if you need it readable, if you have Acrobat,
[26:49.120 --> 26:56.320]  you can open, you need a searchable, you can open it in Acrobat and export it in a way that
[26:56.320 --> 27:11.280]  it'll be searchable. If not, you can go online and take your PDF and they want them in PDF.
[27:11.280 --> 27:19.080]  And then there are tools online that will make your document searchable. All it does
[27:19.080 --> 27:24.040]  is OCR the document, optical character recognition the document.
[27:24.040 --> 27:30.760]  And now you're talking technical again and you know I don't like technical. I prefer
[27:30.760 --> 27:32.320]  plain English.
[27:32.320 --> 27:40.200]  Yeah, well, you want to make a PDF readable, just do a search on Google, make PDF readable
[27:40.200 --> 27:44.480]  and boom, you'll hit a page where you can just drag the document, drop it in there
[27:44.480 --> 27:54.680]  and then download it.
[27:54.680 --> 28:08.360]  Okay. Most of that stuff is required whether it's mailed in or emailed. There may be some
[28:08.360 --> 28:16.400]  more requirements for email, but if you send a paper, if you do hand delivery or throw
[28:16.400 --> 28:23.480]  it in the snail mail, they don't pick on it. You could use different fonts. You can do
[28:23.480 --> 28:33.560]  1.5 spacing on the lines. They don't argue about anything. It could be handwritten.
[28:33.560 --> 28:41.360]  We were talking about, you're talking about the Court of Criminal Appeals denying a habeas
[28:41.360 --> 28:45.800]  corpus. Well, when I was working on that, I went down there and I wanted to see the
[28:45.800 --> 28:51.760]  habeas corpus is filed with the Court of Criminal Appeals in Texas. And they brought out half
[28:51.760 --> 28:59.560]  a dozen of them. They brought out a roll of toilet paper.
[28:59.560 --> 29:11.920]  This was insane. This guy was in jail and wrote a writ of habeas corpus on toilet paper.
[29:11.920 --> 29:21.800]  Use the whole roll. And there was not an error on that thing anywhere. There was not a whole
[29:21.800 --> 29:29.440]  tory in it from the pen anywhere. And I'm looking at this with the clerk and I said,
[29:29.440 --> 29:37.720]  this is insane. And they said, yeah, it is, but it worked. And you're trying to run up
[29:37.720 --> 29:45.000]  the cliff again, Randy. They were probably not getting him paper. He was making a statement,
[29:45.000 --> 29:56.440]  but I was impressed. Hang on, Randy. The guy obviously had more time than I did. Hang
[29:56.440 --> 30:01.160]  on. We'll be right back.
[30:01.160 --> 30:05.600]  Everyone knows that walking is great exercise, but you might not know that the way you walk
[30:05.600 --> 30:09.840]  could predict how long you're going to live. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht and I'll be back
[30:09.840 --> 30:39.480]  to tell you more about walking prognostication in just a moment.
[30:39.480 --> 30:47.920]  New research shows how fast you walk could predict how long you're going to live. The
[30:47.920 --> 30:52.480]  Journal of the American Medical Association reports that older adults who walk one meter
[30:52.480 --> 30:57.760]  per second or faster live longer than expected. In case you're wondering, one meter per second
[30:57.760 --> 31:02.760]  is about two and a quarter miles per hour. A senior's age, gender and walking speed were
[31:02.760 --> 31:07.560]  as good at predicting life expectancy as more traditional statistical measures. Generally
[31:07.560 --> 31:12.960]  speaking, faster walkers live longer. Measuring walking speed is quick and inexpensive. It
[31:12.960 --> 31:17.320]  only takes a stopwatch, some space to walk in a few minutes. Researchers say it could
[31:17.320 --> 31:22.880]  help doctors identify older patients who need special care. I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[31:22.880 --> 31:38.640]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[31:38.640 --> 31:48.600]  World Trade Center 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not hit by a plane. Over 1,200 architects
[31:48.600 --> 31:53.640]  and engineers have looked into the evidence and believed there is more to the story. Bring
[31:53.640 --> 31:58.520]  justice to my son, my uncle, my nephew, my son. Go to buildingwhat.org. Why it fell, why
[31:58.520 --> 32:04.480]  it matters and what you can do. Are you looking to have a closer relationship with God and
[32:04.480 --> 32:09.760]  a better understanding of His Word? Then tune into LogosRadioNetwork.com on Wednesdays
[32:09.760 --> 32:14.800]  from 8 to 10 p.m. Central Time for Scripture Talk, where Nana and her guests discuss the
[32:14.800 --> 32:20.800]  Scriptures in accord with 2 Timothy 2.15. Study to show thyself approved unto God, a
[32:20.800 --> 32:26.440]  workman that needed not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. Starting in January,
[32:26.440 --> 32:30.760]  our first-hour studies are in the book of Mark, where we'll go verse by verse and discuss
[32:30.760 --> 32:36.320]  the true gospel message. Our second-hour topical studies will vary each week with discussions
[32:36.320 --> 32:41.400]  on sound doctrine and Christian character development. We wish to reflect God's light
[32:41.400 --> 32:46.200]  and be a blessing to all those with a hearing ear. Our goal is to strengthen our faith and
[32:46.200 --> 32:51.480]  to transform ourselves more into the likeness of our Lord and Savior Jesus. So tune into
[32:51.480 --> 32:57.560]  Scripture Talk live on LogosRadioNetwork.com Wednesdays from 8 to 10 p.m. to inspire and
[32:57.560 --> 33:22.560]  motivate your studies of the Scriptures.
[33:22.560 --> 33:47.560]  Thank you very much for joining us today on LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[33:52.560 --> 34:03.520]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, and we're talking to Tina
[34:03.520 --> 34:09.560]  in California. Tina, where were we before we were so rudely interrupted by that break?
[34:09.560 --> 34:13.560]  Well, you were trying to put me to sleep with all this technical talk.
[34:13.560 --> 34:26.560]  Oh, yeah, that technical talk. Okay. Formatic. Formatic.
[34:26.560 --> 34:32.840]  The trick to that is plagiarize. Just go get somebody else's document and rip it to shreds
[34:32.840 --> 34:38.880]  and pull their stuff out and put yours in. Well, I do a lot of that anyway, so I'll keep
[34:38.880 --> 34:43.960]  working on it. It's just time constraints and everything, but while you haven't got anyone
[34:43.960 --> 34:50.960]  else on the board for a minute, what we were talking about last night in terms of we had
[34:50.960 --> 34:59.720]  till today to submit a stipulated judgment in that case against the consignment store,
[34:59.720 --> 35:04.360]  they never contacted us again, and she had the audacity to send us an email saying, well,
[35:04.360 --> 35:09.880]  it's in your best interest to settle out of court. Oh, really? So all of a sudden it's
[35:09.880 --> 35:15.880]  in our best interest, and we're not settling out of court, we're in court. I will file
[35:15.880 --> 35:22.360]  an appeal, and she has no clue what filing an appeal means or what she has to do, but
[35:22.360 --> 35:26.800]  that's okay. Let her go ahead and do it. But I talked to the bankruptcy health clinic
[35:26.800 --> 35:34.640]  this morning, and they said, absolutely, you cannot here file what you were talking about
[35:34.640 --> 35:41.120]  a rig of execution. He said, don't even try it, and don't even try filing for the judge
[35:41.120 --> 35:47.600]  to order payments. But he said, maybe later, but he said, right now, it's not what you
[35:47.600 --> 35:56.640]  do. But he gave me one paragraph to put in, and I did post it on Telegram, and I thought
[35:56.640 --> 36:05.160]  it was really interesting. He said, you must put in for the court to reserve jurisdiction
[36:05.160 --> 36:13.840]  over this adversary proceeding. And he said, if you are doing a settlement, and you had
[36:13.840 --> 36:21.760]  one, he said they will give the bankruptcy discharge, but if you ask them to reserve
[36:21.760 --> 36:27.640]  jurisdiction, if they fail to make the payments they claim, you can quickly reopen it and
[36:27.640 --> 36:32.960]  ask them to reinstate the original judgment. And I said, well, we're not even wanting to
[36:32.960 --> 36:38.520]  do that because we don't trust them. They've never followed through on any promise yet.
[36:38.520 --> 36:47.560]  So he said, well, still put it in there because if you want to, and you can offer a settlement
[36:47.560 --> 36:52.680]  once you get the judgment, you can say, well, hey, we got a judgment for the $80,000, but
[36:52.680 --> 36:58.800]  you can settle for $50,000 if you want. And these are the terms. If they follow through,
[36:58.800 --> 37:06.280]  you can then quickly send an email to the court or notice that the judgment was settled
[37:06.280 --> 37:14.200]  in full. Or if they fail to start making payments and fail, you can reopen it and ask them to
[37:14.200 --> 37:20.000]  reinstate the original judgment. So he said, it's a very, very important clause to put
[37:20.000 --> 37:24.720]  in to keep it open because otherwise they just like to close the case, and then it makes
[37:24.720 --> 37:31.560]  it very difficult for you to ever reopen it or file anything in it if you want to. So
[37:31.560 --> 37:38.200]  I added that as the third thing when I filed a notice to the court today.
[37:38.200 --> 37:44.360]  That's good information to know. That's the kind of stuff you only learn in the trenches.
[37:44.360 --> 37:51.120]  Yes. And then this is Tony on the help line. He's been very, very good. And he did say,
[37:51.120 --> 37:54.920]  he said, you know, it's not too late to go to law school. I said, yeah, it is for me.
[37:54.920 --> 38:00.400]  But memory is not good. Well, he said, you need to get an education grant and go and
[38:00.400 --> 38:05.920]  take some courses in legal research or other things. He said, you know, this would be really
[38:05.920 --> 38:11.640]  helpful to you. You've done a great job. But he said, you need to keep up your education.
[38:11.640 --> 38:20.360]  Yeah, you do. That was right. Because we're still young and spry. We got lots of years
[38:20.360 --> 38:28.200]  in front of us. We do. Well, we hope we do. So anyway, I filed this, by the way, today
[38:28.200 --> 38:36.800]  at 3.30 p.m. And then I sent an email copy, but I scheduled the email to go to the other
[38:36.800 --> 38:45.840]  side for 4.55 p.m. Because our deadline to file was at 5 p.m. So they got a copy at 4.55.
[38:45.840 --> 38:52.120]  And they wouldn't be able to file anything in time to respond. That's a good thing to
[38:52.120 --> 38:56.560]  do. I learned about that, that you can schedule your email to go out at a certain time. Because,
[38:56.560 --> 39:00.120]  you know, I forget. I think I'm going to do it and then I forget. And it's like, oh, no,
[39:00.120 --> 39:04.520]  I forgot to send that. So if you do it while you're thinking about it and then schedule
[39:04.520 --> 39:09.040]  the time and day, it just goes out automatically.
[39:09.040 --> 39:11.160]  That's interesting. I didn't know you could do that.
[39:11.160 --> 39:16.520]  Well, I didn't tell about, you know, six months ago and somebody was telling me you can schedule
[39:16.520 --> 39:20.320]  this and I'm like, how do you do that? So they walked me through it and they said, oh,
[39:20.320 --> 39:25.280]  okay, I'll do that from now on. I'll schedule it to go out at the last minute.
[39:25.280 --> 39:32.280]  Yep, that's why Tina gets the big bucks. Yeah, well, I haven't got any bucks yet, but I'm
[39:32.280 --> 39:37.880]  working on it. But, you know, we'll find out. I'll keep you updated next week because we,
[39:37.880 --> 39:43.560]  you know, we should get the order from the judge on Tuesday or Wednesday once he has
[39:43.560 --> 39:50.320]  time to review it on Monday. So I'm tentatively hoping and praying that he gives us all we
[39:50.320 --> 39:55.360]  have school, but you know judges, they, you know, you think he's done everything right,
[39:55.360 --> 40:00.440]  but they can throw a spanner in the works anytime they want. And you think, oh, I've
[40:00.440 --> 40:08.840]  got this down. And then they'll say, no, not quite. So I'm just being cautiously optimistic.
[40:08.840 --> 40:14.600]  Well, the last time you were in the judge, you seemed like he was pretty well tired of
[40:14.600 --> 40:15.760]  these folks.
[40:15.760 --> 40:22.360]  It did. But, you know, again, you just, you know, he said that in his tentatively rulings.
[40:22.360 --> 40:27.800]  He said it in court. But, you know, you just don't know what moods are going to be in at
[40:27.800 --> 40:33.760]  the end of the day. And I think as you so succinctly put it, they're probably going
[40:33.760 --> 40:42.360]  to rule for the party who, you know, messes or pisses out them off the most or the least.
[40:42.360 --> 40:47.880]  And you know, who knows who that is on the day. You think you're doing everything right.
[40:47.880 --> 40:54.480]  You hope you are. But at the end of the day, the judges are human and they, you know, may
[40:54.480 --> 41:00.360]  have had a bad day and said, I don't like this person today.
[41:00.360 --> 41:04.520]  To quote Charles Dickens, he may have eaten a bad potato.
[41:04.520 --> 41:08.720]  He may well have.
[41:08.720 --> 41:10.600]  From the Christmas Carol.
[41:10.600 --> 41:18.040]  Yes, that's a good book. So I'll let you go to the callers and I hope this helps. And
[41:18.040 --> 41:23.360]  if anyone wants anything filed up there, I can file the notice I filed today. It's very,
[41:23.360 --> 41:27.960]  very simple. We'll see what happens. But I'll send it to anyone who asks.
[41:27.960 --> 41:30.480]  Okay. Thank you, Ms. Tina.
[41:30.480 --> 41:32.080]  Okay. Thank you guys.
[41:32.080 --> 41:38.920]  Okay. Now we're going to try Valerie again. Hello, Valerie. Are you there?
[41:38.920 --> 41:52.360]  Hello, Valerie, it looks like she is not there. Okay. Now we're going to go to Chris in Colorado.
[41:52.360 --> 41:56.840]  Hello, Chris. What do you have for us today?
[41:56.840 --> 42:05.280]  So gentlemen, um, well, I, I, we're sitting here on this case in Illinois waiting for
[42:05.280 --> 42:12.880]  the judge to do something. And I'm getting a little curious at this point. Um, it's been
[42:12.880 --> 42:16.720]  October, I think, from November, December, January, February, March, we're, we're pushing
[42:16.720 --> 42:29.800]  six months, um, for him to rule on a second motion to dismiss. Now this, this one of the,
[42:29.800 --> 42:35.720]  one of the causes of act, one of the, the claims in there is a consumer fraud claim.
[42:35.720 --> 42:41.600]  And defense argued that I didn't fit the consumer nexus, even though I paid for a service, I
[42:41.600 --> 42:49.520]  got towed, right? So it doesn't matter if it was, uh, with consent or not. However, the,
[42:49.520 --> 42:54.000]  the laws in Illinois are fairly vague on this actually. And I've even looked through literally
[42:54.000 --> 42:59.920]  every single case law that talks about this and they're kind of vague. So there, there
[42:59.920 --> 43:04.920]  seems to be some opening here to go either way. And I'm wondering if that's what we're
[43:04.920 --> 43:11.520]  sitting on here. Um, because if the judge rules not to go one way, then I get to, I
[43:11.520 --> 43:19.760]  get to appeal it. If he rules in my favor, it, it actually, it actually solidifies possibly
[43:19.760 --> 43:26.200]  a consumer claim for all people who get towed. So my question is more about the appellate
[43:26.200 --> 43:30.760]  process, if that comes into play into walk into our appeal, but that's kind of what I'm
[43:30.760 --> 44:00.560]  wondering right now.
[44:00.560 --> 44:06.540]  Very advanced is in technology. Our lives have greatly improved, except in the area of nutrition.
[44:06.540 --> 44:11.280]  People feed their pets better than they feed themselves. And it's time we changed all that.
[44:11.280 --> 44:17.000]  Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic environment is good nutrition.
[44:17.000 --> 44:22.360]  In a world where natural foods have been irradiated, adulterated and mutilated, young
[44:22.360 --> 44:27.880]  Jevity can provide the nutrients you need. Logos radio network gets many requests to
[44:27.880 --> 44:33.520]  endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject. We have come to trust Jevity so
[44:33.520 --> 44:40.000]  much. We became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs and many others.
[44:40.000 --> 44:45.920]  When you order from logos radio network.com, your health will improve as you help support
[44:45.920 --> 44:51.920]  quality radio. As you realize the benefits of young Jevity, you may want to join us as
[44:51.920 --> 44:57.560]  a distributor. You can experience improved health, help your friends and family and increase
[44:57.560 --> 45:01.040]  your income. Order now.
[45:01.040 --> 45:07.480]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary,
[45:07.480 --> 45:13.960]  the affordable, easy to understand, four CD course that will show you how in 24 hours,
[45:13.960 --> 45:19.680]  step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing. If you don't
[45:19.680 --> 45:24.600]  have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself. Thousands have won with our step
[45:24.600 --> 45:31.720]  by step course and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22
[45:31.720 --> 45:37.120]  years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what
[45:37.120 --> 45:43.440]  everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.440 --> 45:49.640]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[45:49.640 --> 45:56.360]  pro se tactics and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner
[45:56.360 --> 46:25.360]  or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[46:25.360 --> 46:55.200]  Thank you very much.
[46:55.200 --> 47:02.200]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio and we're talking to Chris
[47:02.200 --> 47:10.360]  in Colorado. Okay, Chris, can you say that again? I turned my head set up.
[47:10.360 --> 47:16.480]  When you were talking about interlocutory appeal for something, we weren't sure what.
[47:16.480 --> 47:22.280]  So, I may have to do an interlocutory appeal. I've been warned by a couple attorneys or
[47:22.280 --> 47:27.280]  lawyers. Wait a minute, are you using any kind of hands-free device?
[47:27.280 --> 47:34.560]  No. Okay, I'm not getting great sound. Okay, go ahead.
[47:34.560 --> 47:39.080]  I might have a crappy connection. Brett, can you hear me okay?
[47:39.080 --> 47:46.120]  I can hear you. It sounds like there's an echo or delay. Well, I'll say a big room or
[47:46.120 --> 47:51.760]  something. You're plenty loud and we're not getting breaking up at all. I'm just having
[47:51.760 --> 47:56.800]  no trouble with the high tones. Oh, okay. I'll get closer to the phone. I
[47:56.800 --> 48:07.160]  don't know if that'll help. Okay, do you have a close pin? Clip it to the end of your, you
[48:07.160 --> 48:16.280]  know what, and we'll get more high tones. Oh, well, bad idea.
[48:16.280 --> 48:26.080]  No, I'm not doing that. So, the, and I can call back, maybe we'll get a better connection,
[48:26.080 --> 48:33.720]  but the, I'm curious if I need to get prepared for an interlocutory appeal because I won't
[48:33.720 --> 48:40.040]  get that option to appeal. Okay, what is the ruling for which you want
[48:40.040 --> 48:44.840]  an interlocutory appeal? Well, that's the hypothetical that I gave
[48:44.840 --> 48:50.880]  you that long-winded question about. So, there has been no ruling. We are waiting on a ruling
[48:50.880 --> 48:58.600]  from the judge for almost six months. Okay, well, what's the ruling you expect that you
[48:58.600 --> 49:07.960]  would do the high, the interlocutory for? If he rules in favor of defense and says that
[49:07.960 --> 49:15.040]  I do not fit as a consumer, meaning I got towed, right? They pulled my car and I paid
[49:15.040 --> 49:19.640]  for that service. I paid for the storage and towing of my vehicle. If he rules against
[49:19.640 --> 49:24.640]  that, that's what's in the paper, that's what's in the motion.
[49:24.640 --> 49:33.920]  So, they want to say that you did not contract for this service, so you're not a consumer.
[49:33.920 --> 49:41.120]  Is that understanding that right? Well, again, vagueness. They're hinting
[49:41.120 --> 49:46.200]  at that, but they're not saying that directly. They're just saying I don't fit the nexus.
[49:46.200 --> 49:51.680]  And they're using like parking ticket fines as their example. It's a very weak argument.
[49:51.680 --> 49:55.640]  But if you look through law, when I look through all the laws, I've looked through just about
[49:55.640 --> 50:01.440]  every case law there is on this topic. I don't think I've missed more than a couple.
[50:01.440 --> 50:08.280]  Where a debt can be considered a consumer fraud issue. Like if you have a debt to somebody,
[50:08.280 --> 50:13.120]  that's a consumer protected issue. But towing in that case.
[50:13.120 --> 50:21.920]  You were not engaged in some sort of commercial activity that involved the towing of your
[50:21.920 --> 50:35.000]  vehicle. So, what do you mean by that? You weren't in business with these people.
[50:35.000 --> 50:43.800]  They were providing a service and you were forced to use that service.
[50:43.800 --> 50:52.560]  So what did I pay for? You paid for the service. You didn't choose it. But what technically
[50:52.560 --> 51:02.160]  you did, you're in an adhesion contract when you park. And the adhesion contract says if
[51:02.160 --> 51:10.000]  you exceed the parking limit or you don't put the money in or if it's a no parking zone,
[51:10.000 --> 51:16.920]  then part of the contract is that the owner has a right to tow and the towing goes to
[51:16.920 --> 51:28.880]  you. That doesn't put you in any kind of commerce. You're still a consumer.
[51:28.880 --> 51:35.200]  The only way they can tow your vehicle at all is under contract.
[51:35.200 --> 51:40.320]  So was this from a private parking lot or was it from public property?
[51:40.320 --> 51:45.360]  This is from a private parking lot. Okay, that's private contract and you're
[51:45.360 --> 51:51.240]  in an adhesion contract. You didn't have to sign that contract, but you're under contract.
[51:51.240 --> 52:00.200]  You're a consumer. Okay, I agree. But apparently this issue hasn't been
[52:00.200 --> 52:10.680]  addressed in Illinois, at least not clearly. So even the city, I filed a complaint, I'll
[52:10.680 --> 52:15.160]  just refresh your memory, I filed a complaint with the city about this. So they did an investigation
[52:15.160 --> 52:20.720]  that the city found this tow company guilty of consumer fraud. The tow company signed
[52:20.720 --> 52:25.480]  off it and admitted, yes, I committed consumer fraud. I'm paying the fee for it. But when
[52:25.480 --> 52:30.040]  I got into federal court, they're trying to argue that this was a city ordinance and not
[52:30.040 --> 52:37.080]  a state, but the city pulls their power from the state act of consumer fraud act. I'm arguing
[52:37.080 --> 52:41.480]  all the power comes from this act. It doesn't matter if it's a state city or federal or
[52:41.480 --> 52:45.520]  whatever you want to call it. In the state of Illinois, all the power comes from that
[52:45.520 --> 52:51.000]  act and I am defined as a consumer. And even statute talks about towing with or without
[52:51.000 --> 52:56.360]  consent as a towing service, quote, unquote, and any service is protected under consumer
[52:56.360 --> 53:01.400]  fraud. And so I'm wondering why the court.
[53:01.400 --> 53:10.440]  Okay, so they're saying that consumer fraud doesn't apply because you weren't a consumer.
[53:10.440 --> 53:22.520]  But you're saying Illinois law says any towing falls under consumer, consumer law. Has this
[53:22.520 --> 53:29.360]  already been adjudicated? Are they trying to change law? I mean, let me say that different.
[53:29.360 --> 53:33.040]  Is this in statute? Or is it in case?
[53:33.040 --> 53:40.560]  Oh, that's the thing. It's not clear anywhere. It has not been ruled on clearly anywhere.
[53:40.560 --> 53:47.440]  It's pieced together across statute and some, really, there's nothing for towing in any
[53:47.440 --> 53:49.720]  case law on this issue. Nothing.
[53:49.720 --> 54:01.640]  Then the lawyers have got a, that's a legitimate issue. They're asking for the courts to, what's
[54:01.640 --> 54:11.280]  the term, Brett, distinguish the current law and case law and they're trying to write
[54:11.280 --> 54:23.560]  new law. And that, that's, you're just trying to keep them from writing the new law.
[54:23.560 --> 54:30.800]  Well, no, I'm trying to get them to write the new law and in the civilians favor, meaning
[54:30.800 --> 54:36.280]  make them state whether or not this is a consumer fraud issue because if they say it is, that
[54:36.280 --> 54:38.400]  changes it and it's protected.
[54:38.400 --> 54:43.520]  So I'll give you, I'll give you just a short example, hopefully. So in Illinois, you know,
[54:43.520 --> 54:48.760]  there's a, you've been there brandy, right? So there's a thing where when they, when
[54:48.760 --> 54:53.240]  you get in an accident, all these tow companies will show up and they'll solicit you for the
[54:53.240 --> 54:58.200]  business and a lot of them do it illegally. And, and they'll just come and start towing
[54:58.200 --> 55:01.200]  your car and they'll get it back and then they'll charge people whatever they want.
[55:01.200 --> 55:09.320]  They'll say it's cash. And there was no law really to stop this. So recently, literally
[55:09.320 --> 55:16.720]  just in the past two years, another alderman got on board and passed laws in the city to
[55:16.720 --> 55:24.000]  stop this. So now they have to, it's protected under consumer, consumer fraud issues and consumer
[55:24.000 --> 55:29.440]  rights issues. And now there has to be certain things in play. You cannot do that. But they
[55:29.440 --> 55:33.360]  don't have it for the unsolicited tow. So meaning if a tow company comes and grabs
[55:33.360 --> 55:38.640]  your car or in my case, sets up a tow trap, they don't have anything defined to protect
[55:38.640 --> 55:43.200]  that. So I'm trying to get the court to rule that this is also protected under consumer
[55:43.200 --> 55:48.960]  fraud, consumer issues because the flip side is that the tow company is protected under
[55:48.960 --> 55:53.960]  the Small Leans Act. So if they get, if they come out and they tow, they're entitled to
[55:53.960 --> 55:58.600]  collect their money because they have provided a service. So it's pretty interesting. That
[55:58.600 --> 56:06.000]  has been defined in the court, meaning if I, if I have to tow your car, I now am protected
[56:06.000 --> 56:12.080]  under the Small Labor and Leans Act, which is under $2,000 as a service. So they get,
[56:12.080 --> 56:19.400]  they get protected under a service, but we haven't yet. And so I'm, I'm arguing that.
[56:19.400 --> 56:28.720]  The question is from whom do they get to collect for their service? If, if a tow company comes
[56:28.720 --> 56:36.720]  and tows my car and they tow it from a lot that does not have any no parking signs on
[56:36.720 --> 56:50.040]  there. And the owner of the lot orders them to tow it. Can they charge me for it? Yes.
[56:50.040 --> 57:03.840]  In Illinois. Yes. And in Chicago. Yes. I always hated Chicago. I considered it the armpit
[57:03.840 --> 57:14.920]  of the nation. Okay. So, uh, in Chicago, you can't park on a lot unless you have permission.
[57:14.920 --> 57:23.800]  Well, that's, that goes without saying, right? If it's a private lot, then that goes without
[57:23.800 --> 57:29.480]  saying, but how do you know? No, no, no, no, no, it doesn't go without saying. If there
[57:29.480 --> 57:41.120]  are no, no trespassing signs, I can, and it's open to, uh, access. Then I have easement.
[57:41.120 --> 57:50.280]  One of the primary easement cases was in Chicago. This guy sold newspapers and he walked across
[57:50.280 --> 57:56.240]  this empty lot every day to his newspaper stand. They built a high rise on that empty
[57:56.240 --> 58:05.360]  lot and he sued them and they had to provide him easement so he could go across that. They
[58:05.360 --> 58:12.200]  had to design the building so he could walk through it because he had an easement. It
[58:12.200 --> 58:21.920]  was insane. That was Chicago. What they did and they settled with him and gave him a newspaper
[58:21.920 --> 58:31.680]  stand inside the building. That was easement. So if you got a lot there and you haven't
[58:31.680 --> 58:40.320]  marked it or roped it off, then I have easement. I can cross it. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain,
[58:40.320 --> 58:52.800]  Will of Law Radio, a call in number 512-646-1984. We'll be right back.
[59:40.320 --> 01:00:01.800]  That's 888-551-0102. Or visit us online at bfa.org.
[01:00:01.800 --> 01:00:06.280]  The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution. They guarantee
[01:00:06.280 --> 01:00:11.040]  the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect. Our liberty depends on it. I'm
[01:00:11.040 --> 01:00:14.920]  Dr. Katherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to remember one
[01:00:14.920 --> 01:00:20.360]  of your constitutional rights. Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about
[01:00:20.360 --> 01:00:24.920]  yourself, you'll never get it back again. And once your privacy is gone, you'll find
[01:00:24.920 --> 01:00:30.320]  your freedoms will start to vanish too. So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance
[01:00:30.320 --> 01:00:36.000]  and keep your information to yourself. Privacy. It's worth hanging onto. This public service
[01:00:36.000 --> 01:00:41.440]  announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search engine alternative to Google,
[01:00:41.440 --> 01:00:47.960]  Yahoo, and Bing. Start over with StartPage. Imagine your mom and dad are getting ready
[01:00:47.960 --> 01:00:52.960]  for bed. They pull back the covers and find a third party there. He announces, I'm with
[01:00:52.960 --> 01:00:56.920]  the military and I'm sleeping here tonight. That shocking image of a third party in my
[01:00:56.920 --> 01:01:01.680]  parents' bed reminds me what the Third Amendment was designed to prevent. It protects us from
[01:01:01.680 --> 01:01:06.040]  being forced to share our homes with soldiers, a common demand in the days of our founding
[01:01:06.040 --> 01:01:10.880]  fathers. Third party, Third Amendment, get it? So if you answer a knock at your door
[01:01:10.880 --> 01:01:14.880]  and guys in fatigues demand lodging, tell them to dust off their copy of the Bill of
[01:01:14.880 --> 01:01:19.800]  Rights and reread the Third Amendment. I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht. More news and information
[01:01:19.800 --> 01:01:35.720]  at KatherineAlbrecht.com. The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments of our Constitution.
[01:01:35.720 --> 01:01:40.120]  They guarantee the specific freedoms Americans should know and protect. Our liberty depends
[01:01:40.120 --> 01:01:44.160]  on it. I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht and I'll be right back with an unforgettable way to
[01:01:44.160 --> 01:02:12.920]  remember one of your constitutional rights.
[01:02:12.920 --> 01:02:19.760]  Start over with start page. Imagine four eyes staring at you through binoculars, a magnifying
[01:02:19.760 --> 01:02:24.760]  glass or a pair of x-ray goggles. That imagery reminds me that the Fourth Amendment guarantees
[01:02:24.760 --> 01:02:29.760]  Americans freedom from unreasonable search and seizure. Fourth Amendment, four eyes staring
[01:02:29.760 --> 01:02:34.120]  at you, get it? Unfortunately, the government is trampling our Fourth Amendment rights in
[01:02:34.120 --> 01:02:40.080]  the name of security. Case in point, TSA airport scanners that peer under your clothing. When
[01:02:40.080 --> 01:02:44.320]  government employees demand a peep at your privates without probable cause, I say it's
[01:02:44.320 --> 01:02:48.760]  time to sound the constitutional alarm bells. Join me in asking our representatives to
[01:02:48.760 --> 01:02:53.920]  dust off the Bill of Rights and use their googly eyes to take a gander at the Fourth.
[01:02:53.920 --> 01:03:23.760]  I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:03:23.920 --> 01:03:53.760]  Okay, we are back. I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht from the Rue de la Radio. And I'm Dr. Katherine
[01:03:53.760 --> 01:04:04.400]  Albrecht. And we're on this 70th day of March, 2023. And we are talking to Chris in Colorado.
[01:04:04.400 --> 01:04:12.560]  And this thing in Chicago about easement, I grew up in Chicago. If you have an empty
[01:04:12.560 --> 01:04:20.640]  lot, it will be parked on. And that's all there is to that unless you put a sign up
[01:04:20.640 --> 01:04:24.640]  and tell them that somebody will tow your car if you park on it. And then you don't park
[01:04:24.640 --> 01:04:31.280]  on it because these tow-tow drivers, they generally hired these knuckle-drivers with
[01:04:31.280 --> 01:04:40.000]  little teardrop tattoos next to their eyes and scars on their knuckles. But if you didn't
[01:04:40.000 --> 01:04:44.320]  put one up there, then the presumption was that we had an easement, we could park on
[01:04:44.320 --> 01:04:52.880]  it. So where you were parked, were there no parking such? Oh, yeah, that's the whole point.
[01:04:52.880 --> 01:04:58.240]  I mean, the reason I'm doing this suit is this has already been ruled on. It should have been
[01:04:58.240 --> 01:05:06.400]  a residue to cut the issue. But when I brought that up, when I brought that up, the judge ignored
[01:05:06.400 --> 01:05:10.960]  it. I made that statement. I didn't even argue the claim. I said, please see the document from
[01:05:10.960 --> 01:05:18.720]  the city. This has already been decided. This is a residue to cut an issue. This is consumer
[01:05:18.720 --> 01:05:25.440]  fraud. And the judge ruled against me. He says, amend your complaint. It's dismissed without
[01:05:25.440 --> 01:05:30.880]  prejudice. He says, you haven't made an argument. And I was like, are you kidding me? So I went
[01:05:30.880 --> 01:05:38.320]  deep into all the law and I spent quite a bit of time on it. And I quoted one of the laws,
[01:05:38.320 --> 01:05:44.960]  one of the statutes, and I pointed out, in this one statute alone, it defines towing as it used
[01:05:44.960 --> 01:05:50.720]  the word towing service over at 40 times. 40 times in one part of the statute, it says towing service.
[01:05:51.280 --> 01:05:55.600]  And then in another part of the statute, it calls, it says towing service as well,
[01:05:55.600 --> 01:06:00.400]  when towed without consent. So that means if I was towed without consent, which is exactly what it
[01:06:00.400 --> 01:06:07.120]  was, inferring noncontractual, it's still considered towing service. All right. So it kind of talks
[01:06:07.120 --> 01:06:13.280]  about it in statute, but not specifically for this kind of tow. But you're totally right, Randy.
[01:06:13.280 --> 01:06:19.120]  In the parking lot I parked in, the restaurant balcony hangs over the parking lot. So you want
[01:06:19.120 --> 01:06:23.280]  to tell me how people don't think that's the parking lot for the restaurant unless there's a
[01:06:23.280 --> 01:06:29.520]  sign that says otherwise. And there was no sign. They hid their towing company signs behind other
[01:06:29.520 --> 01:06:36.240]  cars. And so you didn't even know there was a tow company there. But the parking lot is legally
[01:06:36.240 --> 01:06:42.800]  supposed to be defined as residents, business or whatever. This is a parking lot for the businesses
[01:06:42.800 --> 01:06:47.040]  only, or this is a parking lot for the residents only. That wasn't there. It still isn't there
[01:06:47.040 --> 01:07:02.400]  four years later. Randy, are you muted? Somebody muted me when I wasn't looking.
[01:07:02.400 --> 01:07:07.520]  No, I ran out of my throat juice.
[01:07:10.160 --> 01:07:14.960]  Yeah. And that makes perfect sense. It's hanging over the parking lot. Anybody would think that
[01:07:14.960 --> 01:07:20.320]  that's the place to park for that? Yeah.
[01:07:23.680 --> 01:07:27.280]  There's multiple businesses actually that have balconies that hang over it. Some of them are
[01:07:27.280 --> 01:07:33.920]  just for going out and sitting. But the restaurant, when it's warm out, they put chairs out there.
[01:07:33.920 --> 01:07:40.480]  They put tables out there. So it was cold when I was there. I was there in middle of April,
[01:07:40.480 --> 01:07:43.920]  I guess, or end of April. It was a chilly evening, so they didn't have it open. But
[01:07:44.720 --> 01:07:48.400]  so yeah, that's already been decided. This has all been decided that their activity is
[01:07:48.400 --> 01:07:52.640]  illegal, maybe even paid the fine for it. Now we're trying to get the federal court to rule
[01:07:52.640 --> 01:08:00.960]  that this is a consumer issue. And if they don't rule in my favor, which I think he,
[01:08:00.960 --> 01:08:04.320]  I don't know, he could be taking his time to make sure he does this one right.
[01:08:05.200 --> 01:08:09.360]  But if he doesn't rule in my favor, I'm going to have to appeal it. I need that. I have to have
[01:08:09.360 --> 01:08:17.600]  that for punitive damages. Did the judge explain to you what it was that was missing?
[01:08:17.600 --> 01:08:24.160]  Because this is federal. Generally, they do that. If your pleading is insufficient,
[01:08:24.160 --> 01:08:31.120]  they won't just tell you that it's insufficient. They'll generally tell you how it's insufficient.
[01:08:33.200 --> 01:08:38.240]  He did, in other things, and this one he did not. He did not say anything. He just says,
[01:08:38.800 --> 01:08:45.200]  plaintiff has not presented any argument or claim, as really, really said. You didn't present a
[01:08:45.200 --> 01:08:53.600]  claim. And I did, I mean, I clearly did, but he says I haven't presented a claim. So he wanted
[01:08:53.600 --> 01:09:00.400]  me to re-file that. Could you ask the court for clarification?
[01:09:04.320 --> 01:09:10.160]  Well, that's a good way. I got, I mean, you're right. I could at this point.
[01:09:10.160 --> 01:09:16.800]  I don't know. Could I at this part? Yeah, you can. Judges, they want you,
[01:09:17.440 --> 01:09:22.560]  especially in the Fed, they want you to present them with a really good document,
[01:09:22.560 --> 01:09:29.040]  really good pleading. And generally, they'll tell you what's wrong with it. So if he rendered a ruling,
[01:09:29.040 --> 01:09:32.960]  and it's unclear to you how he got there, you can ask him for clarification.
[01:09:32.960 --> 01:09:39.200]  And explain your position and tell him, I don't know what you're talking about.
[01:09:39.760 --> 01:09:43.760]  I have no idea what you're asking me. And they're pretty good about telling you.
[01:09:46.560 --> 01:09:49.440]  Well, I mean, to his credit, I was pretty
[01:09:51.200 --> 01:09:54.720]  assumptive. I assumed that I had, since I had a document that I already said they
[01:09:54.720 --> 01:10:00.240]  committed consumer fraud, that that was sufficient. And I used that and I pointed
[01:10:00.240 --> 01:10:05.040]  to that in many, many ways. But I didn't put a whole lot of statute in there other than that.
[01:10:05.920 --> 01:10:11.040]  That. Oh, hold on. Let's take a step back and get context.
[01:10:12.800 --> 01:10:16.400]  Okay. What are you asking the federal court to rule?
[01:10:17.920 --> 01:10:21.280]  I mean, why did you file in the federal court? What was the issue?
[01:10:21.280 --> 01:10:31.360]  Well, this is that toe thing from Chicago and Illinois. But I'm the judge and I'm sitting
[01:10:31.360 --> 01:10:40.560]  here and you want me to rule. You can't assume anything from the trial from whatever is before
[01:10:40.560 --> 01:10:47.200]  me. Whatever you want me to do, you have to give me everything. You can't expect me to
[01:10:47.200 --> 01:10:54.240]  reach back. Did you give him the argument that got you where you're at?
[01:10:57.280 --> 01:11:04.000]  So I quoted the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act or whatever it is for
[01:11:04.000 --> 01:11:10.720]  Illinois. There's a Consumer Fraud Act in Illinois State Act. And I quoted that as the governing
[01:11:10.720 --> 01:11:18.800]  body, if you will. It sounds like he's saying you didn't state your claim.
[01:11:20.800 --> 01:11:29.920]  Did you re-argue your claim in the federal court? Or are you just asking him to make a
[01:11:29.920 --> 01:11:39.040]  technical ruling on some point of law? No, I argued it. I stated that
[01:11:39.040 --> 01:11:45.600]  I got stated that they committed Consumer Fraud and I quoted the statute. So therefore,
[01:11:45.600 --> 01:11:51.040]  I've been harmed and here's my damages. But it was a brief, it was a fairly brief one.
[01:11:54.400 --> 01:12:00.160]  But no, actually it wasn't that brief. In the original complaint, it was pretty good.
[01:12:00.160 --> 01:12:05.120]  Now, when defense came through and they said, now defense came through and that's where
[01:12:05.120 --> 01:12:11.120]  it's shifted. And I didn't argue the second time much. So the first time in my actual suit,
[01:12:11.760 --> 01:12:18.640]  it's pretty thorough. But when defense put in their argument that I don't fit the nexus,
[01:12:19.760 --> 01:12:24.880]  I put a one paragraph thing. I said, I have, this has been already decided by the city. This is
[01:12:24.880 --> 01:12:31.520]  a rescue to cut issue. I have no need to argue this. It's already been decided. I have no need
[01:12:31.520 --> 01:12:38.000]  to respond. Well, the judge responded to that saying, you made no argument. And I basically said,
[01:12:38.000 --> 01:12:43.440]  I don't need to. This is a rescue cut issue. And apparently they're arguing that it isn't.
[01:12:44.400 --> 01:12:48.320]  But the judge didn't clarify. He just said, you made no argument.
[01:12:49.920 --> 01:12:53.760]  But if my original complaint was sufficient, then why would I need to make an argument?
[01:12:53.760 --> 01:13:00.720]  So this definitely needs a request for clarification.
[01:13:06.480 --> 01:13:10.080]  Ask the judge to clarify. You don't know what he's telling you.
[01:13:11.840 --> 01:13:14.560]  And these are federal courts. They're generally really good about that.
[01:13:14.560 --> 01:13:22.480]  What kind of emotion is that? It's a petition for clarification.
[01:13:26.240 --> 01:13:31.120]  Or a motion for clarification. You have this ruling and it's unclear to you what the court's
[01:13:31.120 --> 01:13:39.760]  telling you. This is no, this isn't special here. It's just like you were talking to the judge
[01:13:39.760 --> 01:13:46.080]  and he says, I don't know what you're talking about. Can you clarify? Just write him a motion
[01:13:46.080 --> 01:13:56.080]  and explain what he ruled and why you're unclear as to what he's asking you and ask him to clarify.
[01:13:56.080 --> 01:14:04.000]  That's easy enough. Does that stay any of the clocks or does it interrupt
[01:14:04.000 --> 01:14:08.480]  his processes behind the scenes?
[01:14:09.600 --> 01:14:15.760]  Yes, definitely. It'll stop everything. You can't be expected to respond to his pleading
[01:14:16.720 --> 01:14:19.040]  into his ruling if you don't know what it is.
[01:14:20.880 --> 01:14:23.360]  But I already responded. That was months ago.
[01:14:23.360 --> 01:14:36.400]  No. Okay, then why are we responding to the part where he said you didn't make an argument?
[01:14:36.400 --> 01:14:37.920]  You didn't make an argument. Yeah, make a claim.
[01:14:40.640 --> 01:14:46.080]  Yeah, but that was, I refiled my suit. That's what I did. I amended my complaint.
[01:14:46.080 --> 01:14:48.880]  Okay, is that issue still in front of the court?
[01:14:48.880 --> 01:14:55.520]  I mean, why are we talking about that if you've already responded to it?
[01:14:58.240 --> 01:15:03.840]  Well, because I'm concerned about why he's not ruling on it yet.
[01:15:04.480 --> 01:15:12.000]  Oh, okay. So he made that ruling and then you responded and now you're waiting for him to
[01:15:12.000 --> 01:15:21.040]  give you a final ruling. Yeah. Oh, okay. Sometimes they're slow.
[01:15:24.320 --> 01:15:29.760]  The last one I did in California took nine months for a ruling.
[01:15:34.560 --> 01:15:40.400]  It just depends on how busy the courts are. The judge doesn't really do this. He has clerks
[01:15:40.400 --> 01:15:46.320]  that do that and it depends on whether or not he's got enough clerks available.
[01:15:49.680 --> 01:15:55.920]  Okay. If he rules against me, how quickly do I have to do an interlock into our appeal?
[01:15:55.920 --> 01:16:03.600]  I think it's like a 30 days. Yeah. No, you give him a notice of intent to appeal and I think,
[01:16:03.600 --> 01:16:13.760]  as Brett, you know, it's 60 or 90 days. When you have to file that? No. If you want to do it,
[01:16:13.760 --> 01:16:18.320]  I don't think there, you want to do an interlockatory. I don't think there is a time limit.
[01:16:19.920 --> 01:16:24.400]  Yeah. I don't know of a time limit for one. Yeah. You can do interlockatory anytime you want to
[01:16:24.400 --> 01:16:27.120]  before the court, but before the trial is over.
[01:16:27.120 --> 01:16:37.200]  Okay. Okay. Do you have other callers? No.
[01:16:40.560 --> 01:16:45.840]  But you weren't supposed to force us to say that on the air that here we are,
[01:16:45.840 --> 01:16:50.560]  this big time radio show. We don't have any callers. What's the deal?
[01:16:50.560 --> 01:16:58.080]  Five, one, two, six, four, six, one, nine, eight, four. We can drive back.
[01:17:20.560 --> 01:17:26.240]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons? How to answer letters and phone calls?
[01:17:26.240 --> 01:17:30.800]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report? How to turn the financial tables on them
[01:17:30.800 --> 01:17:36.800]  and make them pay you to go away? The Michael Mirris proven method is the solution for how
[01:17:36.800 --> 01:17:41.840]  to stop debt collectors. Personal consultation is available as well. For more information,
[01:17:41.840 --> 01:17:48.000]  please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Mirris banner or email Michael Mirris
[01:17:48.000 --> 01:17:57.040]  at Yahoo.com. That's ruleoflawradio.com or email M-I-C-H-A-E-L-M-I-R-R-A-S at Yahoo.com
[01:17:57.040 --> 01:18:02.640]  to learn how to stop debt collectors now. I love logos. Without the shows on this network,
[01:18:02.640 --> 01:18:07.040]  I'd be almost as ignorant as my friends. I'm so addicted to the truth now that there's no going
[01:18:07.040 --> 01:18:12.640]  back. I need my truth fix. I'd be lost without logos and I really want to help keep this network
[01:18:12.640 --> 01:18:16.800]  on the air. I'd love to volunteer as a show producer, but I'm a bit of a Luddite and I really
[01:18:16.800 --> 01:18:22.000]  don't have any money to give because I spent it all on supplements. How can I help logos?
[01:18:22.000 --> 01:18:26.960]  Well, I'm glad you asked. Whenever you order anything from Amazon, you can help logos.
[01:18:26.960 --> 01:18:31.360]  You can order them in your supplies or holiday gifts. First thing you do is clear your cookies.
[01:18:31.360 --> 01:18:38.000]  Now, go to logosregulnetwork.com. Click on the Amazon logo and bookmark it. Now,
[01:18:38.000 --> 01:18:43.280]  when you order anything from Amazon, you use that link and logos gets a few pesos.
[01:18:43.280 --> 01:18:48.640]  Do I pay extra? No. Do I have to do anything different when I order? No. Can I use my Amazon
[01:18:48.640 --> 01:18:55.680]  Prime? No. I mean yes. Wow. Giving without doing anything or spending any money, this is perfect.
[01:18:55.680 --> 01:19:00.000]  Thank you so much. We are logos. Happy holidays, logos.
[01:19:00.000 --> 01:19:06.720]  This is the logos, logos, radio, network.
[01:19:30.400 --> 01:19:58.960]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain,
[01:19:58.960 --> 01:20:05.760]  Luddite and I are talking to Chris in Colorado. Okay, Chris, you had something else?
[01:20:08.800 --> 01:20:15.920]  My last question was about, so they issued discovery. Of course, they ignored my discovery.
[01:20:15.920 --> 01:20:21.440]  I'm still trying to figure out that's allowed in federal court or not. But the questions they
[01:20:21.440 --> 01:20:27.760]  asked me, some of them are just completely irrelevant. They're not even, they asked me
[01:20:27.760 --> 01:20:33.760]  questions about everything that happened before, with that car, before the tow and after the tow.
[01:20:33.760 --> 01:20:37.440]  They want to know what I've done with the car since then, where I've been, who I was seeing in
[01:20:37.440 --> 01:20:42.720]  Chicago, all that kind of stuff. Who my insurance carriers are, all that kind of stuff. And none
[01:20:42.720 --> 01:20:48.480]  of it's relevant except around the time of that tow. So that's what I plan to argue.
[01:20:51.120 --> 01:20:57.280]  And I plan to actually answer them within the 30-day rule, even though it looks like I can ignore
[01:20:57.280 --> 01:21:06.720]  them and make them motion to compel me. Is that found? Yeah, you can always ignore their discovery.
[01:21:08.080 --> 01:21:14.800]  That's kind of standard procedure. Nobody responds to discovery until the judge orders them to.
[01:21:18.000 --> 01:21:24.320]  Okay. I mean, why would you? Because the judge may not order you to respond to something. So
[01:21:24.320 --> 01:21:33.920]  why bother? But if I respond to some things and act reasonable and then push back on some other
[01:21:33.920 --> 01:21:42.000]  things and the judge might see that I'm at least engaging, and so he'll maybe give me some leniency
[01:21:42.000 --> 01:21:47.440]  because I'm not burdening his time as much, right? All he's got to do is look at a couple things
[01:21:47.440 --> 01:21:56.080]  instead of the entire discovery. So if, and plus it gives me an ability to present a paper,
[01:21:56.080 --> 01:22:02.320]  like, look, I've answered some of this. If it doesn't make any difference, if you have no
[01:22:02.320 --> 01:22:09.600]  objection, then yeah, go ahead and file it. Go ahead and give the discovery. Okay. It certainly
[01:22:09.600 --> 01:22:16.080]  won't hurt. It certainly won't hurt anything. Yeah, I gave them every picture and every email
[01:22:16.080 --> 01:22:23.280]  because it all makes them look bad. So why would I hold back? But the things they're asking for
[01:22:23.280 --> 01:22:27.440]  is actually personal. They want to know who owned the car before me. They want to know the bill
[01:22:27.440 --> 01:22:31.920]  of sale, all that kind of stuff. It's none of their business. How much does it mean for that car?
[01:22:33.600 --> 01:22:38.800]  You need to send them some discovery. How much you want it to be worth.
[01:22:38.800 --> 01:22:47.200]  Yeah, and you want to know who owned their tow truck before they bought it.
[01:22:47.200 --> 01:22:56.000]  Yeah, exactly. Exactly. You're right. I'm going to make that point. That's a good point, Randy.
[01:22:56.000 --> 01:23:02.000]  When I make that kind of court rebuttal, do I put that down on the papers so the court might
[01:23:02.000 --> 01:23:04.800]  actually see it or I just do that in a personal letter to the lawyer?
[01:23:04.800 --> 01:23:09.600]  You do it in a letter to the lawyer. You can always file it in the record
[01:23:10.480 --> 01:23:17.200]  so that there's a record of your correspondence so that you can show that you interacted with
[01:23:17.200 --> 01:23:22.800]  the other party in order to handle this issue and you didn't just wait for the court.
[01:23:24.960 --> 01:23:27.520]  So the short answer is, yeah, you can file it with the court.
[01:23:30.160 --> 01:23:34.320]  But that initial, like you were talking about calling us bluff and doing a little bit of poker
[01:23:34.320 --> 01:23:37.440]  game, should I just put that in a letter to him and say, hey, look, defense, if you're going to
[01:23:37.440 --> 01:23:41.120]  start playing it this way, then I'm going to ask for every single thing that came out of,
[01:23:41.120 --> 01:23:45.200]  like you're asking the company. Don't tell him you're going to do it. Just do it.
[01:23:48.480 --> 01:23:54.560]  Okay. This filing, additional discovery. You want to know what color his underwear are.
[01:23:56.400 --> 01:24:00.480]  Ask him a lot of questions that he's going to object to as not relevant.
[01:24:00.480 --> 01:24:10.000]  Good point. Okay. All right. That's all I got. The reason everybody's not on is they're time for
[01:24:10.000 --> 01:24:26.800]  bed like an hour ago. Where is everybody? But we've got Dr. Joe. We've always got Dr. Joe.
[01:24:26.800 --> 01:24:38.960]  Hello, Dr. Joe. Are you there? I think we even put Dr. Joe to sleep. Dr. Joe's on the collar
[01:24:38.960 --> 01:24:47.680]  bridge. Okay. Do you have anything else for us, Chris? No. We'll find something. We've got a
[01:24:47.680 --> 01:25:03.360]  couple more segments. Okay. I got more stuff about my boring suit, but oh, I do have an
[01:25:03.360 --> 01:25:12.880]  interesting one. In the discovery, they asked me a bunch of questions, which leads me to believe
[01:25:12.880 --> 01:25:19.920]  that Western National, the insurance company for the tow company, ran my place and ran my
[01:25:21.920 --> 01:25:27.600]  my VIN number to get information that they did not have authority to do. Now, I don't know if
[01:25:27.600 --> 01:25:31.280]  that's legal or not, but they're obviously doing it behind the scenes because they didn't come right
[01:25:31.280 --> 01:25:36.720]  out and say, hey, we found this information on you. They ask probing questions to get me to admit
[01:25:36.720 --> 01:25:44.400]  to it. And it's very suspicious. The questioning that came out of the fence, that's my next move.
[01:25:44.400 --> 01:25:52.560]  I got to look into that. Were the questions, how are they relevant to parking?
[01:25:55.040 --> 01:26:01.120]  None of them are relevant. They're trying to pull up some ownership issues. They want to, oh, and
[01:26:01.120 --> 01:26:09.680]  then after that tow, I was in Boulder, Colorado, and somebody ran into my bumper in a Whole Foods
[01:26:09.680 --> 01:26:15.280]  park in that one day. I don't really shop at Whole Foods, but I was there one day grabbing something.
[01:26:15.920 --> 01:26:21.280]  And this lady backed back in, and it was her fault. I ended up getting a payout on that
[01:26:21.280 --> 01:26:27.680]  several months later. And then I got broken into in San Francisco, and they damaged the car. So
[01:26:27.680 --> 01:26:33.280]  there's been some claims on the car, and they're probing for me to admit to those. I think they're
[01:26:33.280 --> 01:26:37.760]  going to try to use it to say, see, there was damage. It's none of their business. But they
[01:26:37.760 --> 01:26:42.880]  wouldn't have asked unless they knew, unless they ran it and they looked that information up. So
[01:26:42.880 --> 01:26:45.840]  they are looking at claims for the vehicle, which they have no right to do.
[01:26:45.840 --> 01:27:00.320]  Is that information necessarily secret? It doesn't go to criminal history.
[01:27:03.120 --> 01:27:12.880]  No, it doesn't. You have to be in insurance care. I can't just run your VIN and get,
[01:27:12.880 --> 01:27:16.960]  I can see that there's been accidents or I can see that there's been stuff,
[01:27:17.760 --> 01:27:22.800]  but I can't see what the payout was or what the insurance company is. You have to be an
[01:27:22.800 --> 01:27:26.800]  insurance adjuster. You have to be an insurance company to get that personal information.
[01:27:28.320 --> 01:27:38.480]  So it's a yes and no response. Anybody can run any VIN and they can get some past history,
[01:27:38.480 --> 01:27:45.280]  but they can't get super detailed information. Okay. But even if they did,
[01:27:46.960 --> 01:27:51.760]  and if I'm the insurance company and did you claim damage
[01:27:56.800 --> 01:28:02.080]  from their toe? Yes. Oh, that's probably why they want to make sure that
[01:28:02.080 --> 01:28:11.520]  that you're not claiming preexisting damage. You know what's great is that I have one month
[01:28:11.520 --> 01:28:17.760]  before the toe, I was in another area in Colorado and this woman, I was sitting in the car actually
[01:28:17.760 --> 01:28:22.720]  on the phone and it was kind of a windy day and this woman opened her door and didn't grab hold
[01:28:22.720 --> 01:28:27.600]  of her door and her door slammed into my fender, front left fender. So left a little ding, right?
[01:28:27.600 --> 01:28:33.760]  Well, they paid out on that insurance one month before, so they took pictures obviously. I have
[01:28:33.760 --> 01:28:39.600]  pictures of only one month before of my car having one ding on the left side and so it was clean.
[01:28:40.720 --> 01:28:46.560]  Perfect. Yeah. And so I presented that to the court and they're trying to get me to admit
[01:28:46.560 --> 01:28:52.640]  that to again. I've already given them pictures of it and they're trying to get me to talk about
[01:28:52.640 --> 01:28:57.360]  preexisting damage even before that and I don't think there was. That's right when I
[01:28:57.360 --> 01:29:02.000]  bought the car. So they're probing into stuff that, you know, that's why they want to know
[01:29:02.000 --> 01:29:06.480]  the previous owner's name. They're probing into stuff that's none of their business because
[01:29:06.480 --> 01:29:12.000]  I have pictures that, I have that picture, right? Those pictures there one month before
[01:29:12.000 --> 01:29:17.520]  and then a three months later, the insurance company or the toe company came out of an
[01:29:17.520 --> 01:29:20.960]  estimate. They took their own pictures and they were no different from the day of the toe.
[01:29:20.960 --> 01:29:25.680]  They just had the same damage. So anything before and after those dates to me is irrelevant.
[01:29:25.680 --> 01:29:33.200]  And that's, that's what I want to argue. But you know, I want to play the court's common sense.
[01:29:35.200 --> 01:29:40.240]  That should be easy enough. The court's going to know about that. They do this stuff all the time.
[01:29:40.800 --> 01:29:46.960]  You know, they know what insurance companies do. I mean, it's not the judge's first rodeo.
[01:29:48.320 --> 01:29:51.760]  And he's likely to get real irritated with Crapola.
[01:29:51.760 --> 01:29:59.280]  Okay. Okay, we got a couple of callers. We should go now.
[01:30:01.280 --> 01:30:07.120]  A top cybersecurity expert has a warning for America. If you build an electrical smart grid,
[01:30:07.120 --> 01:30:11.360]  the hackers will come and they could cause a catastrophic blackout.
[01:30:11.360 --> 01:30:15.040]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht back with the shocking details in a moment.
[01:30:15.680 --> 01:30:21.280]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:21.280 --> 01:30:25.680]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:26.320 --> 01:30:32.480]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself. Privacy,
[01:30:32.480 --> 01:30:37.120]  it's worth hanging on to. This message is brought to you by StartPage.com,
[01:30:37.120 --> 01:30:43.200]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo and Bing. Start over with StartPage.
[01:30:45.200 --> 01:30:49.920]  Governments love power. So it's only natural they'd want to control the power going into your
[01:30:49.920 --> 01:30:55.520]  home too with a smart grid. So they're installing a national network of smart meters to remotely
[01:30:55.520 --> 01:31:01.200]  monitor electric use for efficiency and avoid grid failure. But cybersecurity expert David
[01:31:01.200 --> 01:31:06.240]  Chalk says not so fast if we make the national power grid controllable through the web,
[01:31:06.240 --> 01:31:12.320]  hackers will have a field day. Working remotely, they could tap in and black out the entire nation,
[01:31:12.320 --> 01:31:18.640]  leaving us vulnerable to our enemies. I've long opposed smart meters for privacy and health reasons,
[01:31:18.640 --> 01:31:23.040]  but catastrophic failures caused by hackers? There's nothing smart about that.
[01:31:23.040 --> 01:31:49.040]  I'm Dr. Katherine Albrecht for StartPage.com, the world's most private search engine.
[01:31:49.040 --> 01:31:53.040]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I'm a structural engineer. I'm a New York City correction office.
[01:31:53.040 --> 01:31:58.240]  I'm an Air Force pilot. I'm a father who lost his son. We're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:31:58.240 --> 01:32:00.960]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:32:02.640 --> 01:32:06.640]  Rule of Law Radio is proud to offer the Rule of Law Traffic Seminar. In today's America,
[01:32:06.640 --> 01:32:10.480]  we live in a us against them society, and if we the people are ever going to have a free society,
[01:32:10.480 --> 01:32:14.640]  then we're going to have to stand and defend our own rights. Among those rights are the right to
[01:32:14.640 --> 01:32:18.640]  travel freely from place to place, the right to act in our own private capacity, and most importantly,
[01:32:18.640 --> 01:32:23.280]  the right to due process of law. Traffic courts afford us the least expensive opportunity to learn
[01:32:23.280 --> 01:32:27.760]  how to enforce and preserve our rights through due process. Former Sheriff's Deputy Eddie Craig,
[01:32:27.760 --> 01:32:31.360]  in conjunction with Rule of Law Radio, has put together the most comprehensive teaching tool
[01:32:31.360 --> 01:32:35.360]  available that will help you understand what due process is and how to hold courts to the rule
[01:32:35.360 --> 01:32:39.920]  of law. You can get your own copy of this invaluable material by going to ruleoflawradio.com
[01:32:39.920 --> 01:32:43.280]  and ordering your copy today. By ordering now, you'll receive a copy of Eddie's book,
[01:32:43.280 --> 01:32:47.840]  The Texas Transportation Code, The Law Versus the Lie, video and audio of the original 2009
[01:32:47.840 --> 01:32:52.080]  seminar. Hundreds of research documents and other useful resource material. Learn how to fight for
[01:32:52.080 --> 01:32:56.160]  your rights with the help of this material from ruleoflawradio.com. Order your copy today,
[01:32:56.160 --> 01:32:59.280]  and together we can have the free society we all want and deserve.
[01:32:59.280 --> 01:33:15.200]  You are listening to the Logos Radio Network. LogosRadioNetwork.com.
[01:33:30.240 --> 01:33:56.240]  Okay, we are back.
[01:33:56.240 --> 01:34:05.200]  Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rule of Law Radio, and Ms. Sweet Tina from California.
[01:34:05.200 --> 01:34:11.920]  Call back to bail us out of this spot. I did. That was really sweet of her.
[01:34:14.000 --> 01:34:18.640]  So, all that's, you need to take back all that stuff you said about her on the break, Brett.
[01:34:18.640 --> 01:34:27.680]  Okay. Okay, what do you have for us, Tina?
[01:34:29.520 --> 01:34:33.600]  Quick question. While I was listening to the show, I'm starting to fill out the
[01:34:33.600 --> 01:34:43.600]  star complaint against this attorney. And it's the one that was the criminal attorney for the
[01:34:43.600 --> 01:34:49.360]  people we've just been going against in the adversary proceeding. And she has the criminal case.
[01:34:50.160 --> 01:34:57.680]  And apparently it was him who told her that I filed lawsuits for a living and she should file
[01:34:57.680 --> 01:35:06.480]  that. And he was the one who downloaded the order from one of my previous cases, gave it to her to
[01:35:06.480 --> 01:35:15.520]  file in the request for an extension of time for the trial because I had way too much legal experience
[01:35:15.520 --> 01:35:20.960]  because I filed these for a living and she had no knowledge of how to answer my questions.
[01:35:21.600 --> 01:35:27.360]  So, what do I effectively put in that bar complaint to really sting him?
[01:35:29.360 --> 01:35:32.640]  Brett, could you understand her? She's a real muffled, Tina.
[01:35:32.640 --> 01:35:38.480]  She's wanting to know how she can bar grieve.
[01:35:40.080 --> 01:35:45.920]  Like, what would go in that complaint that would really be effective?
[01:35:45.920 --> 01:35:54.240]  Okay, this was the attorney for the other parties in their criminal case.
[01:35:54.960 --> 01:35:58.960]  Is this the one that told her that you were a professional litigant?
[01:35:58.960 --> 01:36:08.320]  Yes. Okay, what was that again you wanted to address? I couldn't understand it.
[01:36:09.760 --> 01:36:17.920]  Well, I wanted to effectively, you know, give him the biggest thing I can for telling her
[01:36:17.920 --> 01:36:29.040]  to put something that, you know, not related to the case. It's, you know, speculative.
[01:36:29.040 --> 01:36:35.280]  Well, you're being a litigious person is not related to the case.
[01:36:37.920 --> 01:36:38.160]  No.
[01:36:39.120 --> 01:36:40.720]  Objection, relevance.
[01:36:42.880 --> 01:36:46.800]  How does that change the issues before the court? That's one.
[01:36:46.800 --> 01:36:51.040]  Yeah. And you could call that slander.
[01:36:51.920 --> 01:36:54.240]  Yeah, I'm not a lawyer. I like that.
[01:36:56.720 --> 01:37:02.480]  This was a criminal lawyer that said this and gave her the complaint.
[01:37:02.480 --> 01:37:07.280]  He downloaded it for her and gave it to her to file into the market.
[01:37:09.120 --> 01:37:13.360]  No, I'm saying you could put in the bar grievance that you're not a lawyer.
[01:37:13.360 --> 01:37:19.760]  He's defaming you by saying that you're a professional litigant.
[01:37:19.760 --> 01:37:25.520]  Jerry, I've never been so insulted in my life.
[01:37:26.320 --> 01:37:26.880]  Exactly.
[01:37:31.440 --> 01:37:34.800]  That would be great to give to the bar.
[01:37:34.800 --> 01:37:44.480]  I love that. I love that. I'm offended and deeply offended. I haven't thought of that.
[01:37:45.360 --> 01:37:52.240]  He's subjected to me, me to severe emotional distress, stress. What if my friends or my
[01:37:52.240 --> 01:37:56.560]  neighbors come to think I'm a lawyer? What do I do then?
[01:37:56.560 --> 01:38:07.840]  Good. That's funny. I have to really sting him because he's now not a criminal attorney.
[01:38:08.720 --> 01:38:12.960]  And the judge actually didn't like it the other day when I went to the criminal hearing.
[01:38:13.680 --> 01:38:19.440]  He's withdrawn or he's been fired or he isn't being paid. But whatever it is,
[01:38:19.440 --> 01:38:27.360]  she's getting a public defender. But he didn't turn up to the last hearing and he assigned for
[01:38:27.360 --> 01:38:34.080]  previous criminal attorney to go in his place. And that judge says, no, I'm not letting him up.
[01:38:34.080 --> 01:38:39.920]  He needs to come in here and do this himself. So he has to come in here and able to fit in.
[01:38:39.920 --> 01:38:49.120]  He has to assign the public defender. So he needs to be here, he said. He was not happy.
[01:38:51.760 --> 01:39:00.560]  That was very interesting. Bar grieving for what the judge made him do. That'll be even better.
[01:39:02.960 --> 01:39:06.240]  How do you feel when you get blamed with something you didn't do?
[01:39:06.240 --> 01:39:08.960]  They do that to us all the time.
[01:39:11.040 --> 01:39:15.520]  Well, that's bad. I haven't thought of that either. This is good. I knew I called you for a reason
[01:39:15.520 --> 01:39:20.800]  because I really, really want to sting him for doing that because it was uncalled for.
[01:39:20.800 --> 01:39:25.680]  It's irrelevant to the case. It's speculative. And as you say, it's foreign.
[01:39:25.680 --> 01:39:39.520]  That'd be great. I'm filing suit against this bailiff. And I'm accusing him of threatening
[01:39:39.520 --> 01:39:46.320]  to use his pistol to prevent me from coming into the courthouse without a mask on.
[01:39:48.720 --> 01:39:55.120]  But I really don't remember if he actually did that or not. I always ask him if they're
[01:39:55.120 --> 01:39:59.840]  willing to use the pistol. But I'm not sure if I asked him that or not, but I'm going to accuse
[01:39:59.840 --> 01:40:08.800]  him of it anyway. There's something about accusing him of something he didn't do.
[01:40:10.960 --> 01:40:17.840]  Well, I like this. I haven't ever met this guy. So why don't I accuse him? That's a really good
[01:40:17.840 --> 01:40:26.560]  idea. And speaking of bailiffs, it was interesting that Judge, well, he told us to go out into the
[01:40:26.560 --> 01:40:30.640]  breakout room and talk to each other. And he said, if things get a little heated, he said,
[01:40:30.640 --> 01:40:36.160]  I've got a very mean bailiff here with a gun. He said, I can send her in. And he asked. It was
[01:40:36.160 --> 01:40:42.480]  a sense of humor thing. And she said, no, I'm not that mean. And we all kind of took it in
[01:40:42.480 --> 01:40:47.760]  good heart. But I thought that was interesting that he would say that if everything gets
[01:40:47.760 --> 01:40:53.280]  out of hand, he can send his bailiff. Yeah, it's odd he would say something like that.
[01:40:54.960 --> 01:40:59.600]  Yeah. Have you had any dealings with this lawyer before?
[01:41:01.360 --> 01:41:04.720]  The criminal lawyer, I have not had any dealings with at all.
[01:41:07.120 --> 01:41:12.960]  All we know is she claims that he filed this 500-page motion to dismiss, and it was actually
[01:41:12.960 --> 01:41:21.120]  a 13-page motion. And all he did in the motion was basically say, oh, the contracts say this,
[01:41:21.120 --> 01:41:27.120]  and they had 15 days to pick it up. And it was pretty worthless. And it was interesting to see
[01:41:27.120 --> 01:41:34.800]  that when we were talking to them in the breakout room, she said, or maybe Nemo, she said, one
[01:41:34.800 --> 01:41:42.000]  thing I've learned is when an attorney gives you a figure, a cost, you times it by four, and that's
[01:41:42.000 --> 01:41:54.400]  the real figure. And they never do what they say they're going to do. That's an understatement
[01:41:54.400 --> 01:42:03.680]  that lawyers never do what they say they're going to do. But this lawyer defamed you,
[01:42:03.680 --> 01:42:14.800]  he must have run a check to see where your name, he probably run a search in the PACER
[01:42:15.840 --> 01:42:20.080]  and in the state database to see if your name came up, and he probably found
[01:42:20.800 --> 01:42:29.440]  every action you were engaged in. Yes, I'm sure he did. And then he made presumptions from there.
[01:42:29.440 --> 01:42:37.040]  Yes. So, and if you're the one bringing criminal charges against his client,
[01:42:37.680 --> 01:42:42.960]  then it was appropriate for him to do the search. But it would have been even more
[01:42:42.960 --> 01:42:49.680]  appropriate if he'd have kept his mouth shut about things he shouldn't didn't really know or
[01:42:49.680 --> 01:42:58.160]  understand. So that'd be great to beat him up with. Well, you know, we're the ones that bring
[01:42:58.160 --> 01:43:03.360]  the criminal complaints against him. It's the district attorney that brought the criminal
[01:43:03.360 --> 01:43:11.120]  complaints against his client who just witnesses and victims. Who filed the complaint against this
[01:43:11.120 --> 01:43:22.480]  woman? The district attorney. No, the district attorney can't. No, 58 people filed complaints
[01:43:22.480 --> 01:43:31.360]  with the district attorney's office about, no, 72 people filed complaints. And then 58 people
[01:43:31.360 --> 01:43:38.880]  finally agreed to be witnesses. Wow. And we were just four of them. That's amazing.
[01:43:40.880 --> 01:43:47.600]  Yeah. He's managed for a lot more than just you then. Oh, yeah. We're just the ones that
[01:43:47.600 --> 01:43:57.280]  took it to the next level. Okay. Hang on, Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rue La Radio, we'll be right back.
[01:44:00.160 --> 01:44:04.080]  Through advances in technology, our lives have greatly improved,
[01:44:04.080 --> 01:44:09.040]  except in the area of nutrition. People feed their pets better than they feed themselves.
[01:44:09.040 --> 01:44:14.880]  And it's time we changed all that. Our primary defense against aging and disease in this toxic
[01:44:14.880 --> 01:44:20.080]  environment is good nutrition. In a world where natural foods have been irradiated,
[01:44:20.080 --> 01:44:26.880]  adulterated, and mutilated, young Jeviti can provide the nutrients you need. Logos Radio Network gets
[01:44:26.880 --> 01:44:32.400]  many requests to endorse all sorts of products, most of which we reject. We have come to trust
[01:44:32.400 --> 01:44:39.680]  Jeviti so much. We became a marketing distributor along with Alex Jones, Ben Fuchs, and many others.
[01:44:39.680 --> 01:44:45.920]  When you order from Logos Radio Network.com, your health will improve as you help support
[01:44:45.920 --> 01:44:51.600]  quality radio. As you realize the benefits of young Jeviti, you may want to join us.
[01:44:51.600 --> 01:44:56.720]  As a distributor, you can experience improved health, help your friends and family,
[01:44:56.720 --> 01:44:59.440]  and increase your income. Order now.
[01:45:03.120 --> 01:45:08.000]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit? Win your case without an attorney
[01:45:08.000 --> 01:45:14.000]  with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy to understand four CD course that will show you
[01:45:14.000 --> 01:45:21.280]  how in 24 hours, step by step. If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:21.280 --> 01:45:24.480]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:25.200 --> 01:45:31.600]  Thousands have won with our step by step course, and now you can too. Jurisdictionary was created
[01:45:31.600 --> 01:45:38.480]  by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case winning experience. Even if you're not in a lawsuit,
[01:45:38.480 --> 01:45:43.840]  you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control
[01:45:43.840 --> 01:45:50.560]  our American courts. You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for
[01:45:50.560 --> 01:45:58.480]  civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more. Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner.
[01:45:58.480 --> 01:46:02.480]  Or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:28.480 --> 01:46:42.640]  Okay, we are back. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, rule of law radio,
[01:46:43.360 --> 01:46:47.840]  and we're talking to Tina. Tina, do you have anything else for us today?
[01:46:48.640 --> 01:46:53.520]  No, you've just given me some really good points here that I'm going to finish this
[01:46:53.520 --> 01:46:58.080]  complaint tonight, and try to give it in the mail tomorrow, because this is going to make me laugh.
[01:46:59.040 --> 01:47:03.600]  Okay, have great fun, and thank you, Tina. I wish. Okay.
[01:47:04.640 --> 01:47:11.920]  Now we're going to go to Nick in Arizona. Hello, Nick. What do you have for us today?
[01:47:16.960 --> 01:47:21.520]  Well, looks like we put Nicholas to sleep.
[01:47:21.520 --> 01:47:29.760]  He's only been there for a few minutes. Yeah, but that's my dulcet tones. I have that effect on
[01:47:29.760 --> 01:47:37.280]  people. Okay, we've got one more second. There he is. Oh, sorry. I just heard a little piece of his
[01:47:37.280 --> 01:47:43.760]  voice. He's probably playing with his mic like you do. Hello, Nick. Are you playing with your
[01:47:43.760 --> 01:47:54.320]  mic? No, you said Arizona, I thought so. Oh, are you in Arizona? No, I'm in Virginia.
[01:47:56.320 --> 01:48:03.280]  Oh, oh, I had, we got Nicholas. We got it on the wrong one.
[01:48:03.280 --> 01:48:14.480]  I can't talk about this on the air. We got a color that's a real whiner, and we have Nicholas
[01:48:14.480 --> 01:48:19.760]  whiner. We had you listed as a whiner, but you're not the whiner. Okay.
[01:48:22.000 --> 01:48:26.160]  What do you have for? Oh, wait, I know you are. You're the one that got your car towed.
[01:48:26.160 --> 01:48:36.080]  Yeah, that's me. Okay. What do you have for us today? Yeah, well, the most recent development was
[01:48:38.880 --> 01:48:45.600]  I pretty much went in front of the magistrate like a week ago, and I was trying to withdraw the
[01:48:45.600 --> 01:48:51.360]  motion because I thought I put some elements in there that kind of contradicted because, you know,
[01:48:51.360 --> 01:48:55.520]  if you're just challenging jurisdiction, you're not supposed to argue the merits of the case.
[01:48:55.520 --> 01:49:02.000]  And I think I may have argued some of the merits of the case. Well, at some point, if you get that far,
[01:49:02.640 --> 01:49:07.600]  you have to argue the merits of the case. But before you get to the merits of the case,
[01:49:07.600 --> 01:49:15.920]  you definitely want to attack jurisdiction. Yeah, well, so I put my motion in like a week ago,
[01:49:17.120 --> 01:49:22.560]  had the hearing set. I went to the hearing and I asked the judge if I could withdraw it and make
[01:49:22.560 --> 01:49:30.880]  some corrections and refile it. And he said, yeah. So Thursday this week, I went in there and refiled
[01:49:30.880 --> 01:49:40.560]  it and tried to set another hearing for the motion. And they said the clerk apparently
[01:49:41.360 --> 01:49:47.280]  was talking to the judge in the back and came back and told me the judge said, no, no more
[01:49:47.280 --> 01:49:58.160]  hearings for you. You have to talk to the judge on the trial date. So... Wait a minute, wait a
[01:49:58.160 --> 01:50:03.680]  minute. You pulled a motion and refiled it and he's not going to hear it? Or is he going to hear
[01:50:03.680 --> 01:50:09.440]  it on the trial date? Yeah, he said, I'll have to come in and talk about that with him on the
[01:50:09.440 --> 01:50:18.720]  trial date. Oh, okay. He's just not going to set another motion hearing. Yeah. Okay, he can do
[01:50:18.720 --> 01:50:28.720]  that. I mean, that probably means he's going to take that motion and stuff it. That's kind of what
[01:50:28.720 --> 01:50:39.440]  I'm thinking. He doesn't see it as being taking long. He's going to look at that and say motion
[01:50:39.440 --> 01:50:48.800]  denied and then we go right to trial. Yeah, I mean, but isn't it the clerk's job to set a motion
[01:50:48.800 --> 01:50:58.560]  hearing like we asked for it? Well, he can hear the motions anytime he wants to. So if he's
[01:50:58.560 --> 01:51:04.240]  already has a hearing date set, he can simply add the motion to the hearing date.
[01:51:06.960 --> 01:51:13.760]  Right. I guess I'm asking like, isn't it their job to set a date for a hearing if you ask for it?
[01:51:13.760 --> 01:51:19.680]  No, yeah, he did. He said it the same day as the trial.
[01:51:19.680 --> 01:51:28.080]  Oh, yeah. He can do that. Generally, motions only take a few minutes anyway.
[01:51:30.080 --> 01:51:36.640]  Not mine. Generally, except when it's Brett's motion. I don't let them give them an inch.
[01:51:36.640 --> 01:51:40.160]  Everything they try to do wrong. I slow them down again.
[01:51:44.160 --> 01:51:48.480]  Yeah, I was hoping to try to get the motion heard before the trial date so I could either,
[01:51:48.480 --> 01:51:50.800]  you know, figure out what the next move is going to be.
[01:51:51.840 --> 01:51:55.680]  Well, you can always, you know, if he rules against you and it is a,
[01:51:57.120 --> 01:52:01.840]  this would be a dispositive pleading. Are you asking him to dismiss the case?
[01:52:03.120 --> 01:52:12.480]  Yeah, yeah. Okay, then if he rules against you, then ask for an appeal, a a a a big
[01:52:12.480 --> 01:52:18.480]  continuance so that you can file an interlock toward your appeal.
[01:52:20.800 --> 01:52:24.880]  Would it be a continuance at that point if he already, you know, denied the motion and just
[01:52:24.880 --> 01:52:29.760]  like real with me? He'll, if you do that, he'll deny the motion and just move ahead,
[01:52:29.760 --> 01:52:36.400]  but that gives you another thing to complain about it. The courts are probably not going to be
[01:52:36.400 --> 01:52:47.440]  unhappy with him. You would be trying to file an interlockatory appeal before you finish the case.
[01:52:48.800 --> 01:52:57.600]  It is appropriate to object to having to argue the case to a jury if you have a dispositive
[01:52:57.600 --> 01:53:06.800]  motion before the court that the court ruled against and you want to get a higher court ruling on it.
[01:53:07.920 --> 01:53:10.800]  Yeah, I gave a municipal judge one time I told him,
[01:53:12.160 --> 01:53:21.040]  well, I'm giving notice right now of interlockatory appeal and he says his response to me
[01:53:21.040 --> 01:53:30.240]  is that the your interlockatory appeal is denied and I couldn't keep my composure.
[01:53:30.240 --> 01:53:37.440]  Normally I don't laugh at a judge, but I couldn't keep my composure. I had to laugh and I caught
[01:53:37.440 --> 01:53:45.680]  myself and I said, well, your honor, you don't have the authority to rule on interlockatory appeal
[01:53:45.680 --> 01:53:54.400]  from your court. Well, it's denied. It's denied.
[01:53:58.000 --> 01:54:01.600]  That's when I say, Mr. Mayliffe, arrest that judge.
[01:54:05.920 --> 01:54:10.480]  Oh yeah, that's the same judge that also ruled on his own disqualification in the moment.
[01:54:10.480 --> 01:54:17.360]  Judicial motion for judicial disqualification and he said denied.
[01:54:20.880 --> 01:54:24.880]  He really needs debate if you're arrested. Required to recuse themselves, right? If you
[01:54:24.880 --> 01:54:27.280]  get proof they have like an interest in the outcome of the case.
[01:54:30.240 --> 01:54:31.680]  With this guy, it was pretty obvious.
[01:54:31.680 --> 01:54:41.200]  But no, he's not required to recuse himself. He is required to do one of two things.
[01:54:41.200 --> 01:54:50.560]  He either has to step away, recuse himself, or he has to refer the matter to what's called the
[01:54:50.560 --> 01:54:57.440]  administrative, what are they called? The head administrative judge of the judicial district.
[01:54:57.440 --> 01:55:06.240]  These guys are like sort of, they handle the traffic between the different courts. If there's
[01:55:06.240 --> 01:55:13.680]  some judge is sick on a day or has to go to the hospital or something and they have,
[01:55:13.680 --> 01:55:17.120]  they shuffle around and make sure that all the documents are covered.
[01:55:17.840 --> 01:55:24.080]  And whenever there's a disqualification, they pull from one place or another or even get a
[01:55:24.080 --> 01:55:33.920]  retired judge in to handle things. So the motion for judicial disqualification has to get handled by
[01:55:35.440 --> 01:55:43.200]  one of those judges. Let me clarify something. You said recusal earlier. It's kind of the wrong
[01:55:43.200 --> 01:55:50.560]  term slipped out. The judge can deny his own recusal and that's something you can appeal.
[01:55:50.560 --> 01:55:57.680]  But he cannot deny his own disqualification. That's the one he has to go to the administrative
[01:55:57.680 --> 01:56:04.640]  judge in the district. Right. So I move for disqualification. Now he can recuse himself
[01:56:05.920 --> 01:56:12.960]  or he can take that matter and he can decide, I'm not going to step down. I'm not going to
[01:56:12.960 --> 01:56:18.400]  recuse myself, but maybe this higher judge is going to end up, well, higher, I say higher in
[01:56:18.400 --> 01:56:26.800]  the process of the shuffling, I guess you say. This admin judge needs to rule on the matter
[01:56:26.800 --> 01:56:33.760]  of his disqualification. And he only has three days to do that. He can't just sit on it for a while
[01:56:33.760 --> 01:56:41.040]  and set up another trial date or whatever he wants. He can't do anything else in the case.
[01:56:41.040 --> 01:56:49.760]  He can't make a peep. He either has to step down or refer the matter to one of these admin judges.
[01:56:51.120 --> 01:56:58.800]  So if there's a three day window, so if I file, it's like I send that through the mail and it gets
[01:56:58.800 --> 01:57:07.600]  filed in the case. Well, keep in mind, this is Texas. We're speaking to Texas law.
[01:57:07.600 --> 01:57:17.040]  You'll have to check and see. Look for a local parallel in Virginia that would
[01:57:17.680 --> 01:57:25.680]  line up with the Texas rules of civil procedure 18A and 18B. If you look at those in Texas and then
[01:57:25.680 --> 01:57:32.480]  just google some of those phrases and see if you find some Virginia procedural rules that
[01:57:32.480 --> 01:57:38.160]  say the same kinds of things, then you'll see if they have a three-day limit or what do they do there.
[01:57:39.200 --> 01:57:44.800]  I do remember seeing a disqualification section, but some people say, I mean,
[01:57:46.400 --> 01:57:50.560]  in the Virginia code, it says that traffic and fractions aren't criminal in nature,
[01:57:50.560 --> 01:57:56.400]  but then have traffic and criminal basically clump together. So I'm kind of like
[01:57:56.400 --> 01:58:03.360]  not sure whether it's a criminal procedure or a civil procedure. Oh, yeah, that whole quasi stuff,
[01:58:03.360 --> 01:58:12.400]  right? Yeah. Some states call them misdemeanors. Some states call them,
[01:58:15.200 --> 01:58:20.880]  I just had it in my head. Civil infractions, they call it. Infractions, yeah, that's the word I was
[01:58:20.880 --> 01:58:27.760]  looking for. And they use infraction like it's not a criminal thing, but it actually is.
[01:58:30.160 --> 01:58:33.680]  Yeah, well, if there's civil criminal or traffic, they didn't follow through.
[01:58:33.680 --> 01:58:39.920]  Okay, hold on, hold on, hold on. We are out of time. Randy Kelton, Brett Fountain, Rue Lauderdale,
[01:58:39.920 --> 01:58:48.480]  thank you all for listening and good night. In about five seconds. Say something insightful, Brett.
[01:58:48.480 --> 01:58:50.000]  Dangerous.
[01:58:50.000 --> 01:58:56.480]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free a unique study Bible called the New Testament
[01:58:56.480 --> 01:59:01.920]  Recovery Version. The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes that explain
[01:59:01.920 --> 01:59:08.000]  what the Bible says verse by verse, helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life.
[01:59:08.000 --> 01:59:16.400]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America. Call us toll free at 888-551-0102
[01:59:16.400 --> 01:59:24.720]  or visit us online at bfa.org. This translation is highly accurate and it comes with over 13,000
[01:59:24.720 --> 01:59:30.480]  cross references, plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible. This is
[01:59:30.480 --> 01:59:35.600]  truly a Bible you can understand. To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version,
[01:59:35.600 --> 01:59:48.800]  call us toll free at 888-551-0102. That's 888-551-0102 or visit us online at bfa.org.