[00:00.000 --> 00:05.000]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[00:05.000 --> 00:12.000]  Four children died and three adults were wounded in a NATO raid in Afghanistan's eastern Ghazni province Wednesday.
[00:12.000 --> 00:17.000]  The deaths occurred when helicopter-borne NATO forces fired on locals in an orchard.
[00:17.000 --> 00:27.000]  Wednesday's incident comes days after NATO was accused of killing 13 civilians in Laghman province Sunday.
[00:27.000 --> 00:35.000]  The Pentagon is under orders from Congress to have its financial statements in auditable shape by 2017,
[00:35.000 --> 00:42.000]  and a government auditor says the Defense Department is making progress toward putting its books in order.
[00:42.000 --> 00:54.000]  However, Senator Tom Carper says new military accounting systems are years behind schedule and at least $6.9 billion over budget.
[00:54.000 --> 01:01.000]  Computer expert Mikhail Hiponin says the Stuxnet computer worm was probably a government attack.
[01:01.000 --> 01:07.000]  Quote, the obvious conclusion from Stuxnet is that there isn't any clear motive other than sabotage,
[01:07.000 --> 01:13.000]  adding no one has found a way to make money from this, which makes criminal involvement unlikely.
[01:13.000 --> 01:21.000]  If you look at the level of difficulty and complexity behind Stuxnet, it has to be a government effort.
[01:21.000 --> 01:27.000]  The dramatic surge in troop suicides has become the Pentagon's top emergency issue.
[01:27.000 --> 01:37.000]  Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said suicides have really jumped recently, forcing him and his top aides to look for a solution.
[01:37.000 --> 01:40.000]  Just last week, five Army soldiers took their lives.
[01:40.000 --> 01:43.000]  Suicides have always been a problem for the military,
[01:43.000 --> 01:51.000]  but the current war-hardened force is spending more time away from home than ever before and faces heightened stress,
[01:51.000 --> 01:56.000]  fighting an urban war and constantly trying to dodge hidden roadside bombs.
[01:56.000 --> 02:03.000]  Mullen said he expects, quote, a significant increase in the challenges facing U.S. troops and their families,
[02:03.000 --> 02:09.000]  because long deployments will result in more pent-up feelings.
[02:09.000 --> 02:14.000]  Israel demonstrated its intent to conquer cyber warfare in the 1990s
[02:14.000 --> 02:20.000]  by presenting the country's legions of hackers with a choice between prison and working for the state.
[02:20.000 --> 02:28.000]  Thousands of people are said to have signed up since then and have been incorporated into the Israel Defense Forces Unit 8200.
[02:28.000 --> 02:34.000]  In the Israeli intelligence community, cyber warfare is regarded as an act of bravura
[02:34.000 --> 02:38.000]  that has given the country an edge in cross-border technology attacks.
[02:38.000 --> 02:46.000]  Hackers who invariably learn their skills as teenagers offer key advantages to countries engaged in cyber warfare.
[02:46.000 --> 02:52.000]  Unit 8200 has evolved into a respected leader in high-technology warfare,
[02:52.000 --> 02:59.000]  with one U.S. consultant rating it as the sixth biggest initiator of cyber attacks in a rapidly growing field.
[02:59.000 --> 03:09.000]  This news brief brought to you by the International News.
[03:29.000 --> 03:39.000]  Thank you for watching.
[03:59.000 --> 04:09.000]  Thank you for watching.
[04:29.000 --> 04:39.000]  Thank you for watching.
[04:59.000 --> 05:05.000]  All right, bad boys, bad boys.
[05:05.000 --> 05:12.000]  What are you going to do when we come for you here on the Rule of Law, Rule of Law Radio?
[05:12.000 --> 05:14.000]  I'm Deborah Stevens.
[05:14.000 --> 05:18.000]  We're here with Randy Kelton, of course, and Eddie Craig.
[05:18.000 --> 05:20.000]  We'll be taking your calls tonight.
[05:20.000 --> 05:26.000]  But first, we have a very special guest, Dawn Kennedy.
[05:26.000 --> 05:31.000]  She's a law student, and she's going to be talking about an approach,
[05:31.000 --> 05:39.000]  an elementary approach to legal reasoning called FIRAC, a way of thinking about things and legal reasoning.
[05:39.000 --> 05:42.000]  Dawn, welcome to the show.
[05:42.000 --> 05:43.000]  Thank you very much.
[05:43.000 --> 05:44.000]  Good evening.
[05:44.000 --> 05:48.000]  Randy, do you want to give a little more in-depth intro of our guest?
[05:48.000 --> 05:49.000]  Yes, I do.
[05:49.000 --> 05:54.000]  I was sitting in an airport in Atlanta, Georgia.
[05:54.000 --> 05:58.000]  Atlanta or Midway, I think Midway first.
[05:58.000 --> 06:03.000]  I think it was, yeah, San Diego first, and then we ended up on the same flight into Atlanta.
[06:03.000 --> 06:12.000]  We both wound up on the same airplane, and it was interesting something that she said the day before.
[06:12.000 --> 06:18.000]  I was talking to someone in Maryland about he was a paralegal,
[06:18.000 --> 06:24.000]  and he made the statement that everything happens for a reason.
[06:24.000 --> 06:30.000]  After talking to Dawn for a while and finding out she was a law student,
[06:30.000 --> 06:34.000]  she said the same thing yesterday in Atlanta.
[06:34.000 --> 06:38.000]  Everything happens for a reason, and I believe that's correct.
[06:38.000 --> 06:41.000]  Odd that I should run into her.
[06:41.000 --> 06:46.000]  We were sitting on a bench with plug-ins for the computers, and hers wasn't working.
[06:46.000 --> 06:50.000]  I got down there and reset the circuit breakers and got it working.
[06:50.000 --> 06:55.000]  We got to talking, and it turned out being a first-year law student,
[06:55.000 --> 07:01.000]  she has a fresh understanding of an important issue
[07:01.000 --> 07:09.000]  that all of our listeners who attempt to adjudicate for themselves
[07:09.000 --> 07:16.000]  or try to understand how to read law and legal documents,
[07:16.000 --> 07:19.000]  this is information they all need to have.
[07:19.000 --> 07:24.000]  So I asked her if she would come on and talk to everyone
[07:24.000 --> 07:32.000]  about what the law schools say about how you should think about legal matters.
[07:32.000 --> 07:42.000]  Dawn, can you kind of first give us an overview of how we should think about legal issues?
[07:42.000 --> 07:43.000]  Absolutely.
[07:43.000 --> 07:45.000]  Again, I am a first-year law student.
[07:45.000 --> 07:48.000]  I just started my education a couple of months ago.
[07:48.000 --> 07:52.000]  I'm taking all of the regular first-year law curriculum,
[07:52.000 --> 07:58.000]  which includes criminal law, tort, and contracts, as well as legal writing.
[07:58.000 --> 08:02.000]  In saying that, there is a different way of thinking,
[08:02.000 --> 08:08.000]  and they encourage you to start thinking from the very first day like a lawyer.
[08:08.000 --> 08:11.000]  And I know to some people that doesn't sound like it's going to be a good thing,
[08:11.000 --> 08:16.000]  but there is a definite way that they like to see material presented.
[08:16.000 --> 08:20.000]  There are resources, tons of resources, if you know where to look for them,
[08:20.000 --> 08:24.000]  that explain this FIRAC, and they're available on Amazon.com,
[08:24.000 --> 08:26.000]  and I can give them to you here in a little bit.
[08:26.000 --> 08:28.000]  But FIRAC is very simple.
[08:28.000 --> 08:36.000]  It's an acronym for the facts of the case, the issue, the rules of law,
[08:36.000 --> 08:46.000]  their application to the facts of the case, and then the overall conclusion.
[08:46.000 --> 08:49.000]  So the first thing you're going to want to do is you're going to want to
[08:49.000 --> 08:54.000]  very briefly talk about the facts of your particular case.
[08:54.000 --> 08:58.000]  Then you have to identify, yeah, the issue that you're facing.
[08:58.000 --> 09:02.000]  Just for a second, I'd like to interject here.
[09:02.000 --> 09:07.000]  In reading documents by people in the legal reform community,
[09:07.000 --> 09:14.000]  probably one of the most important tools they could learn is how to write
[09:14.000 --> 09:18.000]  the facts of the case.
[09:18.000 --> 09:25.000]  Most of the legal reform documents I read, people are,
[09:25.000 --> 09:29.000]  they just have a problem with simply stating the facts.
[09:29.000 --> 09:34.000]  They want to state the facts in a way that you perceive the fact
[09:34.000 --> 09:39.000]  precisely the way they want you to perceive the fact.
[09:39.000 --> 09:45.000]  So they give the fact with all sorts of argument and reasoning.
[09:45.000 --> 09:49.000]  Don, limit to us how we're supposed to state facts.
[09:49.000 --> 09:55.000]  If you put in the front all of your arguments and all of your impassioned
[09:55.000 --> 10:02.000]  pleas, then you don't give any room later on in the document for a judge
[10:02.000 --> 10:12.000]  or an arbitrator or somebody to weave in the rules of law in your case
[10:12.000 --> 10:16.000]  and to be able to see specifically what your facts are.
[10:16.000 --> 10:22.000]  So to keep it simple, you're just going to want to say the who, the what,
[10:22.000 --> 10:26.000]  the when, the where, and the how.
[10:26.000 --> 10:29.000]  You want to make it as short as possible.
[10:29.000 --> 10:33.000]  If you're dealing with, let's say, you're appealing something yourself,
[10:33.000 --> 10:40.000]  you're going to want to put what you did in your previous case short and sweet
[10:40.000 --> 10:47.000]  and then what you think the mistakes are and why you're going to necessarily appeal it.
[10:47.000 --> 10:50.000]  So you're going to add a couple of things depending on your situation,
[10:50.000 --> 10:55.000]  but it's the same thing, who, what, when, where, why, and how,
[10:55.000 --> 10:58.000]  that is going to give you a nice foundation.
[10:58.000 --> 11:02.000]  Again, I'm a student, but this is what we're being taught and being told,
[11:02.000 --> 11:09.000]  and the common sense, it's hard when you're trying to make your case
[11:09.000 --> 11:17.000]  because this is a very emotional thing for a lot of people.
[11:17.000 --> 11:22.000]  Yes, and we're afraid they won't get it.
[11:22.000 --> 11:28.000]  So we feel like we have to beat them over the head with it from the very start,
[11:28.000 --> 11:33.000]  and I've been talking about on the show about statement of facts
[11:33.000 --> 11:46.000]  about how we give only the facts, but in doing that, doing the facts well is an art.
[11:46.000 --> 11:51.000]  We don't have to give every single fact in existence.
[11:51.000 --> 12:02.000]  We give the facts that go to the points and issues that we will try to bring the court to,
[12:02.000 --> 12:07.000]  and when I write up a statement of facts, I like to go back through it and say,
[12:07.000 --> 12:14.000]  how can I arrange these facts so that an ordinary person of reasonable prudence,
[12:14.000 --> 12:23.000]  when reading them, would tend to put them together in a way that would lead to the sort of belief
[12:23.000 --> 12:27.000]  and understanding that I want them to come to,
[12:27.000 --> 12:33.000]  because if I can get them to come to this position without me saying it,
[12:33.000 --> 12:39.000]  it's much more powerful because if I say it, it can be a lie, but if they think it, it's true.
[12:39.000 --> 12:46.000]  So we encourage people to think artfully about the facts,
[12:46.000 --> 12:52.000]  don't be artful about the facts themselves, state the facts clearly, succinctly,
[12:52.000 --> 12:56.000]  without equivocation or exaggeration.
[12:56.000 --> 13:05.000]  But you can arrange them in an order that would tend to lead to the conclusion you want the reader to come to.
[13:05.000 --> 13:07.000]  That's fair, isn't it, Dawn?
[13:07.000 --> 13:09.000]  Yes, yes, you can.
[13:09.000 --> 13:15.000]  You can do it either in a top-to-bottom order, if you will,
[13:15.000 --> 13:21.000]  if you have several facts that are ascending or descending in importance,
[13:21.000 --> 13:25.000]  or if you have a timeline, you can do it that way.
[13:25.000 --> 13:28.000]  The thing is to be consistent throughout your document.
[13:28.000 --> 13:31.000]  So if you always discuss facts in a certain order,
[13:31.000 --> 13:42.000]  it only makes sense to guide your reader by doing the application of those facts in the right order, in the same order.
[13:42.000 --> 13:43.000]  Precisely.
[13:43.000 --> 13:47.000]  Okay, now the next step.
[13:47.000 --> 13:51.000]  We have the facts, now the issues.
[13:51.000 --> 13:56.000]  This is actually the hardest thing I think that I have had to learn,
[13:56.000 --> 14:05.000]  and the hardest thing that I think most students have to learn is to narrow it down to a single issue.
[14:05.000 --> 14:11.000]  So one sentence, maybe two, that is the meat and potatoes of the entire case.
[14:11.000 --> 14:13.000]  And often it's a question statement.
[14:13.000 --> 14:19.000]  So you want to say something like, you know, is that car really blue?
[14:19.000 --> 14:21.000]  That could be an issue statement.
[14:21.000 --> 14:25.000]  So you are going to look at all of the facts.
[14:25.000 --> 14:28.000]  You are going to look at what your problem is,
[14:28.000 --> 14:34.000]  and you're going to put that in a way that you can answer that question logically
[14:34.000 --> 14:40.000]  with everything you can put behind it with the rules of law and the application.
[14:40.000 --> 14:46.000]  And you're guiding your readers through so that they have no choice but to reach the same conclusion.
[14:46.000 --> 14:50.000]  So the issue statement is incredibly important.
[14:50.000 --> 14:52.000]  If you don't have a good issue statement,
[14:52.000 --> 14:55.000]  then people are going to look at your document and they're going to say,
[14:55.000 --> 14:58.000]  what is this person really trying to tell me?
[14:58.000 --> 15:03.000]  And you don't want somebody to look at the document and feel that way.
[15:03.000 --> 15:07.000]  Yes, and I have a document that we're providing to people,
[15:07.000 --> 15:12.000]  and I've got exactly that question and it hurt my feelings.
[15:12.000 --> 15:18.000]  But it told me that I needed to go back and look more carefully.
[15:18.000 --> 15:22.000]  And I understand why that's so difficult.
[15:22.000 --> 15:27.000]  I look at an issue and I know that issue intimately.
[15:27.000 --> 15:34.000]  I clearly understand where all the parts and pieces fit.
[15:34.000 --> 15:43.000]  And the hardest thing for me to do is step outside of my mind and step into the mind of my reader,
[15:43.000 --> 15:49.000]  because I know all the facts and if I miss a connection,
[15:49.000 --> 15:54.000]  I don't necessarily know that I've missed that connection.
[15:54.000 --> 16:02.000]  And we have a caller who calls in, rather regular, Jeff from Maryland,
[16:02.000 --> 16:08.000]  and he suggests that you take the document and read it out loud.
[16:08.000 --> 16:15.000]  And that's a very important idea as it will cause you to begin to recognize
[16:15.000 --> 16:19.000]  where you've missed a referential index,
[16:19.000 --> 16:26.000]  where you've given a piece of information and you fail to make a connection from one place to another
[16:26.000 --> 16:28.000]  so you lose your reader.
[16:28.000 --> 16:35.000]  And in timing the issue, this is the place where that is absolutely most critical.
[16:35.000 --> 16:39.000]  Deb, I'm showing 25 minutes, but I don't care to go through this.
[16:39.000 --> 16:42.000]  It actually says 25 seconds, Randy.
[16:42.000 --> 16:43.000]  I'm sorry.
[16:43.000 --> 16:45.000]  Okay.
[16:45.000 --> 16:46.000]  All right, folks.
[16:46.000 --> 16:51.000]  Listen, we'll be right back with our very special guest, Don Kennedy.
[16:51.000 --> 16:53.000]  We'll start taking calls in a little while.
[16:53.000 --> 16:55.000]  This is the rule of law.
[16:55.000 --> 17:02.000]  Thank you.
[17:02.000 --> 17:04.000]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins,
[17:04.000 --> 17:07.000]  precious metals, and coin supplies in the Austin metro area.
[17:07.000 --> 17:09.000]  We also ship worldwide.
[17:09.000 --> 17:12.000]  We are a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices
[17:12.000 --> 17:14.000]  on your coin and metal purchases.
[17:14.000 --> 17:18.000]  We buy, sell, trade, and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections,
[17:18.000 --> 17:20.000]  precious metals, and scrap gold.
[17:20.000 --> 17:22.000]  We purchase and sell gold and jewelry items.
[17:22.000 --> 17:25.000]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullion.
[17:25.000 --> 17:30.000]  We are located at 5448 Burnett Road, Suite 3 at the corner of Burnett and Shulmont,
[17:30.000 --> 17:34.000]  and we're open Mondays and Fridays, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 5.
[17:34.000 --> 17:37.000]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours
[17:37.000 --> 17:42.000]  or call 512-646-6440 with any questions.
[17:42.000 --> 17:46.000]  Ask for chat and say you heard about us on Blue of Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio.
[17:46.000 --> 17:49.000]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion at the corner of Burnett and Shulmont,
[17:49.000 --> 17:53.000]  and we're open Mondays and Fridays, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 5.
[17:53.000 --> 17:58.000]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[17:58.000 --> 18:04.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:04.000 --> 18:08.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[18:08.000 --> 18:12.000]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors,
[18:12.000 --> 18:14.000]  and now you can win, too.
[18:14.000 --> 18:18.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court
[18:18.000 --> 18:20.000]  using federal civil rights statutes,
[18:20.000 --> 18:24.000]  what to do when contacted by phone, mail, or court summons,
[18:24.000 --> 18:26.000]  how to answer letters and phone calls,
[18:26.000 --> 18:28.000]  how to get debt collectors out of your credit reports,
[18:28.000 --> 18:33.000]  how to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[18:33.000 --> 18:38.000]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:38.000 --> 18:40.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:40.000 --> 18:44.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[18:44.000 --> 18:46.000]  and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[18:46.000 --> 18:49.000]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[18:49.000 --> 18:51.000]  That's ruleoflawradio.com
[18:51.000 --> 18:57.000]  or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[18:57.000 --> 18:59.000]  to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[18:59.000 --> 19:26.000]  MUSIC
[19:26.000 --> 19:32.000]  It's spinning like it's out of control on the edge of a hole inside a deep dark dome
[19:32.000 --> 19:38.000]  I'm always on the lookout for something to soothe my soul
[19:38.000 --> 19:44.000]  And so I sit back and I watch the evidence unfold
[19:44.000 --> 19:58.000]  And I see justice is the goal
[19:58.000 --> 20:01.000]  Sometimes we fell a little too far at sea
[20:01.000 --> 20:04.000]  And then we got to get back on course with a please
[20:04.000 --> 20:07.000]  Don't we go under heavy advisory
[20:07.000 --> 20:11.000]  From the man that came all the way from Galilee
[20:11.000 --> 20:14.000]  I'm always on the lookout for something to soothe my soul
[20:14.000 --> 20:17.000]  Sometimes we fell a little too far at sea
[20:17.000 --> 20:20.000]  And then we got to get back on course with a please
[20:20.000 --> 20:23.000]  Don't we go under heavy advisory
[20:23.000 --> 20:26.000]  From the man that came all the way from Galilee
[20:26.000 --> 20:30.000]  I'm always on the lookout for something to soothe my soul
[20:30.000 --> 20:33.000]  Sometimes we fell a little too far at sea
[20:33.000 --> 20:36.000]  And then we got to get back on course with a please
[20:36.000 --> 20:41.000]  It's a large complex case
[20:41.000 --> 20:47.000]  Do you attempt to frame a single issue for the entire case?
[20:47.000 --> 20:54.000]  Or do you address issues one at a time?
[20:54.000 --> 20:59.000]  I'll be honest with you, again I'm a student and I haven't done a whole lot
[20:59.000 --> 21:04.000]  As far as briefing anything other than what we get in our case books
[21:04.000 --> 21:06.000]  And I have seen it both ways
[21:06.000 --> 21:10.000]  So one way is to have more than one rule statement
[21:10.000 --> 21:13.000]  And it's broken down into a subsection
[21:13.000 --> 21:16.000]  Like a Roman numeral one, Roman numeral two
[21:16.000 --> 21:18.000]  And then each one is discussed separately
[21:18.000 --> 21:21.000]  And then I've also seen it where it is one large rule statement
[21:21.000 --> 21:24.000]  Because even though it's a complex issue
[21:24.000 --> 21:28.000]  It really is under the exact same subject
[21:28.000 --> 21:32.000]  So sometimes the issues are really, they may be linked
[21:32.000 --> 21:35.000]  And they are two really different rules of law
[21:35.000 --> 21:41.000]  Or different subjects when you peel back the layers
[21:41.000 --> 21:47.000]  The reason I ask that is on my website, Jurisimprudence.com
[21:47.000 --> 21:54.000]  I have a rather long and complex writ of habeas corpus
[21:54.000 --> 22:00.000]  And it walks through due process from arrest to trial
[22:00.000 --> 22:08.000]  And in there I name statute after statute after statute after statute that they violate
[22:08.000 --> 22:13.000]  So in preparing a suit based on those issues
[22:13.000 --> 22:22.000]  Would I craft an argument for each violation as if it stood on its own?
[22:22.000 --> 22:34.000]  Or would I treat all of the issues as if they were part of one overriding wrong?
[22:34.000 --> 22:39.000]  Well the best I can say is if you have certain facts
[22:39.000 --> 22:42.000]  And they only feed one issue
[22:42.000 --> 22:45.000]  You're going to logically take your readers through
[22:45.000 --> 22:52.000]  So you don't want to throw a bunch of issues in when the facts are not detailed enough to support them
[22:52.000 --> 22:56.000]  So if you put a lot of issue statements in because they're all connected
[22:56.000 --> 23:00.000]  I would think that without having the facts to back them all up
[23:00.000 --> 23:07.000]  That your writing would not be as cohesive
[23:07.000 --> 23:17.000]  Okay that's understandable because sometimes you can have more issues than a human being can assimilate readily
[23:17.000 --> 23:24.000]  And even though you have all these issues if all they do is confuse the reader they don't do any good
[23:24.000 --> 23:30.000]  Okay now let's go on to the next issue
[23:30.000 --> 23:38.000]  This R for rule of law and this feeds beautifully into what you were just saying about the statute after statute after statute
[23:38.000 --> 23:46.000]  And this is where you put the statute that you believe answers your issue
[23:46.000 --> 23:52.000]  So this is where somebody said is the car blue and that was your issue in a question mark
[23:52.000 --> 23:56.000]  Then the rule of law would be all Toyotas are blue
[23:56.000 --> 24:03.000]  And then you could look and see and weave it in there and in this case the car is a Chevy
[24:03.000 --> 24:12.000]  The Chevy obviously cannot be blue then so it's a simple way to put it but that's how you have to kind of weave that in
[24:12.000 --> 24:20.000]  So when you put the rules of law in there and again I'll give you some resources and some great books that are available
[24:20.000 --> 24:26.000]  You can pick all the work that you've already done and all the statutes and all of the language
[24:26.000 --> 24:34.000]  And just tie them right back into the fact or what we call the fact pattern that you've already identified up front
[24:34.000 --> 24:43.000]  So now you're saying this is the background, this is my problem, my issue statement, then this is the rule that I think applies
[24:43.000 --> 24:50.000]  That is probably a really important step is to make sure that you're interpreting it correctly
[24:50.000 --> 24:56.000]  And that you are identifying the right rule that goes to answer that issue
[24:56.000 --> 25:02.000]  The other thing you don't want to do is accidentally give the wrong rule of law
[25:02.000 --> 25:10.000]  And have somebody look at it and realize that your argument is going to fall apart before they ever get to your argument
[25:10.000 --> 25:16.000]  Well I'm not sure if they've got you to this point yet being you are where you are in your studies
[25:16.000 --> 25:24.000]  But one of the things that we run into consistently here is conflicting points of law from either various sections of the same code
[25:24.000 --> 25:27.000]  Or from different and distinct codes
[25:27.000 --> 25:35.000]  For instance one code will have a set of processes that applies for anything that's being done under that code
[25:35.000 --> 25:44.000]  Yet the powers that be are utilizing a completely different code to do what they do in response to it
[25:44.000 --> 25:49.000]  Even though there is this procedure already outlined and in place in the previous code
[25:49.000 --> 25:53.000]  That's actually kind of funny
[25:53.000 --> 25:59.000]  Justice Scalia actually wrote a book on how to persuade judges
[25:59.000 --> 26:07.000]  And the very first thing in his book and he covers it for quite a few pages is to make sure that you are writing from the correct jurisdiction
[26:07.000 --> 26:14.000]  That there may be a local jurisdiction that yes it's the state but then it applies it maybe a little bit differently
[26:14.000 --> 26:22.000]  And you may have to frame your argument a little differently in order to kind of get through that what I'm going to call a wicket
[26:22.000 --> 26:26.000]  The jurisdiction issue I think can be a little bit complicated
[26:26.000 --> 26:29.000]  I don't have it down pat I'll be perfectly honest with you
[26:29.000 --> 26:33.000]  But when you're working through the federal system or you're working through the state system
[26:33.000 --> 26:41.000]  You know even local municipalities have as you statutes that are not necessarily voted in by the state legislature
[26:41.000 --> 26:46.000]  They're just local and it's which one applies at what point at what time
[26:46.000 --> 26:49.000]  Well I've already got a legal argument against that
[26:49.000 --> 27:04.000]  Yes this is one of Eddie's major studies about when and where ordinances, statutes, rules apply
[27:04.000 --> 27:16.000]  And this is a problem that we run into where ordinances or statutes or rules are applied interchangeably
[27:16.000 --> 27:21.000]  And in jurisdictions where they don't apply
[27:21.000 --> 27:22.000]  Right
[27:22.000 --> 27:32.000]  It gets very complex when you try to tell a judge that this rule you're treating you're claiming here
[27:32.000 --> 27:41.000]  Is overruled by a statute somewhere else or this particular ordinance doesn't apply to the class of persons
[27:41.000 --> 27:45.000]  The individual or class of persons to which you are applying it
[27:45.000 --> 27:48.000]  This gets really tough
[27:48.000 --> 27:56.000]  It does and some of the goodness in here is with the R that rule there is some flexibility
[27:56.000 --> 28:07.000]  And in saying that you can have a primary rule and then underneath that you can have you know two or three rules that are in support
[28:07.000 --> 28:19.000]  I don't really know and I can't go into depth about how many you can have but I can tell you that you're going to have to have a rule for each issue
[28:19.000 --> 28:27.000]  So if you do happen like you said to write a case that has a lot of issues you're going to have to have a lot of rules supporting each one
[28:27.000 --> 28:37.000]  And you actually apply this whole fly wreck thing kind of over and over to each and every issue that you're raising
[28:37.000 --> 28:43.000]  So if one issue can be supported by one rule and another issue can be supported by another rule
[28:43.000 --> 28:56.000]  That is how they are teaching us to go ahead and explain the law and apply it so that it makes sense to a judge or to a court
[28:56.000 --> 29:04.000]  Yes and that fits very well in the document I was speaking to
[29:04.000 --> 29:17.000]  It is so complex and there are so many issues raised that we had to back out and look at it overall and come up with some way of making all of this make sense
[29:17.000 --> 29:20.000]  And that certainly went to the issue
[29:20.000 --> 29:29.000]  We're going to go in there and say they violated this law and this law and this law and this law and this law and after a while people start saying what the heck is going on here?
[29:29.000 --> 29:33.000]  How could they be violating all these laws and why would they do that?
[29:33.000 --> 29:36.000]  I have to answer that question
[29:36.000 --> 29:41.000]  I actually apparently have my issue in the wrong place
[29:41.000 --> 29:46.000]  I have what they're doing first and the issue later so I guess I'm going to have to fix that
[29:46.000 --> 29:55.000]  Okay we're coming back up on break, Randy Kelton, Eddie Craig, Deborah Stevens, Wheel of Law Radio, we'll be right back
[30:17.000 --> 30:20.000]  Monday through Wednesday, lunch and dinner, five dollars
[30:20.000 --> 30:24.000]  Friday and Saturday, we got late night with them for a sound crew, still five dollar plates
[30:24.000 --> 30:29.000]  Jerk chicken and vegetarian place to beat, One Love Kitchen, Austin, Texas
[30:29.000 --> 30:36.000]  Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn was sentenced to eight years hard labor for criticizing Stalin in a letter to a friend
[30:36.000 --> 30:41.000]  Good thing those days are past, or are they? I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more in a moment
[30:41.000 --> 30:48.000]  Google is watching you, recording everything you've ever searched for and creating a massive database of your personal information
[30:48.000 --> 30:49.000]  That's creepy
[30:49.000 --> 30:51.000]  But it doesn't have to be that way
[30:51.000 --> 30:54.000]  Startpage.com is the world's most private search engine
[30:54.000 --> 31:01.000]  Startpage.com doesn't store your IP address, make a record of your searches or use tracking cookies and they're third party certified
[31:01.000 --> 31:08.000]  If you don't like big brother spying on you, start over with Startpage, great search results and total privacy
[31:08.000 --> 31:12.000]  Startpage.com, the world's most private search engine
[31:12.000 --> 31:18.000]  Back in the bad old Soviet days, officials routinely opened people's letters and scanned them for political correctness
[31:18.000 --> 31:25.000]  Today, the government of Finland is opening and scanning people's letters for a different reason, to deliver their mail electronically
[31:25.000 --> 31:34.000]  Hundreds of Finnish citizens are letting postal workers open their mail and scan each letter and bill into a computer file they can see online or receive by email
[31:34.000 --> 31:36.000]  They hope the idea eventually goes viral
[31:36.000 --> 31:41.000]  Postal officials promise the staff is sworn to secrecy and would never read the contents of the letters
[31:41.000 --> 31:47.000]  Somehow, if he were alive today, I doubt Alexander Solzhenitsyn would be among the first to sign up
[31:47.000 --> 31:52.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com
[31:52.000 --> 32:13.000]  Yeah, I got a warrant and I'm gonna solve them to the government them, prosecute them
[32:13.000 --> 32:23.000]  Okay, who's that?
[32:43.000 --> 32:45.000]  We come vote for Bush
[32:45.000 --> 32:47.000]  So how the hell he get the presidency?
[32:47.000 --> 32:50.000]  That's why we have a warrant for him
[32:50.000 --> 32:54.000]  Everybody listen carefully, listen to the words that the Christians perceive
[32:54.000 --> 32:58.000]  Citizens arrest for Mr. Bush
[32:58.000 --> 33:12.000]  A warrant for good change
[33:12.000 --> 33:34.000]  Okay, this is Brandon Kelton, David Stevens, Eddie Craig
[33:34.000 --> 33:38.000]  We're back, we're talking to Don Kennedy
[33:38.000 --> 33:43.000]  and we were talking about facts, issue, rule
[33:43.000 --> 33:46.000]  Now we'll go to application
[33:46.000 --> 33:50.000]  Would you tell us about application, Don?
[33:50.000 --> 33:58.000]  Actually, yes, and another way to remember it beyond application is to use the word
[33:58.000 --> 34:02.000]  I just lost it, you can either apply it or analysis, there's the other word
[34:02.000 --> 34:05.000]  So this is where your analysis goes
[34:05.000 --> 34:08.000]  So application is the application of the law
[34:08.000 --> 34:13.000]  but it really is where you're going to make your argument
[34:13.000 --> 34:16.000]  You're going to take each and every rule
[34:16.000 --> 34:22.000]  and you're going to make it so it makes sense in the issue statement
[34:22.000 --> 34:26.000]  One of the easiest ways to do that, that we have been taught
[34:26.000 --> 34:28.000]  and that every book that I have read
[34:28.000 --> 34:31.000]  and I read it before I actually started law school
[34:31.000 --> 34:35.000]  because I was terrified of starting law school
[34:35.000 --> 34:40.000]  it uses the word here or the word because a lot
[34:40.000 --> 34:44.000]  So you have your rule of law and then after your rule of law
[34:44.000 --> 34:51.000]  you would say here or in this case or because, those would be your leading words
[34:51.000 --> 34:57.000]  and then you actually go ahead and explain what you're trying to do
[34:57.000 --> 34:59.000]  and how you're linking them back together
[34:59.000 --> 35:06.000]  You could maybe say because the car was parked in the driveway
[35:06.000 --> 35:12.000]  it was bound to get hit, it was in a no parking zone, that kind of thing
[35:12.000 --> 35:16.000]  So you are actually going to state your fact pattern in there
[35:16.000 --> 35:20.000]  and you're going to apply it one by one to the rule
[35:20.000 --> 35:26.000]  It works very well that way and in fact when you write essays in law school
[35:26.000 --> 35:29.000]  they'll tell you that the number one place to get your points
[35:29.000 --> 35:33.000]  is in the analysis or the application section
[35:33.000 --> 35:37.000]  That is where you're going to make your money in the bar exams
[35:37.000 --> 35:40.000]  and the first year law student exams, your final exams
[35:40.000 --> 35:43.000]  and everything you do in law school
[35:43.000 --> 35:46.000]  This is where the bread and butter of your argument has to go
[35:46.000 --> 35:54.000]  Yes and this is a thing a lot of the folks in the pro se area try to do first
[35:54.000 --> 35:59.000]  because they seem to be afraid they won't get their point across
[35:59.000 --> 36:02.000]  so they try to get it done first
[36:02.000 --> 36:08.000]  and you have a situation to where the people you're making the argument to
[36:08.000 --> 36:12.000]  have no idea what the basis of the argument is yet
[36:12.000 --> 36:13.000]  Right
[36:13.000 --> 36:23.000]  And one other issue about application is logic
[36:23.000 --> 36:29.000]  Absolutely and this is where it makes a whole lot of sense
[36:29.000 --> 36:32.000]  to what I do is I make a checklist
[36:32.000 --> 36:36.000]  It just seems really simple but it works for me
[36:36.000 --> 36:38.000]  and I will just make a checklist and I'll go down
[36:38.000 --> 36:42.000]  and I will check off each rule as I apply a fact to it
[36:42.000 --> 36:46.000]  So I have the rule that says all balls are red
[36:46.000 --> 36:51.000]  I have an application that says here the ball is blue
[36:51.000 --> 36:54.000]  Well then the next one would be it's not a ball, it can't be
[36:54.000 --> 36:56.000]  It can't be if all balls are red
[36:56.000 --> 37:00.000]  and I'll go through and I will walk down the facts that I'm given
[37:00.000 --> 37:02.000]  because we're given facts
[37:02.000 --> 37:05.000]  We don't actually have cases at this point
[37:05.000 --> 37:07.000]  We don't talk to clients or anything in the first year
[37:07.000 --> 37:12.000]  but what they do is they'll give us an essay section that is a fact pattern
[37:12.000 --> 37:14.000]  and most of the time they're fictitious
[37:14.000 --> 37:17.000]  but they do require you to apply the law
[37:17.000 --> 37:21.000]  and I'll just check it off as I go and make sure that it does make sense
[37:21.000 --> 37:28.000]  and every single one of those rules has a here, a because or an in this case
[37:28.000 --> 37:31.000]  And this speaks to a good discipline
[37:31.000 --> 37:38.000]  because one of the things I come across a lot is specious logic
[37:38.000 --> 37:44.000]  One of my favorite quotations says logic is not truth
[37:44.000 --> 37:47.000]  It merely has the ring of truth
[37:47.000 --> 37:52.000]  and therefore is the first refuge of the scoundrel
[37:52.000 --> 37:57.000]  and those portions of logic that have the ring of truth
[37:57.000 --> 38:03.000]  are logical syllogisms based on false premise
[38:03.000 --> 38:09.000]  And if you are structuring our argument we must be very careful
[38:09.000 --> 38:16.000]  to define our premise carefully before we apply the premise to the logical syllogism
[38:16.000 --> 38:19.000]  As soon as you get through this application
[38:19.000 --> 38:22.000]  as soon as you do your checklist
[38:22.000 --> 38:25.000]  it is always a great idea to go back
[38:25.000 --> 38:30.000]  and make sure you have captured or found or covered all of the issues
[38:30.000 --> 38:35.000]  again so that you don't even apply it to half a premise
[38:35.000 --> 38:39.000]  where you're getting only part of the argument
[38:39.000 --> 38:42.000]  and the other half falls apart pulling the entire thing down
[38:42.000 --> 38:45.000]  The easiest way that I can think of to explain it
[38:45.000 --> 38:50.000]  is either it's all true, none of it's true, or half of it's true
[38:50.000 --> 38:55.000]  but you do not want to go into court when only none of it's true or half of it's true
[38:55.000 --> 39:01.000]  And while you were speaking something else came to mind
[39:01.000 --> 39:07.000]  what about arguing those issues
[39:07.000 --> 39:12.000]  that on the surface appear to be detrimental to your position
[39:12.000 --> 39:16.000]  issues you know the other side will address?
[39:16.000 --> 39:20.000]  Well personally I believe in coming out swinging
[39:20.000 --> 39:25.000]  and what I mean by that is if you know what your opponent's logical
[39:25.000 --> 39:29.000]  and easy to spot arguments are going to be
[39:29.000 --> 39:34.000]  then you can refute them before you ever get to your conclusion
[39:34.000 --> 39:37.000]  In this case and here in the cause
[39:37.000 --> 39:41.000]  you can also stick a sentence in there that says
[39:41.000 --> 39:44.000]  this is not going to be supported because
[39:44.000 --> 39:49.000]  or this is not true or this does not apply in this case because
[39:49.000 --> 39:56.000]  Again I do want to turn you back to Justice Scalia's book on persuading judges
[39:56.000 --> 40:02.000]  He talks very much about it. That book has a lot of legal words in it
[40:02.000 --> 40:04.000]  but he does talk about coming out swinging
[40:04.000 --> 40:07.000]  You want to kind of throw them off their game
[40:07.000 --> 40:10.000]  You want the judge when he reads your paper
[40:10.000 --> 40:14.000]  to expect what he reads in their paper
[40:14.000 --> 40:17.000]  And when you do that then there's nothing new
[40:17.000 --> 40:19.000]  There's no new argument under the sun
[40:19.000 --> 40:22.000]  They're not showing anything
[40:22.000 --> 40:26.000]  They may have some different child strategy or something like that
[40:26.000 --> 40:28.000]  and that again is covered in the book
[40:28.000 --> 40:34.000]  but if you can anticipate as many things as possible
[40:34.000 --> 40:36.000]  it's better to put them in up front
[40:36.000 --> 40:40.000]  than it is to be caught answering them later
[40:40.000 --> 40:42.000]  especially in my opinion
[40:42.000 --> 40:43.000]  I'm a first year law student
[40:43.000 --> 40:48.000]  but if you're pro se and you have a team of lawyers if you will
[40:48.000 --> 40:50.000]  answering and they're going to try to bury you in paperwork
[40:50.000 --> 40:56.000]  isn't it better to just get it out front that you see it coming
[40:56.000 --> 40:58.000]  and they can try to argue it all they want
[40:58.000 --> 41:03.000]  but they're not going to necessarily get a summary judgment
[41:03.000 --> 41:08.000]  which is where the case never gets in front of the judge or the jury
[41:08.000 --> 41:11.000]  it gets thrown out
[41:11.000 --> 41:20.000]  I recall reading that an attorney arguing an issue has a duty
[41:20.000 --> 41:27.000]  to advise the court of case law that would be in contravention
[41:27.000 --> 41:29.000]  to the position that he's taking
[41:29.000 --> 41:33.000]  that he cannot simply ignore that case law
[41:33.000 --> 41:40.000]  that if he argues a position that has been adjudicated by a court
[41:40.000 --> 41:47.000]  and fails to offer a different way of a reason for the court
[41:47.000 --> 41:51.000]  to render a different decision and thereby create new law
[41:51.000 --> 41:55.000]  then his argument is frivolous and he can be sanctioned
[41:55.000 --> 41:57.000]  that is very true
[41:57.000 --> 42:04.000]  one of my professors has made the argument that about 95% of the time
[42:04.000 --> 42:07.000]  an attorney can pretty much go
[42:07.000 --> 42:12.000]  this is the law, this is the issue, this is the law, this is the issue
[42:12.000 --> 42:15.000]  and in a lot of cases, in a lot of ways
[42:15.000 --> 42:21.000]  you can apply the rules and navigate through a bunch of cases
[42:21.000 --> 42:26.000]  it's only maybe 5% of the time where an attorney will make their money
[42:26.000 --> 42:34.000]  working pro se, it's a lot of work to learn how to do research
[42:34.000 --> 42:39.000]  and to find precedent that may be on the other side of your argument
[42:39.000 --> 42:45.000]  again, I have not in depth gone into the law library
[42:45.000 --> 42:48.000]  we were just introduced to it a few weeks ago
[42:48.000 --> 42:51.000]  finding my realm there is intimidating
[42:51.000 --> 42:54.000]  and I can imagine it would be very intimidating for somebody
[42:54.000 --> 42:57.000]  who is trying to represent themselves
[42:57.000 --> 43:03.000]  and trying to write the best argument they can to convince the court
[43:03.000 --> 43:07.000]  I would suggest that they go to maybe the library
[43:07.000 --> 43:10.000]  and in some states and some districts
[43:10.000 --> 43:13.000]  there is a law library available for the public
[43:13.000 --> 43:15.000]  I know that we have one in Atlanta, Georgia
[43:15.000 --> 43:17.000]  which is closer to where I live
[43:17.000 --> 43:22.000]  okay, let me offer an elegant shortcut
[43:22.000 --> 43:24.000]  if you get a new issue
[43:24.000 --> 43:30.000]  the first place and best place to go is the clerk of the court
[43:30.000 --> 43:35.000]  and pull out cases addressing a similar issue to your own
[43:35.000 --> 43:37.000]  and beat emotions
[43:37.000 --> 43:41.000]  that's where I use my most highly honed skill
[43:41.000 --> 43:44.000]  I am an accomplished plagiarist
[43:44.000 --> 43:47.000]  and I have found stuff, real gems in there
[43:47.000 --> 43:50.000]  things I would have never thought of
[43:50.000 --> 43:54.000]  we're going to do one more segment with Dawn
[43:54.000 --> 43:57.000]  and we'll finish up with conclusion
[43:57.000 --> 44:00.000]  we'll go to questions, we'll be right back
[44:28.000 --> 44:31.000]  Adaptogenic herbs serve as the healing component
[44:31.000 --> 44:34.000]  and organic hemp protein in greens and superfoods
[44:34.000 --> 44:37.000]  act as a balanced nutrient base
[44:37.000 --> 44:41.000]  plus Shentrician tastes great in just water
[44:41.000 --> 44:45.000]  this powder supplement is everything you'd want in a product
[44:45.000 --> 44:47.000]  and it's all natural
[44:47.000 --> 44:50.000]  visit Shentrician.com to order yours
[44:50.000 --> 44:55.000]  or call 1-866-497-7436
[44:55.000 --> 44:59.000]  after you use Shentrician, you'll believe in supplements again
[44:59.000 --> 45:03.000]  are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[45:03.000 --> 45:06.000]  win your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary
[45:06.000 --> 45:10.000]  the affordable, easy to understand, 4-CD course
[45:10.000 --> 45:14.000]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step
[45:14.000 --> 45:18.000]  if you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing
[45:18.000 --> 45:22.000]  if you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself
[45:22.000 --> 45:25.000]  thousands have won with our step by step course
[45:25.000 --> 45:27.000]  and now you can too
[45:27.000 --> 45:30.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney
[45:30.000 --> 45:33.000]  with 22 years of case winning experience
[45:33.000 --> 45:38.000]  even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[45:38.000 --> 45:42.000]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts
[45:42.000 --> 45:47.000]  you'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials
[45:47.000 --> 45:51.000]  forms for civil cases, pro se tactics, and much more
[45:51.000 --> 45:55.000]  please visit WTPRN.com and click on the banner
[45:55.000 --> 46:22.000]  or call toll free, 866-LAW-EZ
[46:22.000 --> 46:28.000]  always, I must be careful what I'm wishing for
[46:28.000 --> 46:33.000]  when I'm hungry, I like to know just what I'm fishing for
[46:33.000 --> 46:39.000]  I ain't asking for much, I ain't trying to be no glutton
[46:39.000 --> 46:45.000]  I'm just here making my living pushing buttons
[46:45.000 --> 46:51.000]  I get my message out to anyone in shot and distance
[46:51.000 --> 46:56.000]  both for bravery and against slavery, showing resistance
[46:56.000 --> 47:01.000]  first I'm crawling, then I'm walking, then I start strutting
[47:01.000 --> 47:09.000]  I'm just so glad to make my living pushing buttons
[47:09.000 --> 47:22.000]  oh, oh, oh, oh, oh, yeah
[47:22.000 --> 47:26.000]  when we sat down to play Monopoly we all wanted to win the games
[47:26.000 --> 47:30.000]  we gave some guy an endless money supply
[47:30.000 --> 47:33.000]  we must have not been thinking with brains
[47:33.000 --> 47:36.000]  after sometime the worth of my dime got me down to dinner
[47:36.000 --> 48:05.400]  Okay, this is Debra Stevens, Eddie Craig, Randy Kelton with our special guest Don Kennedy
[48:05.400 --> 48:13.400]  and we're talking about law school and law school, talking about how to frame legal arguments
[48:13.400 --> 48:14.800]  and Deb, you had a question.
[48:14.800 --> 48:21.560]  Yeah, you were talking right before the break about going to the courthouse to look for
[48:21.560 --> 48:29.520]  cases similar to yours and so my question was are you using the court clerk as alexis
[48:29.520 --> 48:35.360]  so to speak because I mean you just go down to the courthouse, how do you know which cases
[48:35.360 --> 48:37.960]  are cases that are similar to yours?
[48:37.960 --> 48:38.960]  How do you do that kind of search?
[48:38.960 --> 48:43.880]  I mean because there's literally thousands of files there so are you just like somehow
[48:43.880 --> 48:50.720]  schmoozing the clerk into doing your Lexis search engine business for you or what?
[48:50.720 --> 48:51.720]  Yeah, precisely.
[48:51.720 --> 48:52.720]  I love it.
[48:52.720 --> 48:58.320]  The clerks stand around, they do the same stuff all day, every day, it gets boring.
[48:58.320 --> 49:04.840]  You come down there and start asking them interesting questions and especially if you're
[49:04.840 --> 49:10.400]  a law student, you know they're used to attorneys coming down there pushing them around and
[49:10.400 --> 49:16.040]  then they get someone that's in the study of law and coming down treating them like
[49:16.040 --> 49:20.920]  they're a wealth of knowledge, they will bend over backwards to help you.
[49:20.920 --> 49:27.040]  I was doing that pro se and I started asking the clerks different questions and have you
[49:27.040 --> 49:34.180]  ever heard any cases like this and once they began to understand that I wasn't after anything
[49:34.180 --> 49:39.600]  in particular, that I'm just doing general research, they bend over backwards to be helpful.
[49:39.600 --> 49:40.600]  Well I found...
[49:40.600 --> 49:46.480]  And frankly the cases I asked them to see first were the big ones.
[49:46.480 --> 49:50.960]  Well I found that even librarians can be helpful in that way because I remember Randy when
[49:50.960 --> 50:00.720]  we were at the law library in Pennsylvania that we went there and the librarian was bending
[50:00.720 --> 50:03.120]  over backwards to help us do our research.
[50:03.120 --> 50:04.840]  Oh she was a sweetheart.
[50:04.840 --> 50:09.360]  It was awesome.
[50:09.360 --> 50:17.440]  You may have a problem in the law library at the law school, but if you go to a law
[50:17.440 --> 50:21.920]  library elsewhere, they are remarkably helpful.
[50:21.920 --> 50:22.920]  What was that Dawn?
[50:22.920 --> 50:23.920]  Lawyers eat their young.
[50:23.920 --> 50:24.920]  Yeah, I bet.
[50:24.920 --> 50:36.920]  Generally, when I'm doing legal research, the hardest thing to find is the first case
[50:36.920 --> 50:40.720]  on point or near point.
[50:40.720 --> 50:50.080]  Once I find a case at or near point, my first place to go is shepherds or if I could find
[50:50.080 --> 50:57.760]  briefs on the subject because a brief will argue all around the issues in order to frame
[50:57.760 --> 51:00.600]  the specific issue they're addressing.
[51:00.600 --> 51:06.240]  So a lot of times when I can't get something directly on point, I can get something close
[51:06.240 --> 51:14.840]  to the issue and in order to frame the issue, the court will address the surrounding issues
[51:14.840 --> 51:21.960]  and most of the time if I can find one close, the surrounding issues will give me a hit.
[51:21.960 --> 51:27.600]  And if it's an old case or new case, just as long as I get a case on point.
[51:27.600 --> 51:33.160]  If it's old case, then I go directly to shepherds and they bring me up to new cases.
[51:33.160 --> 51:39.180]  If it's a new case close, then I can look in that case and go to the ones they reference
[51:39.180 --> 51:44.200]  and it's like peeling an onion.
[51:44.200 --> 51:45.560]  Absolutely.
[51:45.560 --> 51:51.360]  There's so much out there and I'll be honest, it's overwhelming.
[51:51.360 --> 51:57.600]  This may not be common knowledge but in law school, you really do start common law way
[51:57.600 --> 52:03.560]  back in old English and they do not update the language for you and there have been quite
[52:03.560 --> 52:09.680]  a few cases where I've read it five or six times and wish I had been born in the 1700s.
[52:09.680 --> 52:12.680]  Okay, a suggestion.
[52:12.680 --> 52:19.520]  Lost the name, what's the name, Eddie, of the dictionary, the...
[52:19.520 --> 52:20.520]  Bouviers.
[52:20.520 --> 52:21.520]  Bouviers.
[52:21.520 --> 52:22.520]  Bouviers.
[52:22.520 --> 52:23.520]  I am black.
[52:23.520 --> 52:24.520]  Bouviers 1856.
[52:24.520 --> 52:25.520]  Bouviers.
[52:25.520 --> 52:28.080]  That's what the Supreme Court uses.
[52:28.080 --> 52:31.040]  Everybody else uses blacks.
[52:31.040 --> 52:34.120]  I use blacks because that's what was recommended.
[52:34.120 --> 52:40.360]  If you're talking about Supreme Court cases, you might want to go from those cases, go
[52:40.360 --> 52:45.040]  to Bouviers and compare them to blacks, you might be surprised at the differences.
[52:45.040 --> 52:47.440]  Oh yeah, big surprise.
[52:47.440 --> 52:50.960]  It would certainly surprise your law professors if you knew to do that.
[52:50.960 --> 52:56.880]  Yeah, I might actually get some points on some things, that would be great, that would
[52:56.880 --> 52:59.880]  be really good.
[52:59.880 --> 53:10.600]  The things I find most useful, if I can locate them, are briefs and orders by judges.
[53:10.600 --> 53:19.560]  Especially if you're doing federal, you can go to PACER and go into the cases and pull
[53:19.560 --> 53:23.360]  down the orders that the judges issue.
[53:23.360 --> 53:27.720]  We have to file a case in Nebraska.
[53:27.720 --> 53:32.800]  He filed on a Friday, it was a foreclosure issue, Monday was Memorial Day, Tuesday the
[53:32.800 --> 53:36.600]  judge didn't have time to hear his temporary restraining order, Wednesday was the sale,
[53:36.600 --> 53:40.720]  he went down and stopped them from selling it, forced the bank to buy it back.
[53:40.720 --> 53:46.840]  Thursday, he got a response from the judge denying the TRO his moot and gave him a six
[53:46.840 --> 53:54.360]  page brief telling him exactly what he needed to give the judge so the judge could give
[53:54.360 --> 53:57.360]  him the ruling that he wanted.
[53:57.360 --> 54:00.200]  We are finding this very common.
[54:00.200 --> 54:09.480]  I have a friend, Harmon Taylor, and he's always said that the rulings by the judges, the orders,
[54:09.480 --> 54:13.000]  even if they're against you, are always very instructive.
[54:13.000 --> 54:19.160]  That was, yes, I'm sorry, go ahead, that just goes back to what you were saying.
[54:19.160 --> 54:25.880]  That was a great place to look initially because the judge will give you case law on point
[54:25.880 --> 54:33.160]  exactly to the issue you're addressing telling you exactly what he needs.
[54:33.160 --> 54:39.240]  That perfectly goes back to what we were saying about 95% of the time, it's just a rule to
[54:39.240 --> 54:40.600]  an issue.
[54:40.600 --> 54:45.240]  If you have a judge willing to hand that stuff down to you, that's got to be very comforting
[54:45.240 --> 54:50.040]  when you're especially representing yourself because you can go back and you can do just
[54:50.040 --> 54:53.160]  a little bit of research and pull all of that stuff down.
[54:53.160 --> 54:57.680]  I think once you have the, if you will, bunny trail to guide you, you won't end up on the
[54:57.680 --> 55:03.360]  wrong path and then you can't make a critical mistake.
[55:03.360 --> 55:08.240]  That critical mistake is really where it's going to show.
[55:08.240 --> 55:14.520]  Yes, I like pulling the pleadings.
[55:14.520 --> 55:19.400]  Those are one of my favorite things to read are the pleadings from the cases.
[55:19.400 --> 55:21.040]  Pleadings tell me more than anything else.
[55:21.040 --> 55:25.120]  Pleading tells me all of the things I need and for anybody out there who's trying to
[55:25.120 --> 55:33.560]  write legal documents, probably the very first place to go for research is to forms.
[55:33.560 --> 55:43.720]  In Texas we have O'Connor's forms and on any motion that I want to write, it's got everything.
[55:43.720 --> 55:50.200]  If you get the litigation guides, these lawyers don't know how to write a writ of mandamus.
[55:50.200 --> 55:56.400]  They just go to O'Connor's and just walk right down and it gives them all the issues they
[55:56.400 --> 56:02.640]  can bring up, case law supporting those issues, arguments against the issues, how to adjudicate
[56:02.640 --> 56:03.640]  both sides.
[56:03.640 --> 56:06.440]  It is a wealth of knowledge.
[56:06.440 --> 56:09.920]  Okay, we've used up an hour.
[56:09.920 --> 56:15.120]  When we come back, I'd like to open up the phone lines and take some questions.
[56:15.120 --> 56:20.920]  If you can hang on, Dawn, would you be willing to field some questions?
[56:20.920 --> 56:26.360]  Absolutely, but really quick, I want to say that C is your conclusion.
[56:26.360 --> 56:31.760]  That last piece is FIRAC and there's nothing special about the conclusion as long as you
[56:31.760 --> 56:36.800]  wrap it up neatly and wrap it in a bow and your analysis leads to it, then you shouldn't
[56:36.800 --> 56:38.800]  have a problem.
[56:38.800 --> 56:40.800]  Excellent.
[56:40.800 --> 56:49.000]  I have a question right now for you, Dawn, and this is not concerning specific technical
[56:49.000 --> 56:55.520]  legal issues while we've been talking about, but I want to know what just the general aura
[56:55.520 --> 57:00.520]  of political climate, so to speak, is at the law school where you're at.
[57:00.520 --> 57:04.520]  I'll give a little background of why I'm asking this question so you'll know where I'm headed.
[57:04.520 --> 57:11.120]  I had a friend, he's a lawyer now, he went to the law school at the University of New
[57:11.120 --> 57:19.240]  Mexico in Albuquerque and he said that it was outrageous there concerning the communistic
[57:19.240 --> 57:27.520]  political climate of all the law professors there and he said the Federalist Society shrunk
[57:27.520 --> 57:31.960]  and shrunk and shrunk until finally he was the only one left.
[57:31.960 --> 57:38.520]  He had to carry on the Federalist Society all by himself and he was trying to find freshmen
[57:38.520 --> 57:42.600]  because he was about to graduate and if he couldn't have found anyone else to carry on
[57:42.600 --> 57:46.480]  the Federalist Society, it would have died at that law school and he said that none of
[57:46.480 --> 57:52.240]  the law professors taught anything about original intent of the Constitution and the founding
[57:52.240 --> 57:59.000]  fathers and the principles of limited government and small government and all this thing.
[57:59.000 --> 58:02.680]  The political climate at that law school was nothing but big government, big government,
[58:02.680 --> 58:09.160]  big government, straight up, total statism and I think the reason for that, what he was
[58:09.160 --> 58:14.120]  saying is that prospective lawyers go in a law school, they don't want to hear that
[58:14.120 --> 58:18.800]  our founding fathers intended for a government to be small because then that means there
[58:18.800 --> 58:22.760]  wouldn't be as many jobs for the lawyers, these prospective lawyers want to hear that
[58:22.760 --> 58:26.920]  we're supposed to have big government so they can have lots of attorneys and lots of jobs
[58:26.920 --> 58:32.680]  so we're heading to break now but I'd like to get your take on that, is there a political
[58:32.680 --> 58:38.480]  climate one way or the other at the law school where you're at and if so, how extreme is
[58:38.480 --> 58:39.480]  it?
[58:39.480 --> 58:45.040]  So we'll get that question answered on the other side of the break and we'll start taking
[58:45.040 --> 58:59.480]  your calls 512-646-1984, we'll be right back folks.
[58:59.480 --> 59:04.440]  It is so enlightening to listen to 90.1 FM but finding things on the internet isn't so
[59:04.440 --> 59:08.160]  easy and neither is finding like minded people to share it with.
[59:08.160 --> 59:11.120]  Oh well I guess you haven't heard of Brave New Books then.
[59:11.120 --> 59:12.120]  Brave New Books?
[59:12.120 --> 59:16.920]  Yes, Brave New Books has all the books and DVDs you're looking for by authors like Alex
[59:16.920 --> 59:21.880]  Jones, Ron Paul and G. Edward Griffin, they even stock inner food, Berkey products and
[59:21.880 --> 59:22.880]  Calvin Soaps.
[59:22.880 --> 59:25.800]  There's no way a place like that exists.
[59:25.800 --> 59:31.640]  Go check it out for yourself, it's downtown at 1904 Guadalupe Street just south of UT.
[59:31.640 --> 59:35.360]  By UT, there's never anywhere to park down there.
[59:35.360 --> 59:40.240]  Actually they now offer a free hour of parking for paying customers at the 500 MLK parking
[59:40.240 --> 59:43.240]  facility just behind the bookstore.
[59:43.240 --> 59:46.240]  It does exist, but when are they open?
[59:46.240 --> 59:51.000]  Monday through Saturday, 11 AM to 9 PM and 1 to 6 PM on Sundays.
[59:51.000 --> 59:58.160]  So give them a call at 512-480-2503 or check out their events page at bravenewbookstore.com.
[59:58.160 --> 01:00:05.040]  This news brief brought to you by the International News Net.
[01:00:05.040 --> 01:00:10.420]  In Somalia Wednesday, at least 11 people, mostly women, were killed and 20 others wounded
[01:00:10.420 --> 01:00:16.040]  in an artillery battle between Somali government and African Union forces and insurgents in
[01:00:16.040 --> 01:00:17.920]  the capital Mogadishu.
[01:00:17.920 --> 01:00:23.680]  Al-Shabaab and Hisbal Islam insurgents control most of southern and central Somalia following
[01:00:23.680 --> 01:00:27.920]  a three-year battle to overthrow the AU-backed government.
[01:00:27.920 --> 01:00:34.880]  AU forces have been accused of deliberately shelling civilians.
[01:00:34.880 --> 01:00:40.080]  In Ecuador Thursday, one person was killed and 50 injured during clashes between rebel
[01:00:40.080 --> 01:00:45.560]  police and supporters of Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa.
[01:00:45.560 --> 01:00:50.360]  Troops took over the airport in the country's capital, Quito, while police protested in
[01:00:50.360 --> 01:00:54.360]  the streets over reduced benefits.
[01:00:54.360 --> 01:00:59.120]  A California judge granted a stay of execution Tuesday for a man whose planned death this
[01:00:59.120 --> 01:01:04.360]  week would have ended a nearly five-year moratorium on the death penalty in the state.
[01:01:04.360 --> 01:01:09.240]  A key reason for the reprieve was a shortage of the drug used to sedate the condemned man
[01:01:09.240 --> 01:01:12.240]  in the death chamber.
[01:01:12.240 --> 01:01:17.960]  The U.S. government apologized to Guatemala Friday for a study in which U.S. scientists
[01:01:17.960 --> 01:01:23.120]  deliberately infected hundreds of prisoners in that country with syphilis.
[01:01:23.120 --> 01:01:29.520]  Under the experiments conducted between 1946 and 1948, U.S. scientists sent prostitutes
[01:01:29.520 --> 01:01:35.120]  infected with syphilis into a Guatemalan prison, mental health hospital, and army barracks
[01:01:35.120 --> 01:01:37.200]  to test possible cures.
[01:01:37.200 --> 01:01:42.040]  Once the men were infected, they were given direct inoculations either on their sexual
[01:01:42.040 --> 01:01:45.800]  organs, forearms, face, or through spinal injections.
[01:01:45.800 --> 01:01:50.840]  Friday's acknowledgment shed new light on U.S. medical experiments that include the
[01:01:50.840 --> 01:01:56.480]  infamous Tuskegee syphilis study, in which scientists observed but didn't treat hundreds
[01:01:56.480 --> 01:02:02.680]  of African-American men with late-stage syphilis in Alabama over a period of decades, starting
[01:02:02.680 --> 01:02:06.560]  in 1932.
[01:02:06.560 --> 01:02:11.400]  Evidence highly favorable to the defendant has emerged in the case of Mumia Abu Jamal,
[01:02:11.400 --> 01:02:17.200]  a journalist and civil rights activist condemned to death for the 1981 murder of a Philadelphia
[01:02:17.200 --> 01:02:18.800]  police officer.
[01:02:18.800 --> 01:02:22.460]  During the murder trial, the prosecution's central argument was the testimony of two
[01:02:22.460 --> 01:02:28.240]  key witnesses who claimed to have seen Abu Jamal fire his pistol repeatedly at point-blank
[01:02:28.240 --> 01:02:31.720]  range into the prone officer Daniel Faulkner.
[01:02:31.720 --> 01:02:36.160]  One bullet was found in Faulkner, but no clear indent of the missed shots were ever found
[01:02:36.160 --> 01:02:38.520]  in the pavement surrounding the body.
[01:02:38.520 --> 01:02:42.620]  Recently conducted independent tests have conclusively demonstrated it is impossible
[01:02:42.620 --> 01:02:47.080]  to fire such a gun from a standing position to a sidewalk without the bullets leaving
[01:02:47.080 --> 01:02:48.680]  clearly visible marks.
[01:02:48.680 --> 01:02:55.680]  Jamal will receive a new hearing November 9th to review his death sentence.
[01:03:19.680 --> 01:03:20.680]  Okay.
[01:03:20.680 --> 01:03:21.680]  Okay folks.
[01:03:21.680 --> 01:03:22.680]  We're back.
[01:03:22.680 --> 01:03:23.680]  We're back.
[01:03:23.680 --> 01:03:52.680]  All right, we are back folks.
[01:03:52.680 --> 01:03:55.680]  We're talking with our very special guest Dawn.
[01:03:55.680 --> 01:03:59.680]  Sorry, Dawn, she's a law student.
[01:03:59.680 --> 01:04:01.680]  We're just laughing on the break here.
[01:04:01.680 --> 01:04:04.680]  And so, Dawn, what's the political climate like?
[01:04:04.680 --> 01:04:10.680]  Are the teachers, do they believe in the principles that Ron Paul teaches?
[01:04:10.680 --> 01:04:16.680]  You know, limited government, libertarian, sort of, you know, founding father type of
[01:04:16.680 --> 01:04:23.680]  business or is it just totally extreme to the max, statism, big government and that
[01:04:23.680 --> 01:04:25.680]  kind of stuff or somewhere in between?
[01:04:25.680 --> 01:04:26.680]  What's it like?
[01:04:26.680 --> 01:04:28.680]  Well, you're going to actually love this.
[01:04:28.680 --> 01:04:36.680]  The day that I enrolled and got accepted, as soon as my classes started, I joined the
[01:04:36.680 --> 01:04:41.680]  Federalist Society for the school, the Federalist Society at the national level and then the
[01:04:41.680 --> 01:04:47.680]  Christian Law School Association and finally the Student Bar Association.
[01:04:47.680 --> 01:04:50.680]  And I'm active in all of them while I'm going to school.
[01:04:50.680 --> 01:04:55.680]  There are a lot of people who are active in those organizations, although right now our
[01:04:55.680 --> 01:04:58.680]  Federalist Society is looking for some officers.
[01:04:58.680 --> 01:05:00.680]  Some people are graduating.
[01:05:00.680 --> 01:05:03.680]  My school is very nontraditional.
[01:05:03.680 --> 01:05:08.680]  And what I mean by this, it is a California school but all of our professors are not from
[01:05:08.680 --> 01:05:09.680]  California.
[01:05:09.680 --> 01:05:16.680]  So it's great that we're getting instructors from all over the country, some from Colorado.
[01:05:16.680 --> 01:05:19.680]  I have one from Massachusetts.
[01:05:19.680 --> 01:05:23.680]  I have another one from actually Atlanta, about an hour and a half from where I live.
[01:05:23.680 --> 01:05:27.680]  I am in a non-ABA approved school.
[01:05:27.680 --> 01:05:30.680]  So the American Bar Association did not approve my school.
[01:05:30.680 --> 01:05:36.680]  So in order to actually go and take the bar exam, I am going to have to do a bunch of
[01:05:36.680 --> 01:05:42.680]  extra cartwheels, backflips and, you know, different things so that I can be eligible
[01:05:42.680 --> 01:05:44.680]  to sit for the bar.
[01:05:44.680 --> 01:05:50.680]  We have people from all across the country, and in fact we actually have some soldiers
[01:05:50.680 --> 01:05:55.680]  from overseas who were in the first year law student classes last year.
[01:05:55.680 --> 01:06:02.680]  And they flew back from where they were to take the first year law student exam.
[01:06:02.680 --> 01:06:07.680]  If you don't pass that exam, you don't get the second year of law.
[01:06:07.680 --> 01:06:13.680]  So I'm still in that danger zone where I have just enough to be a little bit dangerous,
[01:06:13.680 --> 01:06:19.680]  but I can't even think about going on to the second year, which is where I'll pick up
[01:06:19.680 --> 01:06:26.680]  constitutional law and I'll pick up rules of evidence and civil pro and then also criminal
[01:06:26.680 --> 01:06:29.680]  procedure.
[01:06:29.680 --> 01:06:37.680]  It is a great climate because we have guest speakers from both sides, and we have a guest
[01:06:37.680 --> 01:06:44.680]  speaker bureau that is not necessarily sponsored, but we have student advisors that are
[01:06:44.680 --> 01:06:46.680]  professors.
[01:06:46.680 --> 01:06:51.680]  And they'll come on and, you know, they'll maybe debate some issues.
[01:06:51.680 --> 01:06:56.680]  They'll bring in some people with different viewpoints.
[01:06:56.680 --> 01:07:01.680]  One time we had somebody from the ACLU in there who came in and he lectured for about
[01:07:01.680 --> 01:07:04.680]  an hour, took some student questions.
[01:07:04.680 --> 01:07:10.680]  And then we had somebody from a different viewpoint come in on a similar topic about
[01:07:10.680 --> 01:07:12.680]  a month later.
[01:07:12.680 --> 01:07:19.680]  So it's actually a very balanced political climate, which is very comfortable for me
[01:07:19.680 --> 01:07:25.680]  anyway because I feel like I'm getting a chance to have my own opinion, to speak my
[01:07:25.680 --> 01:07:26.680]  own mind.
[01:07:26.680 --> 01:07:29.680]  And the way that they grade papers, you're going to find this great.
[01:07:29.680 --> 01:07:31.680]  You don't put your name on anything.
[01:07:31.680 --> 01:07:33.680]  You get a number.
[01:07:33.680 --> 01:07:35.680]  And it's all anonymous.
[01:07:35.680 --> 01:07:36.680]  It just goes to a professor.
[01:07:36.680 --> 01:07:40.680]  You don't even know which professor you're going to get for any of your papers.
[01:07:40.680 --> 01:07:45.680]  And it's, you know, several different attorneys will read it because all the professors are
[01:07:45.680 --> 01:07:46.680]  obviously attorneys.
[01:07:46.680 --> 01:07:49.680]  And then they'll give you grades, and those grades, you know, average, and that's what
[01:07:49.680 --> 01:07:50.680]  you get back.
[01:07:50.680 --> 01:07:56.680]  So you don't even have an issue as far as, you know, the politics may be affecting your
[01:07:56.680 --> 01:07:57.680]  grades.
[01:07:57.680 --> 01:07:59.680]  That is not an issue at all.
[01:07:59.680 --> 01:08:02.680]  I go to law school, like I said, in California.
[01:08:02.680 --> 01:08:03.680]  It's a hybrid.
[01:08:03.680 --> 01:08:05.680]  It's online, but it's also live.
[01:08:05.680 --> 01:08:06.680]  It's video lectures.
[01:08:06.680 --> 01:08:12.680]  It's, you know, you still have to show up in person for certain things.
[01:08:12.680 --> 01:08:15.680]  But it's a four-year part-time course, too.
[01:08:15.680 --> 01:08:20.680]  So most of us going have second careers, and we're balancing school with work.
[01:08:20.680 --> 01:08:27.680]  So we all have different life experiences, too.
[01:08:27.680 --> 01:08:32.680]  So you wouldn't say that there's, like, an overriding political climate in one way or
[01:08:32.680 --> 01:08:33.680]  the other?
[01:08:33.680 --> 01:08:38.680]  Like, do you sense, you know, any insidiousness on the part of any of the professors to try
[01:08:38.680 --> 01:08:45.680]  to indoctrinate with a statism type of mentality or entitlement type of mentality?
[01:08:45.680 --> 01:08:51.680]  Or is it just, I mean, are the professors, like, some are more status and some are more
[01:08:51.680 --> 01:08:52.680]  libertarian?
[01:08:52.680 --> 01:08:54.680]  Or, I mean, is it kind of like half and half?
[01:08:54.680 --> 01:08:59.680]  Yeah, I would say it's about half and half from the professors I have.
[01:08:59.680 --> 01:09:04.680]  The courses I'm taking are the 1L courses that every lawyer has to take.
[01:09:04.680 --> 01:09:08.680]  Like, whether or not they ever practice criminal law, you have to take it.
[01:09:08.680 --> 01:09:10.680]  Or tort law, you have to take it.
[01:09:10.680 --> 01:09:13.680]  Contract law, you still have to take it.
[01:09:13.680 --> 01:09:18.680]  But, yeah, I haven't seen anything one way or the other from any of my professors.
[01:09:18.680 --> 01:09:23.680]  And being involved with the Student Bar Association, you might think that you would see maybe
[01:09:23.680 --> 01:09:26.680]  something there, but there isn't.
[01:09:26.680 --> 01:09:29.680]  The student advisors have been great.
[01:09:29.680 --> 01:09:34.680]  Now, if I was at what we call a brick and mortar school, like Mercer is about an hour
[01:09:34.680 --> 01:09:35.680]  and a half from me.
[01:09:35.680 --> 01:09:36.680]  It's here in Georgia.
[01:09:36.680 --> 01:09:42.680]  That is a school that is well known for being pretty liberal.
[01:09:42.680 --> 01:09:48.680]  So there are several schools in the different states that, you know, they happen to have
[01:09:48.680 --> 01:09:52.680]  the pendulum swinging pretty seriously one side or the other.
[01:09:52.680 --> 01:09:53.680]  Now, what about the student body?
[01:09:53.680 --> 01:09:58.680]  Are most of the students libertarian-minded, small government, you know, believing that
[01:09:58.680 --> 01:10:01.680]  the only role of government is to protect life, liberty, and property, that sort of thing?
[01:10:01.680 --> 01:10:03.680]  Or is it a mix?
[01:10:03.680 --> 01:10:08.680]  I mean, because my friend who went to the law school at the University of New Mexico
[01:10:08.680 --> 01:10:10.680]  said that it wasn't just the professors.
[01:10:10.680 --> 01:10:12.680]  It was the students, too.
[01:10:12.680 --> 01:10:14.680]  They were like, what are you talking about original intent?
[01:10:14.680 --> 01:10:15.680]  What are you talking about small government?
[01:10:15.680 --> 01:10:17.680]  No, no, are you kidding me?
[01:10:17.680 --> 01:10:19.680]  The Constitution is a living document.
[01:10:19.680 --> 01:10:21.680]  No, it's not a living document.
[01:10:21.680 --> 01:10:25.680]  It doesn't change, you know, depending on what generation you're in.
[01:10:25.680 --> 01:10:27.680]  I mean, it's like the students were like that, too.
[01:10:27.680 --> 01:10:33.680]  It was just a prevailing mindset at the whole law school, even for like first-year students
[01:10:33.680 --> 01:10:35.680]  who were just coming in as freshmen.
[01:10:35.680 --> 01:10:39.680]  And it wasn't even that they had been indoctrinated or changed that much.
[01:10:39.680 --> 01:10:45.680]  So what is the political climate and attitudes of the students there?
[01:10:45.680 --> 01:10:48.680]  Well, there are student groups.
[01:10:48.680 --> 01:10:49.680]  It's funny.
[01:10:49.680 --> 01:10:56.680]  We do have posting threads and things that you can see where students fall on the political spectrum.
[01:10:56.680 --> 01:11:01.680]  And I think it kind of depends on geography somewhat.
[01:11:01.680 --> 01:11:06.680]  We do have students that fall across the United States in all the different time zones
[01:11:06.680 --> 01:11:07.680]  and all different areas.
[01:11:07.680 --> 01:11:11.680]  I happen to live in a very military area at Fort Benning.
[01:11:11.680 --> 01:11:18.680]  And we have some students who also live in other areas that would be considered military.
[01:11:18.680 --> 01:11:23.680]  And, you know, they tend to be, you know, much more libertarian
[01:11:23.680 --> 01:11:29.680]  than some of the students that, let's say, hail from Massachusetts.
[01:11:29.680 --> 01:11:37.680]  You know, rather than incriminate myself and name names, there are a few people that I guess the way
[01:11:37.680 --> 01:11:41.680]  that I can find them, it takes about two seconds, is their argument is not an argument.
[01:11:41.680 --> 01:11:43.680]  It's just an epithet.
[01:11:43.680 --> 01:11:44.680]  And that's how you can find them.
[01:11:44.680 --> 01:11:45.680]  And then you ignore them.
[01:11:45.680 --> 01:11:46.680]  You just delete them.
[01:11:46.680 --> 01:11:48.680]  And they're no longer your friend.
[01:11:48.680 --> 01:11:50.680]  And you just go on to the next one.
[01:11:50.680 --> 01:11:55.680]  Well, yeah, well, that's really good to hear because, you know,
[01:11:55.680 --> 01:12:00.680]  I'm glad to hear that there are law schools out there that at least see both sides, if not, you know, prevail.
[01:12:00.680 --> 01:12:05.680]  I would like to see the prevailing libertarian philosophy, of course, with the Founding Fathers intent.
[01:12:05.680 --> 01:12:10.680]  But my friend had told me, he said pretty much all the law schools,
[01:12:10.680 --> 01:12:15.680]  and I guess he was likely referring to the ones that are approved by the Bar Association or whatever,
[01:12:15.680 --> 01:12:18.680]  they are totally status to the max.
[01:12:18.680 --> 01:12:20.680]  I mean, just hardcore.
[01:12:20.680 --> 01:12:25.680]  And he said, in fact, when he was in law school, he said he could hardly get a date.
[01:12:25.680 --> 01:12:26.680]  Okay?
[01:12:26.680 --> 01:12:30.680]  He was blackballed by the whole student body.
[01:12:30.680 --> 01:12:33.680]  He said that they used to call him the white Satan.
[01:12:33.680 --> 01:12:34.680]  Right.
[01:12:34.680 --> 01:12:40.680]  He was like the only one in law school of like, you know, a couple thousand people, students,
[01:12:40.680 --> 01:12:44.680]  that believed in the founding principles of our country.
[01:12:44.680 --> 01:12:46.680]  It was incredible.
[01:12:46.680 --> 01:12:49.680]  And he said, you know, he was persecuted severely,
[01:12:49.680 --> 01:12:52.680]  and that's the way it is at most of these law schools now.
[01:12:52.680 --> 01:12:56.680]  So I'm glad to hear that it's not quite that bad for you.
[01:12:56.680 --> 01:12:59.680]  But again, it's because it's not approved by the Bar.
[01:12:59.680 --> 01:13:01.680]  I think that's the reason.
[01:13:01.680 --> 01:13:07.680]  That and also, this is interesting, that our demographic at the whole school is a little bit different.
[01:13:07.680 --> 01:13:10.680]  Most law schools, you know, these kids are 21, 22.
[01:13:10.680 --> 01:13:13.680]  They've lived off of student loans and their parents.
[01:13:13.680 --> 01:13:18.680]  And, you know, for them, big government and being taken care of is okay.
[01:13:18.680 --> 01:13:20.680]  And I have nothing against student loans.
[01:13:20.680 --> 01:13:22.680]  I'm going to be paying them back probably till I die.
[01:13:22.680 --> 01:13:26.680]  However, our student body, you know, we're older.
[01:13:26.680 --> 01:13:29.680]  All of us, this is the career we wanted.
[01:13:29.680 --> 01:13:31.680]  We couldn't afford law school when we were younger.
[01:13:31.680 --> 01:13:36.680]  We had children, and we stayed home with them until they were old enough to go to school.
[01:13:36.680 --> 01:13:38.680]  I have a job working.
[01:13:38.680 --> 01:13:42.680]  I do work for the Army, and that is my full-time day job.
[01:13:42.680 --> 01:13:46.680]  And then this is my most of the night job.
[01:13:46.680 --> 01:13:50.680]  And, you know, the average age, I believe, at the school is something like 40.
[01:13:50.680 --> 01:13:52.680]  People have master's degrees, PhDs.
[01:13:52.680 --> 01:13:54.680]  We have a few MDs.
[01:13:54.680 --> 01:13:56.680]  And these people, you know, they're educated.
[01:13:56.680 --> 01:14:00.680]  And their political views are much more mature.
[01:14:00.680 --> 01:14:04.680]  And they can stand up and answer questions that are asked.
[01:14:04.680 --> 01:14:07.680]  You're not talking about young kids anymore.
[01:14:07.680 --> 01:14:12.680]  And I really do think that it takes a long time for your political views to mature,
[01:14:12.680 --> 01:14:20.680]  to where you can see, you know, what the right answers are and where they come from.
[01:14:20.680 --> 01:14:25.680]  I think you don't get those anymore at the undergraduate level at any of the schools.
[01:14:25.680 --> 01:14:26.680]  Yes.
[01:14:26.680 --> 01:14:32.680]  So all you young whippersnappers, listen to the old guy.
[01:14:32.680 --> 01:14:33.680]  He's been around.
[01:14:33.680 --> 01:14:36.680]  He knows what's going on.
[01:14:36.680 --> 01:14:42.680]  I'll send you a check later for that one.
[01:14:42.680 --> 01:14:50.680]  Yeah, well, and it makes sense that people who are younger would cling to the entitlement mentality
[01:14:50.680 --> 01:14:54.680]  because they've been taken care of by their parents most of their life.
[01:14:54.680 --> 01:14:59.680]  And so they, you know, they've just lived in this sort of entitlement mentality.
[01:14:59.680 --> 01:15:04.680]  But, you know, once you get out there and have to start doing it yourself,
[01:15:04.680 --> 01:15:09.680]  then you start to realize that, you know, the entitlement thing, it just,
[01:15:09.680 --> 01:15:12.680]  it's not all it cracks up to be, you know.
[01:15:12.680 --> 01:15:15.680]  Government handouts equal loss of liberty.
[01:15:15.680 --> 01:15:17.680]  That's just all there is to it.
[01:15:17.680 --> 01:15:23.680]  And people who are younger, I think, are just not as well informed.
[01:15:23.680 --> 01:15:25.680]  They don't make that connection.
[01:15:25.680 --> 01:15:27.680]  What do you mean if I get a handout I'm losing my liberty?
[01:15:27.680 --> 01:15:32.680]  They don't click immediately, you know, that that's what it means.
[01:15:32.680 --> 01:15:36.680]  The bigger the government is, the more government handouts you get,
[01:15:36.680 --> 01:15:42.680]  the more government handouts the government's giving out in general equals loss of liberty,
[01:15:42.680 --> 01:15:45.680]  loss of property and enslavement.
[01:15:45.680 --> 01:15:48.680]  That's just all there is to it.
[01:15:48.680 --> 01:15:56.680]  I grew up in the inner city in Chicago, and most of the people around us were on welfare.
[01:15:56.680 --> 01:16:03.680]  And I heard a lot of people griping and complaining about these lazy good-for-nothings
[01:16:03.680 --> 01:16:05.680]  who collected welfare.
[01:16:05.680 --> 01:16:10.680]  Well, my parents owned some buildings and we rented it to people on welfare,
[01:16:10.680 --> 01:16:15.680]  and I came to a whole different position.
[01:16:15.680 --> 01:16:23.680]  I once had a family in the middle of winter in December in Chicago go for three weeks
[01:16:23.680 --> 01:16:28.680]  without hot water because I hadn't had time to get in and fix a water heater.
[01:16:28.680 --> 01:16:32.680]  Well, when I got there, the pilot had blown out.
[01:16:32.680 --> 01:16:34.680]  That was it.
[01:16:34.680 --> 01:16:43.680]  These people, because of what we did to them, are absolutely helpless and terrified.
[01:16:43.680 --> 01:16:47.680]  We've done them no favors, giving them a living.
[01:16:47.680 --> 01:16:52.680]  No, we're not doing anybody any favor by giving them a handout, that's for sure.
[01:16:52.680 --> 01:16:53.680]  Listen, we're going to break.
[01:16:53.680 --> 01:17:01.680]  We'll be right back on the other side with a few more comments and then we'll take calls.
[01:17:01.680 --> 01:17:04.680]  Capital Coin and Bullion is your local source for rare coins, precious metals
[01:17:04.680 --> 01:17:06.680]  and coin supplies in the Austin metro area.
[01:17:06.680 --> 01:17:08.680]  We also ship worldwide.
[01:17:08.680 --> 01:17:11.680]  We are a family-owned and operated business that offers competitive prices
[01:17:11.680 --> 01:17:13.680]  on your coin and metals purchases.
[01:17:13.680 --> 01:17:17.680]  We buy, sell, trade and consign rare coins, gold and silver coin collections,
[01:17:17.680 --> 01:17:19.680]  precious metals and scrap gold.
[01:17:19.680 --> 01:17:21.680]  We purchase and sell gold and jewelry items.
[01:17:21.680 --> 01:17:24.680]  We offer daily specials on coins and bullion.
[01:17:24.680 --> 01:17:29.680]  We are located at 5448 Burnett Road, Suite 3 at the corner of Burnett and Shulmont
[01:17:29.680 --> 01:17:33.680]  and we're open Mondays and Fridays, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 5.
[01:17:33.680 --> 01:17:36.680]  You are welcome to stop in our shop during regular business hours
[01:17:36.680 --> 01:17:41.680]  or call 512-646-6440 with any questions.
[01:17:41.680 --> 01:17:45.680]  Ask for chat and say you've heard about us on Google Law Radio or Texas Liberty Radio.
[01:17:45.680 --> 01:17:48.680]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion at the corner of Burnett and Shulmont
[01:17:48.680 --> 01:17:52.680]  and we're open Mondays and Fridays, 10 to 6, Saturdays, 10 to 5.
[01:17:52.680 --> 01:17:57.680]  That's Capital Coin and Bullion, 512-646-6440.
[01:17:57.680 --> 01:18:03.680]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters or even lawsuits?
[01:18:03.680 --> 01:18:07.680]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Mears Proven Method.
[01:18:07.680 --> 01:18:11.680]  Michael Mears has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors
[01:18:11.680 --> 01:18:13.680]  and now you can win two.
[01:18:13.680 --> 01:18:17.680]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court
[01:18:17.680 --> 01:18:19.680]  using federal civil rights statutes.
[01:18:19.680 --> 01:18:23.680]  What to do when contacted by phone, mail or court summons.
[01:18:23.680 --> 01:18:25.680]  How to answer letters and phone calls.
[01:18:25.680 --> 01:18:28.680]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report.
[01:18:28.680 --> 01:18:32.680]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away.
[01:18:32.680 --> 01:18:37.680]  The Michael Mears Proven Method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[01:18:37.680 --> 01:18:39.680]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[01:18:39.680 --> 01:18:43.680]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com
[01:18:43.680 --> 01:18:45.680]  and click on the blue Michael Mears banner
[01:18:45.680 --> 01:18:48.680]  or email michaelmears at yahoo.com.
[01:18:48.680 --> 01:18:56.680]  That's ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[01:18:56.680 --> 01:18:58.680]  to learn how to stop debt collectors now.
[01:18:58.680 --> 01:19:18.680]  ain't gonna blame me don't fool me well
[01:19:18.680 --> 01:19:23.680]  ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:19:23.680 --> 01:19:28.680]  I was blindsided but now I can see your plan
[01:19:28.680 --> 01:19:33.680]  you put the fear in my pocket took the money from my hand
[01:19:33.680 --> 01:19:42.680]  ain't gonna fool me with that same old trick again
[01:19:42.680 --> 01:19:54.680]  ain't gonna fool me
[01:19:54.680 --> 01:19:56.680]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[01:19:56.680 --> 01:19:59.680]  Alright, and just to finish up on this
[01:19:59.680 --> 01:20:03.680]  not doing anybody a favor by giving them a handout,
[01:20:03.680 --> 01:20:07.680]  absolutely not doing anybody a favor by giving them a handout,
[01:20:07.680 --> 01:20:08.680]  a government handout.
[01:20:08.680 --> 01:20:10.680]  Now, I'm not talking about charity.
[01:20:10.680 --> 01:20:14.680]  I'm not talking about volunteer private charity.
[01:20:14.680 --> 01:20:18.680]  You know, like, you know, I'll give the homeless people
[01:20:18.680 --> 01:20:23.680]  on the street corner, you know, a few bucks, you know, when I can.
[01:20:23.680 --> 01:20:24.680]  At the stoplight.
[01:20:24.680 --> 01:20:26.680]  They're all over town here in Austin.
[01:20:26.680 --> 01:20:28.680]  It's like a full-time profession for these people.
[01:20:28.680 --> 01:20:32.680]  But that's different because that's me making the decision
[01:20:32.680 --> 01:20:35.680]  to voluntarily give somebody charity.
[01:20:35.680 --> 01:20:37.680]  I'm talking about a government handout here
[01:20:37.680 --> 01:20:41.680]  where you're robbing one person and the government gives to another person.
[01:20:41.680 --> 01:20:44.680]  You're not doing anyone any favors with the government health care,
[01:20:44.680 --> 01:20:48.680]  with everything, and like these hardcore leftists will say,
[01:20:48.680 --> 01:20:53.680]  you are heartless, you're ruthless, you're cold, you're libertarians.
[01:20:53.680 --> 01:20:59.680]  Well, no, we're not because the thing is the free market
[01:20:59.680 --> 01:21:04.680]  is the most humanitarian way because in the free market,
[01:21:04.680 --> 01:21:07.680]  the true free market, which we don't even have a free market right now,
[01:21:07.680 --> 01:21:11.680]  I don't think we ever have except maybe in the early days of our republic,
[01:21:11.680 --> 01:21:17.680]  but in a true free market you get the best quality services
[01:21:17.680 --> 01:21:22.680]  for the lowest price to the most number of people.
[01:21:22.680 --> 01:21:23.680]  All right?
[01:21:23.680 --> 01:21:29.680]  Not everyone is going to get the services like in a socialist situation.
[01:21:29.680 --> 01:21:32.680]  No, everyone will not get the services,
[01:21:32.680 --> 01:21:34.680]  but because some people are not going to be able to afford it,
[01:21:34.680 --> 01:21:38.680]  but you get the highest quality services for the lowest price
[01:21:38.680 --> 01:21:40.680]  to the most number of people.
[01:21:40.680 --> 01:21:42.680]  That's as good as it's going to get.
[01:21:42.680 --> 01:21:46.680]  That is the most humanitarian way because when you have socialized medicine
[01:21:46.680 --> 01:21:51.680]  and all these other social programs and handouts, then there's no incentive,
[01:21:51.680 --> 01:21:55.680]  and so the quality of service goes down, and yet everyone may get it,
[01:21:55.680 --> 01:21:58.680]  but what are you really getting anyway?
[01:21:58.680 --> 01:22:02.680]  Absolutely, we're not doing any of us a favor with the government handout,
[01:22:02.680 --> 01:22:05.680]  but I know I'm sort of preaching to the choir here a little bit,
[01:22:05.680 --> 01:22:10.680]  but for new listeners, really, really, we need to study these principles,
[01:22:10.680 --> 01:22:14.680]  and I strongly recommend to listeners to read Michael Badnerich's book,
[01:22:14.680 --> 01:22:18.680]  Good to be King, and he talks about this in depth
[01:22:18.680 --> 01:22:20.680]  and does an analysis of the Constitution.
[01:22:20.680 --> 01:22:23.680]  He teaches this Constitution class, and he goes over all these principles.
[01:22:23.680 --> 01:22:29.680]  I'm telling you, Michael Badnerich could turn the most liberal, tree-hugging,
[01:22:29.680 --> 01:22:37.680]  hippie gun-grabber into a gun-toting, pure libertarian constitutionalist
[01:22:37.680 --> 01:22:42.680]  waving the gas and flag property rights activist in a matter of eight hours.
[01:22:42.680 --> 01:22:47.680]  Okay, the man is just incredible, so please, folks, get that book.
[01:22:47.680 --> 01:22:50.680]  It will change your life if you haven't read it already
[01:22:50.680 --> 01:22:52.680]  or if you're not already familiar with these principles.
[01:22:52.680 --> 01:22:56.680]  Now, before we go to the calls, I wanted to finish up on something
[01:22:56.680 --> 01:23:01.680]  we had begun talking about on the break a few breaks ago with Eddie.
[01:23:01.680 --> 01:23:09.680]  And, Dawn, you were mentioning to us that you like to have these types of discussions
[01:23:09.680 --> 01:23:11.680]  with people other than just at your law school
[01:23:11.680 --> 01:23:17.680]  because the law professors are not the ones that are going to be grading the bar exam.
[01:23:17.680 --> 01:23:20.680]  So will you explain a little bit about this?
[01:23:20.680 --> 01:23:23.680]  And we started talking with Eddie about what his research is,
[01:23:23.680 --> 01:23:26.680]  what he's found concerning ordinances and statutes and stuff.
[01:23:26.680 --> 01:23:29.680]  So will you explain a little bit about that?
[01:23:29.680 --> 01:23:30.680]  Sure.
[01:23:30.680 --> 01:23:35.680]  So the bar exam is been by the team of bar examiners,
[01:23:35.680 --> 01:23:40.680]  and there are actually quite a few exams you have to take.
[01:23:40.680 --> 01:23:44.680]  So the bar exam is the overarching, you've graduated with your Juris Doctorate,
[01:23:44.680 --> 01:23:46.680]  you want to be admitted to the bar.
[01:23:46.680 --> 01:23:50.680]  There are a ton of attorneys, or I'm sorry, not attorneys, but JDs, Juris Doctorates,
[01:23:50.680 --> 01:23:54.680]  who graduate every year, who never sit for the bar exam,
[01:23:54.680 --> 01:23:57.680]  who never get admitted to the bar and do not practice law.
[01:23:57.680 --> 01:24:04.680]  They become risk mitigation type people or they work in compliance,
[01:24:04.680 --> 01:24:09.680]  that kind of thing in a corporation, but they don't necessarily practice law.
[01:24:09.680 --> 01:24:16.680]  What the bar examiners do is they are attorneys from across the state.
[01:24:16.680 --> 01:24:20.680]  And we do what's called an MBE, a multi-state bar exam,
[01:24:20.680 --> 01:24:24.680]  and almost every single state has the same type of stuff.
[01:24:24.680 --> 01:24:30.680]  The multiple choice questions, which is a good part of it, is multi-state.
[01:24:30.680 --> 01:24:33.680]  There's right and there's wrong answers.
[01:24:33.680 --> 01:24:37.680]  But when you get down to the actual essay questions and the practicums
[01:24:37.680 --> 01:24:44.680]  and all the things that prove you understand, you know, at least the fundamentals,
[01:24:44.680 --> 01:24:49.680]  so that you can go ahead and start to practice law,
[01:24:49.680 --> 01:24:52.680]  usually under the tutelage of someone else, though.
[01:24:52.680 --> 01:24:57.680]  You know, the people that you get reading these things,
[01:24:57.680 --> 01:25:01.680]  there's no one right answer, but there is a checklist, like I was talking about earlier.
[01:25:01.680 --> 01:25:04.680]  And they're going to say, okay, well, with this fact pattern,
[01:25:04.680 --> 01:25:09.680]  they should have found these seven issues.
[01:25:09.680 --> 01:25:11.680]  They only found five.
[01:25:11.680 --> 01:25:13.680]  And these are not your professors.
[01:25:13.680 --> 01:25:18.680]  So if those professors did not teach you all of the rules of law
[01:25:18.680 --> 01:25:22.680]  or all of the issues, or, you know, for me, I was sleeping in class that day,
[01:25:22.680 --> 01:25:26.680]  I can definitely lose points, fail the essay, fail the bar exam.
[01:25:26.680 --> 01:25:31.680]  And it's not, it is not hard to fail the bar exam.
[01:25:31.680 --> 01:25:35.680]  There is a very tight curve between passing and failing.
[01:25:35.680 --> 01:25:40.680]  And the essay exams, they're subjective.
[01:25:40.680 --> 01:25:45.680]  They're subjective based on the examiners, not a right or a wrong.
[01:25:45.680 --> 01:25:47.680]  You can argue one side.
[01:25:47.680 --> 01:25:48.680]  You can argue the other side.
[01:25:48.680 --> 01:25:50.680]  The best way is to argue both sides.
[01:25:50.680 --> 01:25:52.680]  But then you have to draw a conclusion.
[01:25:52.680 --> 01:25:55.680]  And you start that conclusion with, you know, probably, or in this case,
[01:25:55.680 --> 01:25:59.680]  it is most likely that the court would find four.
[01:25:59.680 --> 01:26:04.680]  And that's a perfectly acceptable statement.
[01:26:04.680 --> 01:26:07.680]  But if you missed anything up above that conclusion,
[01:26:07.680 --> 01:26:10.680]  there's a good chance you're not going to get all the credit that you need
[01:26:10.680 --> 01:26:14.680]  in order to move on and pass to the next grade or the next level
[01:26:14.680 --> 01:26:16.680]  or to even be admitted at all.
[01:26:16.680 --> 01:26:18.680]  Wow.
[01:26:18.680 --> 01:26:21.680]  Have you ever heard of jurisdictionary, Dawn?
[01:26:21.680 --> 01:26:22.680]  Jurisdictionary?
[01:26:22.680 --> 01:26:24.680]  Yeah.
[01:26:24.680 --> 01:26:25.680]  No.
[01:26:25.680 --> 01:26:29.680]  You may want to study this at some point in your career.
[01:26:29.680 --> 01:26:35.680]  Jurisdictionary is a course written by a retired attorney, Dr. Frederick Graves.
[01:26:35.680 --> 01:26:39.680]  He's actually a host on this network on Monday nights.
[01:26:39.680 --> 01:26:45.680]  And he teaches people through this course how to deal with the court system
[01:26:45.680 --> 01:26:49.680]  pro se, everything that you need to file a lawsuit or defend yourself
[01:26:49.680 --> 01:26:54.680]  against the lawsuit, the rules of evidence, causes of action,
[01:26:54.680 --> 01:27:00.680]  how to set things up in order to have a successful appeal, everything.
[01:27:00.680 --> 01:27:01.680]  It's just amazing.
[01:27:01.680 --> 01:27:07.680]  And we recommend to all our listeners who are active pro se litigants
[01:27:07.680 --> 01:27:09.680]  to get the jurisdictionary course.
[01:27:09.680 --> 01:27:15.680]  And what Frederick Graves was saying is that they don't teach you these things in law school.
[01:27:15.680 --> 01:27:18.680]  He was saying they just teach you legal theory,
[01:27:18.680 --> 01:27:21.680]  at least when he was in law school, and they don't teach you anything practical,
[01:27:21.680 --> 01:27:26.680]  and that once you get out, these attorneys have to figure out these things for themselves.
[01:27:26.680 --> 01:27:33.680]  And he said everything he's ever needed to know as a practicing attorney
[01:27:33.680 --> 01:27:40.680]  in all the law books he ever studied boiled down to about 80 pages.
[01:27:40.680 --> 01:27:46.680]  And so he's condensed all this down, you know, like the federal rules of evidence,
[01:27:46.680 --> 01:27:51.680]  civil rules, you know, he says you first read the rules of civil procedure,
[01:27:51.680 --> 01:27:55.680]  rules of appellate procedure, these are all, you know, federal rules,
[01:27:55.680 --> 01:28:01.680]  and rules of evidence, and then he presents, you know, what causes of action are
[01:28:01.680 --> 01:28:05.680]  and how to deal with filing lawsuits and, you know, differences between motions
[01:28:05.680 --> 01:28:08.680]  and different types of pleadings and all these kinds of things.
[01:28:08.680 --> 01:28:15.680]  So it's very, very practical, you know, for attorneys and pro se alike as well.
[01:28:15.680 --> 01:28:17.680]  So you may want to check that out.
[01:28:17.680 --> 01:28:19.680]  We have that on our Web site too.
[01:28:19.680 --> 01:28:20.680]  Oh, that's great, yeah.
[01:28:20.680 --> 01:28:29.680]  I'm just thinking right now I'm going to kill whoever assigned me 225 pages in seven days.
[01:28:29.680 --> 01:28:31.680]  Wow, 80 pages, I wish.
[01:28:31.680 --> 01:28:32.680]  Okay.
[01:28:32.680 --> 01:28:33.680]  Yeah, yeah.
[01:28:33.680 --> 01:28:36.680]  And like one of the things that, you know, we're about to go to break,
[01:28:36.680 --> 01:28:41.680]  but I wanted to bring Eddie into the discussion about this concerning differences
[01:28:41.680 --> 01:28:46.680]  in jurisdictions and statutes and when certain statutes apply
[01:28:46.680 --> 01:28:49.680]  and to what classes of entities statutes apply.
[01:28:49.680 --> 01:28:55.680]  And one of the examples is, say for example, city ordinances here in the state of Texas.
[01:28:55.680 --> 01:28:59.680]  City ordinances do not apply, can never apply to We the People.
[01:28:59.680 --> 01:29:04.680]  City ordinances only apply to city employees.
[01:29:04.680 --> 01:29:09.680]  Okay, so all these city ordinances that are passed concerning curfews and, you know,
[01:29:09.680 --> 01:29:12.680]  you can't talk on your cell phone in the car in a school zone
[01:29:12.680 --> 01:29:17.680]  and all these ridiculous things, well, I just like bring it on, you know.
[01:29:17.680 --> 01:29:22.680]  I mean, I'm not asking for trouble, but it's like if they want to go there,
[01:29:22.680 --> 01:29:26.680]  it's like you can't tell me that I can't talk on my cell phone in a school zone
[01:29:26.680 --> 01:29:28.680]  because I'm not a city employee.
[01:29:28.680 --> 01:29:31.680]  Okay, maybe city employees can't do that because it is a city ordinance.
[01:29:31.680 --> 01:29:33.680]  And so there's little things like that.
[01:29:33.680 --> 01:29:38.680]  And, you know, these are first blush types of issues that have not been adjudicated yet,
[01:29:38.680 --> 01:29:45.680]  but there's nothing in Constitution that authorizes municipalities to enact law.
[01:29:45.680 --> 01:29:46.680]  Right.
[01:29:46.680 --> 01:29:51.680]  They can only enact ordinances that apply to the employees of the municipality.
[01:29:51.680 --> 01:29:56.680]  And I'll give a few more examples on the other side and see what you think about that.
[01:29:56.680 --> 01:29:57.680]  And then we'll start taking calls.
[01:29:57.680 --> 01:29:59.680]  We'll be right back.
[01:29:59.680 --> 01:30:02.680]  Top 10 reasons to question the official story of the Oklahoma City bombing.
[01:30:02.680 --> 01:30:04.680]  Number nine, the extra leg.
[01:30:04.680 --> 01:30:08.680]  Former Oklahoma State medical examiner Dr. Fred Jordan had stated,
[01:30:08.680 --> 01:30:12.680]  we had eight people with amputated left legs and nine left legs to account for.
[01:30:12.680 --> 01:30:14.680]  Chief pathologist for Northern Ireland T.K. Marshall,
[01:30:14.680 --> 01:30:17.680]  who performed over $2,500 autopsies in his time, stated,
[01:30:17.680 --> 01:30:19.680]  there's never been an unknown victim.
[01:30:19.680 --> 01:30:22.680]  This leg belonged to a perpetrator close enough to the bomb
[01:30:22.680 --> 01:30:25.680]  or his body to be damaged, leaving only a left leg behind.
[01:30:25.680 --> 01:30:26.680]  Who was this person?
[01:30:26.680 --> 01:30:29.680]  Please go to okcbombingtruth.com.
[01:30:29.680 --> 01:30:34.680]  If you have a Gmail account, Google reads every message you send or receive
[01:30:34.680 --> 01:30:37.680]  and records the keywords in a profile they keep on you.
[01:30:37.680 --> 01:30:40.680]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I think that's just plain creepy.
[01:30:40.680 --> 01:30:42.680]  I'll say more in a moment.
[01:30:42.680 --> 01:30:44.680]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:44.680 --> 01:30:47.680]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[01:30:47.680 --> 01:30:52.680]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:52.680 --> 01:30:54.680]  So protect your rights.
[01:30:54.680 --> 01:30:58.680]  Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[01:30:58.680 --> 01:31:00.680]  It's worth hanging on to.
[01:31:00.680 --> 01:31:03.680]  This public service announcement is brought to you by Startpage.com,
[01:31:03.680 --> 01:31:07.680]  the private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:31:07.680 --> 01:31:11.680]  Start over with Startpage.
[01:31:11.680 --> 01:31:15.680]  Hey, Gmail users, ever seen an online ad that exactly matches something
[01:31:15.680 --> 01:31:17.680]  you discussed in a private email?
[01:31:17.680 --> 01:31:18.680]  It's no coincidence.
[01:31:18.680 --> 01:31:22.680]  See, Google offers you Gmail, about a $40 annual value, for free,
[01:31:22.680 --> 01:31:26.680]  so they can get inside your head and figure out your interests by reading your mail.
[01:31:26.680 --> 01:31:30.680]  They say reading every message you send or receive helps them better target ads,
[01:31:30.680 --> 01:31:34.680]  but most people have no idea that Google keeps a record of their email contents,
[01:31:34.680 --> 01:31:36.680]  and they'd be pretty upset if they knew.
[01:31:36.680 --> 01:31:40.680]  When Gmail was first released, dozens of privacy experts asked Google
[01:31:40.680 --> 01:31:43.680]  to stay out of people's private correspondence.
[01:31:43.680 --> 01:31:45.680]  Unfortunately, Google ignored our request.
[01:31:45.680 --> 01:31:47.680]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht.
[01:31:47.680 --> 01:31:57.680]  More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32:17.680 --> 01:32:35.680]  The wicked come with temptations They're trying to buy the whole place
[01:32:35.680 --> 01:32:46.680]  They want to poison the nation Because they've fallen from grace
[01:32:46.680 --> 01:32:49.680]  They will not drink that cup
[01:32:49.680 --> 01:32:51.680]  Okay, folks, we are back.
[01:32:51.680 --> 01:32:56.680]  We're speaking with Don, and Don, I just want to give a couple more examples
[01:32:56.680 --> 01:33:01.680]  concerning some of the issues that Eddie has discovered reading the Texas
[01:33:01.680 --> 01:33:06.680]  Transportation Code and the enacting clause in the Constitution here in Texas
[01:33:06.680 --> 01:33:08.680]  and things like that.
[01:33:08.680 --> 01:33:13.680]  And another example I was going to give is concerning traffic tickets
[01:33:13.680 --> 01:33:16.680]  being handed out by municipal police.
[01:33:16.680 --> 01:33:18.680]  They have no authority to do that.
[01:33:18.680 --> 01:33:23.680]  Municipal police work for the municipality.
[01:33:23.680 --> 01:33:28.680]  They're only authorized to enforce city ordinances.
[01:33:28.680 --> 01:33:34.680]  They are not authorized to enforce state law, period.
[01:33:34.680 --> 01:33:37.680]  And so every time, but if you think about it,
[01:33:37.680 --> 01:33:42.680]  most of the traffic tickets are given by municipal police in big cities,
[01:33:42.680 --> 01:33:48.680]  not the sheriff or another authorized law enforcement entity
[01:33:48.680 --> 01:33:52.680]  that's actually authorized to enforce state law.
[01:33:52.680 --> 01:33:55.680]  But the Texas Transportation Code is a state law.
[01:33:55.680 --> 01:33:57.680]  It's not city ordinances.
[01:33:57.680 --> 01:34:00.680]  And even if there were traffic ordinances,
[01:34:00.680 --> 01:34:03.680]  they could never apply to We the People anyway.
[01:34:03.680 --> 01:34:06.680]  They could only apply if you were a city employee,
[01:34:06.680 --> 01:34:10.680]  like the example of the city ordinance or a city contractor.
[01:34:10.680 --> 01:34:12.680]  All right, like if you're talking,
[01:34:12.680 --> 01:34:15.680]  the ordinance against talking on your cell phone in a school zone.
[01:34:15.680 --> 01:34:18.680]  That only applies if you're a city contractor or a city employee.
[01:34:18.680 --> 01:34:25.680]  And so it is the biggest money racket scheme in the history of mankind,
[01:34:25.680 --> 01:34:27.680]  I would say, next to the Federal Reserve,
[01:34:27.680 --> 01:34:31.680]  what's going on with the traffic code,
[01:34:31.680 --> 01:34:36.680]  with the municipal police giving traffic tickets.
[01:34:36.680 --> 01:34:41.680]  And not only that, the traffic code in Texas doesn't apply anyway
[01:34:41.680 --> 01:34:44.680]  unless you're engaged in commerce on the roadways.
[01:34:44.680 --> 01:34:46.680]  It's very clear in the law.
[01:34:46.680 --> 01:34:50.680]  And going to work doesn't count because you engage in commerce
[01:34:50.680 --> 01:34:53.680]  once you get to your destination.
[01:34:53.680 --> 01:34:59.680]  You know, a farmer bringing his goods to the farmer's market doesn't count
[01:34:59.680 --> 01:35:02.680]  because he engages in commerce once he gets to the farmer's market.
[01:35:02.680 --> 01:35:07.680]  Only situations like a taxi cab driver, a limo driver, all right,
[01:35:07.680 --> 01:35:12.680]  18-wheelers where you're either hauling either a load of goods for hire
[01:35:12.680 --> 01:35:19.680]  from point A to point B or bringing a passenger from point A to point B.
[01:35:19.680 --> 01:35:21.680]  Then you're engaged in commerce on the roadways.
[01:35:21.680 --> 01:35:23.680]  You have to literally be in commerce on the roadways
[01:35:23.680 --> 01:35:26.680]  in order for any of the transportation code to apply at all.
[01:35:26.680 --> 01:35:31.680]  But people don't know this because they don't read the law,
[01:35:31.680 --> 01:35:35.680]  and the government takes advantage of people's ignorance.
[01:35:35.680 --> 01:35:37.680]  And while we're on that specific subject,
[01:35:37.680 --> 01:35:39.680]  there is something I wanted to bring up.
[01:35:39.680 --> 01:35:40.680]  I talked to Randy about it today.
[01:35:40.680 --> 01:35:43.680]  I have been looking at this all day to verify that it is true,
[01:35:43.680 --> 01:35:45.680]  that it's not fictional.
[01:35:45.680 --> 01:35:47.680]  But for those of you out there that are listening,
[01:35:47.680 --> 01:35:51.680]  especially you, Gary, in Georgia and you, Don, since you say that you're in Georgia,
[01:35:51.680 --> 01:35:53.680]  this is going to be very interesting to you.
[01:35:53.680 --> 01:35:58.680]  If you'll go to the www.georgia.gov website
[01:35:58.680 --> 01:36:01.680]  and in the banner at the top, click on Government,
[01:36:01.680 --> 01:36:04.680]  and under Government, go to State Government,
[01:36:04.680 --> 01:36:08.680]  and under that, go to Legislature.
[01:36:08.680 --> 01:36:10.680]  You'll come up to a page that's headed Legislature,
[01:36:10.680 --> 01:36:13.680]  and down below that you'll see five different links,
[01:36:13.680 --> 01:36:17.680]  the bottom of which is the Georgia General Assembly.
[01:36:17.680 --> 01:36:21.680]  If you will click on that, you'll come to a picture of the Georgia Capitol.
[01:36:21.680 --> 01:36:26.680]  Click on Representatives by Name on the left-hand side of the Capitol.
[01:36:26.680 --> 01:36:31.680]  Scroll down and find Bobby Franklin.
[01:36:31.680 --> 01:36:34.680]  When you find Bobby Franklin, it's going to give you information about him,
[01:36:34.680 --> 01:36:39.680]  and it's also got a set of links under Committees,
[01:36:39.680 --> 01:36:43.680]  and right to the right and above Committees, there are four things.
[01:36:43.680 --> 01:36:46.680]  Press Legislation, District Map, and Video Bio.
[01:36:46.680 --> 01:36:50.680]  Click on Legislation.
[01:36:50.680 --> 01:36:52.680]  Then you're going to go to the list of all the legislation
[01:36:52.680 --> 01:36:55.680]  that this particular representative has sponsored.
[01:36:55.680 --> 01:37:00.680]  Scroll down and find House Bill 875.
[01:37:00.680 --> 01:37:05.680]  Guess what House Bill 875 is, Deborah?
[01:37:05.680 --> 01:37:08.680]  I wasn't following your instructions on clicking on the links,
[01:37:08.680 --> 01:37:10.680]  but I don't know.
[01:37:10.680 --> 01:37:11.680]  What does it say?
[01:37:11.680 --> 01:37:14.680]  It is the Bike to Travel Act in Georgia.
[01:37:14.680 --> 01:37:15.680]  All right.
[01:37:15.680 --> 01:37:20.680]  It is specifically written to repeal Chapter 5 of Title 40
[01:37:20.680 --> 01:37:23.680]  of the Georgia Motor Vehicles and Traffic Code,
[01:37:23.680 --> 01:37:28.680]  requiring driver's licenses for the free people of Georgia
[01:37:28.680 --> 01:37:36.680]  as their constitutional rights give them the right to travel without licensure.
[01:37:36.680 --> 01:37:37.680]  Excellent.
[01:37:37.680 --> 01:37:41.680]  This particular bill takes every one of the best legal brief arguments
[01:37:41.680 --> 01:37:47.680]  I've ever constructed or come across and used to write this bill.
[01:37:47.680 --> 01:37:50.680]  It's even something I've never seen in a bill before.
[01:37:50.680 --> 01:37:54.680]  The bill actually references case citations.
[01:37:54.680 --> 01:37:55.680]  Wow.
[01:37:55.680 --> 01:37:56.680]  Very nice.
[01:37:56.680 --> 01:37:59.680]  Yeah, the right to travel issue is pretty well adjudicated,
[01:37:59.680 --> 01:38:02.680]  but they just keep ripping people off anyway.
[01:38:02.680 --> 01:38:07.680]  I mean, the whole business of the municipality getting all this income,
[01:38:07.680 --> 01:38:11.680]  I mean, for one thing, talking about the jurisdictional issue,
[01:38:11.680 --> 01:38:14.680]  the city prosecutor, the municipal prosecutor,
[01:38:14.680 --> 01:38:20.680]  has no authority to prosecute state laws in the municipal courts.
[01:38:20.680 --> 01:38:21.680]  No, absolutely not.
[01:38:21.680 --> 01:38:25.680]  I mean, the district attorney would have to prosecute traffic tickets
[01:38:25.680 --> 01:38:32.680]  or the county attorney in the state court or the county court respectively,
[01:38:32.680 --> 01:38:35.680]  the county attorney in the county court.
[01:38:35.680 --> 01:38:39.680]  You're aware of what due process actually means, right?
[01:38:39.680 --> 01:38:41.680]  Absolutely.
[01:38:41.680 --> 01:38:45.680]  It is the minimum amount of fairness in our legal system.
[01:38:45.680 --> 01:38:49.680]  Right, but it's also a specific set of procedures
[01:38:49.680 --> 01:38:53.680]  that precede and predate any actions by the legislature.
[01:38:53.680 --> 01:38:59.680]  They are, in fact, the procedures mandated under common law by the Magna Carta.
[01:38:59.680 --> 01:39:00.680]  Right.
[01:39:00.680 --> 01:39:04.680]  And they're enumerated here in Texas in the criminal procedure code,
[01:39:04.680 --> 01:39:06.680]  the Code of Criminal Procedure.
[01:39:06.680 --> 01:39:12.680]  Now, when these individuals fail to provide due process of law,
[01:39:12.680 --> 01:39:14.680]  which they do very often,
[01:39:14.680 --> 01:39:19.680]  then their case should be destroyed just by their own actions.
[01:39:19.680 --> 01:39:21.680]  And this city attorney is one of those.
[01:39:21.680 --> 01:39:25.680]  And I've got many court cases that I've researched that specifically states
[01:39:25.680 --> 01:39:30.680]  that due process is not what the legislature wants it to be.
[01:39:30.680 --> 01:39:36.680]  It is what the Magna Carta said it was before the legislature was ever conceived of,
[01:39:36.680 --> 01:39:39.680]  before the constitutions even existed.
[01:39:39.680 --> 01:39:43.680]  So one of the arguments I'm building is that in most states,
[01:39:43.680 --> 01:39:50.680]  the legislature is attempting to subjugate the common law to legislative statute law.
[01:39:50.680 --> 01:39:54.680]  Well, there's a problem with that, especially here in Texas,
[01:39:54.680 --> 01:40:01.680]  because here in Texas we have a specific section under Article 1 of the Bill of Rights, Section 29,
[01:40:01.680 --> 01:40:05.680]  that says that any law contrary to any provision of the Bill of Rights
[01:40:05.680 --> 01:40:11.680]  or any other part of the Constitution is void upon its face.
[01:40:11.680 --> 01:40:16.680]  Now, when they try to give us a set of due process procedures
[01:40:16.680 --> 01:40:21.680]  that are outside of the ability to be sustained under common law,
[01:40:21.680 --> 01:40:23.680]  you're being denied due process.
[01:40:23.680 --> 01:40:26.680]  And the reason I make that argument is this.
[01:40:26.680 --> 01:40:31.680]  If the Constitution itself is based upon the common law,
[01:40:31.680 --> 01:40:36.680]  the rights of the people protected by that Constitution existed as they did
[01:40:36.680 --> 01:40:40.680]  at the time of its creation under the common law,
[01:40:40.680 --> 01:40:47.680]  then no amount of statutory rewrite can remove the common law from the people for their protection.
[01:40:47.680 --> 01:40:54.680]  It can't subjugate their rights under statute because statute cannot supersede the common law in that regard.
[01:40:54.680 --> 01:41:02.680]  If it could, it can supersede the foundation upon which the Constitution itself is based, and that can't happen.
[01:41:02.680 --> 01:41:13.680]  Yeah, and not only that, but they're not even abiding by the statute either of due process, of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
[01:41:13.680 --> 01:41:18.680]  Like one example is every time a person is arrested,
[01:41:18.680 --> 01:41:23.680]  a crime is being committed by the police, aggravated assault, aggravated kidnapping,
[01:41:23.680 --> 01:41:27.680]  because they don't take the arrested person directly to a magistrate.
[01:41:27.680 --> 01:41:31.680]  They're being punished, they're being punished, and they haven't even been accused of a crime yet.
[01:41:31.680 --> 01:41:36.680]  They have to take you directly to a magistrate, not to the jail to get booked in the orange suit
[01:41:36.680 --> 01:41:41.680]  and putting you through the ring or in the mug shots and extracting biometric data from you and all these things.
[01:41:41.680 --> 01:41:43.680]  And then sometime the next day you see a magistrate.
[01:41:43.680 --> 01:41:44.680]  No, that's not the way it works.
[01:41:44.680 --> 01:41:46.680]  That's not what the law says.
[01:41:46.680 --> 01:41:48.680]  That's not what the principles of due process.
[01:41:48.680 --> 01:41:50.680]  They have to take you directly to a magistrate.
[01:41:50.680 --> 01:41:53.680]  And then the police officer tells you a side of the story.
[01:41:53.680 --> 01:41:57.680]  You tell your side of the story in a hearing for finding a probable cause.
[01:41:57.680 --> 01:41:59.680]  It's called an examining trial.
[01:41:59.680 --> 01:42:00.680]  They don't do that.
[01:42:00.680 --> 01:42:02.680]  They always bring people straight to jail first.
[01:42:02.680 --> 01:42:03.680]  It's totally breaking the law.
[01:42:03.680 --> 01:42:09.680]  And the other thing that they do all the time, they violate the criminal rules of evidence
[01:42:09.680 --> 01:42:15.680]  because while you're being booked, the police and the prosecutor are submitting evidence against you
[01:42:15.680 --> 01:42:21.680]  to the magistrate in an ex parte hearing when you're not there because you're being put in the orange suit.
[01:42:21.680 --> 01:42:27.680]  And then the magistrate makes a decision of probable cause while you're not there,
[01:42:27.680 --> 01:42:33.680]  decides the bail amounts when you're not there, and then just tells you later that's total violation statute.
[01:42:33.680 --> 01:42:36.680]  That's not a proper examining trial.
[01:42:36.680 --> 01:42:42.680]  And then not only that, another crime has been committed when the magistrate gives the file
[01:42:42.680 --> 01:42:45.680]  of all the evidence against you directly to the prosecutor.
[01:42:45.680 --> 01:42:46.680]  And the prosecutor holds onto it.
[01:42:46.680 --> 01:42:49.680]  That's felony tampering with a government document.
[01:42:49.680 --> 01:42:54.680]  The magistrate is supposed to seal the envelope, seal the documents, write his name across the seal,
[01:42:54.680 --> 01:42:56.680]  and forward it to the clerk of the court.
[01:42:56.680 --> 01:42:58.680]  It has to be filed with the court immediately.
[01:42:58.680 --> 01:43:00.680]  And it never is.
[01:43:00.680 --> 01:43:02.680]  It's always secreted away by the prosecutor.
[01:43:02.680 --> 01:43:06.680]  And then the prosecutor sits on it until he squeezes a deal out of people.
[01:43:06.680 --> 01:43:11.680]  And then you can't file any motions in your case because there is no case.
[01:43:11.680 --> 01:43:16.680]  And so that's why Randy wrote up his petition for writ of habeas corpus.
[01:43:16.680 --> 01:43:17.680]  Bring me to the courts.
[01:43:17.680 --> 01:43:19.680]  I demand to be heard by the courts.
[01:43:19.680 --> 01:43:22.680]  I demand to be able to defend myself and file motions in this case.
[01:43:22.680 --> 01:43:26.680]  It's totally illegal for the prosecutor to hold onto these documents and, oh,
[01:43:26.680 --> 01:43:30.680]  well, when the prosecutor decides after he squeezes a deal out of you, well, then he files.
[01:43:30.680 --> 01:43:31.680]  No, I'm sorry.
[01:43:31.680 --> 01:43:37.680]  There are literally every line of the due process statutes are violated in the state of Texas
[01:43:37.680 --> 01:43:39.680]  and pretty much everywhere else.
[01:43:39.680 --> 01:43:42.680]  So those are just some examples of things that we found.
[01:43:42.680 --> 01:43:47.680]  And when we get back, I want to get your take on what you were saying on the previous break
[01:43:47.680 --> 01:43:53.680]  about the legal theory and what, you know, what they teach in law school,
[01:43:53.680 --> 01:43:54.680]  what you were saying in the last break.
[01:43:54.680 --> 01:43:55.680]  And then we'll go to calls.
[01:43:55.680 --> 01:43:56.680]  We'll be right back.
[01:43:56.680 --> 01:44:07.680]  More energy, stronger immune power, improved sense of well-being.
[01:44:07.680 --> 01:44:10.680]  How many supplements have you heard boast of these benefits?
[01:44:10.680 --> 01:44:16.680]  The team behind Shintrician believes that supplements should over-deliver on their promises.
[01:44:16.680 --> 01:44:20.680]  And Shintrician does just that.
[01:44:20.680 --> 01:44:25.680]  Shintrician utilizes the ancient healing wisdom of Chinese medicine in conjunction
[01:44:25.680 --> 01:44:27.680]  with the science of modern nutrition.
[01:44:27.680 --> 01:44:30.680]  Adaptogenic herbs serve as the healing component.
[01:44:30.680 --> 01:44:36.680]  And organic hemp protein in greens and superfoods act as a balanced nutrient base.
[01:44:36.680 --> 01:44:40.680]  Plus, Shintrician tastes great in just water.
[01:44:40.680 --> 01:44:44.680]  This powder supplement is everything you'd want in a product.
[01:44:44.680 --> 01:44:46.680]  And it's all natural.
[01:44:46.680 --> 01:44:55.680]  Visit Shintrician.com to order yours or call 1-866-497-7436.
[01:44:55.680 --> 01:44:59.680]  After you use Shintrician, you'll believe in supplements again.
[01:44:59.680 --> 01:45:02.680]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:02.680 --> 01:45:06.680]  Win your case without an attorney with Juris Dictionary,
[01:45:06.680 --> 01:45:14.680]  the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course that will show you how in 24 hours, step by step.
[01:45:14.680 --> 01:45:18.680]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:45:18.680 --> 01:45:22.680]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.680 --> 01:45:27.680]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course, and now you can too.
[01:45:27.680 --> 01:45:33.680]  Juris Dictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:33.680 --> 01:45:38.680]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand
[01:45:38.680 --> 01:45:42.680]  about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:42.680 --> 01:45:48.680]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:48.680 --> 01:45:51.680]  pro se tactics, and much more.
[01:45:51.680 --> 01:46:00.680]  Please visit WTPRN.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:00.680 --> 01:46:28.680]  Thank you.
[01:46:28.680 --> 01:46:55.680]  Thank you.
[01:46:55.680 --> 01:47:04.680]  Okay, we're back, folks.
[01:47:04.680 --> 01:47:12.680]  And I wanted to go back to Dawn here to discuss something that she was bringing up on a previous break.
[01:47:12.680 --> 01:47:17.680]  This was right after we talked about Juris Dictionary and the 80 pages
[01:47:17.680 --> 01:47:22.680]  and how Dr. Frederick Graves teaches in his course.
[01:47:22.680 --> 01:47:26.680]  And he says it on his show all the time that, you know, out of everything that they made him read
[01:47:26.680 --> 01:47:32.680]  and learn and do in law school, in his practice, after he got out, everything boiled.
[01:47:32.680 --> 01:47:36.680]  The only thing he ever used, basically it amounted to 80 pages worth of material.
[01:47:36.680 --> 01:47:38.680]  And so that's what he teaches in his course.
[01:47:38.680 --> 01:47:45.680]  And you were saying, because he was saying that mostly what they taught him at the time was just legal theory.
[01:47:45.680 --> 01:47:49.680]  And so you were going to make a comment on that saying, yes, they teach a lot of legal theory,
[01:47:49.680 --> 01:47:50.680]  and you were talking about the interpretation.
[01:47:50.680 --> 01:47:52.680]  So can you explain that, please?
[01:47:52.680 --> 01:47:53.680]  Sure.
[01:47:53.680 --> 01:47:55.680]  They do teach a lot of interpretation.
[01:47:55.680 --> 01:48:04.680]  And some of this I've actually picked up on my own that, you know, no instructor, this is that lead the horse to water thing.
[01:48:04.680 --> 01:48:08.680]  They don't actually give you a lot of information sometimes.
[01:48:08.680 --> 01:48:15.680]  So they'll kind of box you in with the law so that you have no choice but to look up and go, oh, that's right.
[01:48:15.680 --> 01:48:20.680]  Okay, so I'm in the den with Mrs. White and oh, got it.
[01:48:20.680 --> 01:48:31.680]  So with the nuances of the law, the way the law is interpreted, there are adverbs in these laws.
[01:48:31.680 --> 01:48:41.680]  And the way that these adverbs modify all of the elements behind it that are separated by commas,
[01:48:41.680 --> 01:48:49.680]  like willfully do something and something or something, depending on what those words are in there,
[01:48:49.680 --> 01:48:55.680]  do you have to be guilty of all of those things or just one of those things?
[01:48:55.680 --> 01:49:02.680]  Well, Don, doesn't this boil down to simple grammar and sentence diagramming?
[01:49:02.680 --> 01:49:04.680]  You would think.
[01:49:04.680 --> 01:49:05.680]  You would think.
[01:49:05.680 --> 01:49:09.680]  But arguments can be made in both ways, and that is one thing.
[01:49:09.680 --> 01:49:18.680]  When they say there's no one right answer, they will allow you to argue, and the best argument sets a precedent.
[01:49:18.680 --> 01:49:28.680]  Eddie, will you bring up the discussion we had earlier, I think it's earlier today, on that exact subject?
[01:49:28.680 --> 01:49:30.680]  In which way are we talking about?
[01:49:30.680 --> 01:49:33.680]  The positioning of commas.
[01:49:33.680 --> 01:49:44.680]  Ah, yes. Yeah, what I'm doing right now is I'm researching the original enactment in 1995 of the Texas Transportation Code.
[01:49:44.680 --> 01:49:53.680]  And basically what is supposed to happen in these statutory revisions is that the Texas Legislative Council
[01:49:53.680 --> 01:50:03.680]  makes recommendations to the legislative members on what basically they rewrite the statutes is what they do,
[01:50:03.680 --> 01:50:10.680]  and then they submit them to the legislature to vote upon them and pass them in their current iteration that they rewrote them into.
[01:50:10.680 --> 01:50:19.680]  But what they do is there are 14 people that sit on this committee, and their purpose is to read through the statutes,
[01:50:19.680 --> 01:50:26.680]  determine whether there's redundancy, where the language can be cleaned up to remove language
[01:50:26.680 --> 01:50:35.680]  that would cause the interpretation to be unconstitutional or outside the scope of the actual intent of the bill itself,
[01:50:35.680 --> 01:50:41.680]  and so on and so forth, and to basically organize it in a fashion where everything is easier to reference.
[01:50:41.680 --> 01:50:50.680]  Well, it turns out that what they're also doing is rewriting the law without informing the legislature
[01:50:50.680 --> 01:50:54.680]  that they have made a substantive change to the law by their rewrite.
[01:50:54.680 --> 01:50:59.680]  Right, and I'll bet as far as traffic goes, there's probably a whole lot of strict liability.
[01:50:59.680 --> 01:51:08.680]  Yes and no, but the point here being that at the beginning of every statute we have in Texas
[01:51:08.680 --> 01:51:15.680]  other than the penal code, it specifically says that this statute is part of the statutory revision program,
[01:51:15.680 --> 01:51:21.680]  but it is enacted without any substantive change to the underlying law,
[01:51:21.680 --> 01:51:30.680]  when in fact by the removal of commas in certain locations or the reconstruction of the wording of certain paragraphs,
[01:51:30.680 --> 01:51:37.680]  they have in fact constructed it to apply to something completely outside the scope of the original language.
[01:51:37.680 --> 01:51:45.680]  Absolutely. It doesn't take a whole lot, and that is where I guess lawyers make their money.
[01:51:45.680 --> 01:51:52.680]  I'm in my first year, but I can see it when we're backed into corners by professors.
[01:51:52.680 --> 01:51:58.680]  Well, what if it meant this instead? Well, I can see how it could mean that also.
[01:51:58.680 --> 01:52:03.680]  Well, argue it that way. Well, argue it that way, and we do get a lot of that.
[01:52:03.680 --> 01:52:11.680]  Yeah, and here's my problem with that. If the law is so uncertain as to be able to be viewable from multiple aspects
[01:52:11.680 --> 01:52:18.680]  with no definitive answer, the law is null and void for being completely ambiguous.
[01:52:18.680 --> 01:52:26.680]  Well, let me carry out that only by saying that may not be true depending on the fact pattern.
[01:52:26.680 --> 01:52:31.680]  The facts to the case will point the law typically in one direction or the other.
[01:52:31.680 --> 01:52:37.680]  When you're looking at the rules of law and the application of the law to something that is already very abstract
[01:52:37.680 --> 01:52:44.680]  because you're just learning how to think, then it's not anything that you're being taught to be ambiguous.
[01:52:44.680 --> 01:52:52.680]  You're being taught how to think, how to look, where to look, how to interpret, how to argue.
[01:52:52.680 --> 01:52:57.680]  You have to be the best advocate you can for your client. That is your job.
[01:52:57.680 --> 01:53:06.680]  If you're not, you're going to be in trouble. But if the fact pattern is applied to that argument,
[01:53:06.680 --> 01:53:13.680]  there is an answer. It may not be a right or wrong answer as far as the law school essay goes,
[01:53:13.680 --> 01:53:20.680]  but there is one answer that is better than the other. You can get points on either side.
[01:53:20.680 --> 01:53:29.680]  You can't learn to argue a single case with facts that are completely made up,
[01:53:29.680 --> 01:53:35.680]  that don't actually apply to any real substantive law, and all you're doing is you're being taught how to think about the law
[01:53:35.680 --> 01:53:40.680]  and how to interpret it. There are ambiguous laws, and there are laws that should be void for vagueness,
[01:53:40.680 --> 01:53:47.680]  but they're not all the law. Some of the laws that we have are very clear once you have the facts,
[01:53:47.680 --> 01:53:52.680]  and they can be applied just like you had that little shape toy thing when you were a kid
[01:53:52.680 --> 01:53:55.680]  where you put the star in the star and the triangle in the triangle.
[01:53:55.680 --> 01:54:02.680]  There are some facts that you apply in that way, and you can see it pretty clear where it is to apply.
[01:54:02.680 --> 01:54:08.680]  Don, I wanted to ask you something along those same lines, because Randy and I have discussed this on the air,
[01:54:08.680 --> 01:54:19.680]  all three of us concerning interpreting the law, and the way that I've learned, at least from what Randy has shown
[01:54:19.680 --> 01:54:26.680]  and from the legal research that I've done myself, you look up case law to support your side,
[01:54:26.680 --> 01:54:32.680]  or possibly that would even shoot down your legal argument in that it's your job to come up with the case law,
[01:54:32.680 --> 01:54:40.680]  the supporting case law to support the interpretation that you are asserting, because the judges don't really want to hear
[01:54:40.680 --> 01:54:45.680]  your personal interpretation of what the law is, because that's really the judge's job,
[01:54:45.680 --> 01:54:52.680]  and so we're supposed to bring case law to the table so that the judge will have something substantive
[01:54:52.680 --> 01:54:58.680]  to make a ruling on concerning the interpretation that you're asserting. Is that correct?
[01:54:58.680 --> 01:55:02.680]  Or does it also go along with the facts?
[01:55:02.680 --> 01:55:10.680]  When you're doing these classes, are they expecting you to come up with case law research to support your interpretation,
[01:55:10.680 --> 01:55:14.680]  or is it strictly just interpretation based on facts?
[01:55:14.680 --> 01:55:22.680]  It's on facts, it's on logic, it's on what your understanding of the rule of law is, and where you are in classes as well.
[01:55:22.680 --> 01:55:29.680]  If you don't have all the substantive law, like you don't have, let's say, all of the defenses down,
[01:55:29.680 --> 01:55:36.680]  then it's very hard to give a complete answer, if that helps.
[01:55:36.680 --> 01:55:42.680]  The one thing that we do learn is that precedent is precedent is precedent is precedent.
[01:55:42.680 --> 01:55:46.680]  And you're right, judges don't necessarily want to hear your interpretation.
[01:55:46.680 --> 01:55:50.680]  You have to give them the case law so they have something firm to rule on.
[01:55:50.680 --> 01:55:58.680]  And if you have a case going one way or a case going another way,
[01:55:58.680 --> 01:56:05.680]  then they have to have something, a better argument on one side than the other based on your facts.
[01:56:05.680 --> 01:56:13.680]  That's where it turns. It turns on, judges, as far as I know anyway, and some of the things that I've read,
[01:56:13.680 --> 01:56:21.680]  and again, I have to turn back to Justice Scalia's book on persuading judges. It's actually a great book.
[01:56:21.680 --> 01:56:27.680]  They don't like to make new law. That gets them in trouble and gets them overturned.
[01:56:27.680 --> 01:56:38.680]  They want to have something substantive that they can turn to, and when they go through their legal review, they're okay.
[01:56:38.680 --> 01:56:46.680]  Judges also have to go through legal review, and they have to get all of their cases looked at or a portion of their cases looked at.
[01:56:46.680 --> 01:56:53.680]  This book was also written by Brian Garner, and he's one of the editors of Black Law Dictionary.
[01:56:53.680 --> 01:56:59.680]  So I would recommend, it is a little bit more probably legalese than most people would like to read,
[01:56:59.680 --> 01:57:09.680]  but it is kind of a step-by-step of how to clear the clutter and make your case as strong as possible by going in there
[01:57:09.680 --> 01:57:19.680]  and talking to a judge, like he's a real person, and how to make your case clear enough that he can follow it along.
[01:57:19.680 --> 01:57:25.680]  One thing he says in there is he doesn't want to read 15 pages before he gets to the issue.
[01:57:25.680 --> 01:57:31.680]  And that's, I think, something, again, the fire act that we talked about earlier, I think, kind of helped clear that up.
[01:57:31.680 --> 01:57:37.680]  At least that's what we've been taught is, you know, in the military we call it bluff, bottom line up front.
[01:57:37.680 --> 01:57:41.680]  This is what it is. And then you discuss it from there.
[01:57:41.680 --> 01:57:46.680]  Right. And who would want to read 15 pages before getting to the point anyway?
[01:57:46.680 --> 01:57:49.680]  Well, I'm a law student.
[01:57:49.680 --> 01:57:57.680]  I mean, I think maybe a good rule of thumb is that if something would annoy you, then it's probably going to annoy the judge.
[01:57:57.680 --> 01:58:00.680]  I think you're probably right.
[01:58:00.680 --> 01:58:02.680]  Okay, listen, we're going to break.
[01:58:02.680 --> 01:58:04.680]  We're going to the top of the hour break.
[01:58:04.680 --> 01:58:09.680]  We're going to go to Elise in Washington on the other side, Elise and other callers.
[01:58:09.680 --> 01:58:12.680]  Thank you for being so patient.
[01:58:12.680 --> 01:58:17.680]  And after Elise, we are going to bring on Pastor Massad as well.
[01:58:17.680 --> 01:58:20.680]  So callers, just hang on the line. We'll get to all your calls.
[01:58:20.680 --> 01:58:26.680]  We're at the midway point here in our Friday evening info marathon.
[01:58:26.680 --> 01:58:32.680]  It's October 1st, 2010, and we will be right back after the top of the hour news.
[01:58:32.680 --> 01:58:58.680]  Sign in, World Report.
[01:59:02.680 --> 01:59:08.680]  Micro plant powder will change your life by removing all types of positive toxins such as heavy metals,
[01:59:08.680 --> 01:59:14.680]  parasites, bacteria, viruses and fungus from the digestive tract and stomach wall so you can absorb nutrients.
[01:59:14.680 --> 01:59:21.680]  Micro plant powder is 89% silica and packed with a negative charge that attracts positive toxins from the blood,
[01:59:21.680 --> 01:59:23.680]  organs, spine and brain.
[01:59:23.680 --> 01:59:29.680]  This product has the ability to rebuild cartilage and bone, which allows synovial fluid to return to the joints.
[01:59:29.680 --> 01:59:35.680]  Silica is a precursor to calcium, meaning the body turns silica into calcium and is great for the heart.
[01:59:35.680 --> 01:59:41.680]  There is no better time than now to have micro plant powder on your shelf or in your storage shelter.
[01:59:41.680 --> 01:59:44.680]  And with an unlimited shelf life, you can store it anywhere.
[01:59:44.680 --> 01:59:49.680]  Call 908-691-2608 or visit hempusa.org.
[01:59:49.680 --> 01:59:51.680]  It's a great way to change your life.
[01:59:51.680 --> 01:59:59.680]  So call 908-691-2608 or visit us at hempusa.org today.