Poor Judy does not understand that default is not automatic, and that since he failed to state a claim upon which he may be granted relief.
In response, Judy filed a motion for rehearing “en Blanc”… I kid you not… A petition for rehearing en Banc asks the full court to render judgment. Given the frivolous nature of the case, this will not go anywhere.
I may have missed reporting on this one. Orly had raised some incredible arguments and the Appeal’s Court responded ‘kindly’ after the State had declined to even respond… Orly at her best and worst.
Orly Taitz appeals the district court’s orders granting summary judgment to Defendant in this action alleging denying Taitz’s motion to reconsider; and denying her motion to reopen and recuse. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Taitz v. Colvin, No. 1:13-cv-01878-ELH (D. Md. May 13, 2014; June 13, 2014; July 25, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Terry has decided to file some documents, even though it is not clear if he has been qualified to proceed ‘pro se’ or is filing through a lawyer. A real lawyer would not likely have been willing to file these documents.
ACTION DATE TEXT
11/25/2014 OBJECTION WITH MOTION TO DISMISS
11/25/2014 DEMAND FOR QUALIFYING DOCUMENTS-HANKINSON
11/25/2014 DEMAND FOR QUALIFYING DOCUMENTS-MEGGS
11/25/2014 OBJECTION-NOT GUILTY PLEA
11/24/2014 DEMAND FOR BILL OF MORE SPECIFIC PARTICULARS AND
MEMORANDA OF LAW IN SUPPORT THEREOF
11/24/2014 OBJECTION-DEMAND FOR ACCUSED TO HIRE ATTORNEY
Terry desperately needs a lawyer in order to explain to him the rules. The Judge is protecting Terry’s due process rights to be represented by a lawyer, until a proper hearing has been performed. Terry should have filed a motion for a ‘Faretta’ hearing to determine if he is allowed to be ‘pro se’.
The demand for bill of particulars etc, will be given to Terry once he 1) has a lawyer 2) or he has been allowed to proceed ‘pro se’.
The object to the ‘not guilty’ plea is a strange request. Terry may be objecting to the Judge having entered a ‘not guilty’ plea during the arraignment, since Terry failed to appear with a lawyer and was not properly vetted to proceed ‘pro se’. The Judge again, is protecting Terry’s due process rights.
The demands for qualifying documents is pure ‘sovCit’ and likely involves a request for oath and bond. What a waste of the Court’s time.
As to the ‘object with motion to dismiss’, that motion will not be considered until Terry’s Faretta hearing has been concluded, and it may have to be refiled by a real lawyer, who may not be willing to file it, as it may very well be another SovCit filing.
For a more complete explanation, read Paul Lentz’s posting that the Fogbow
A hilarious interview with ‘Sheriff’ Arpaio who is trying to defend his claims that the birth certificate is fraudulent but is unwilling to reveal why his investigations are not done, citing “on-going investigation”. And yet, he is willing to already make the claim of ‘fraudulent’.
What a joker, and those people who believe that there is any evidence for ‘probable cause’ need to realize that the work of his so-called ‘experts’ has been largely debunked. And nobody really cares about Arpaio’s ‘investigations’ anymore.
Von NotHaus, who will be sentenced next month, had argued that federal laws prohibiting counterfeit currency were unconstitutional, and he said prosecutors didn’t present enough evidence to prove he intended to violate those laws.
“When the people own the money, they control the government,” von NotHaus said in 1999. “When the government owns the money, it controls the people.”
The judge dismissed his arguments that anti-counterfeit laws infringed the public’s right to privately barter, and von NotHaus’ claims it was not illegal to compete with the Federal Reserve.
No travel outside Carolina without permission, no visits to DC unless for Court visits, active GPS monitoring, Rod must pay monthly fees, list of weapons to be declared within 24 hours. Rod relinquishes all claims to weapons that were confiscated. They will drop failure to appear charge, jail time 0-6 months, fine $500-$5000. A criminal conviction may also prohibit Rod from owning firearms.
11/21/2014 Minute Entry; for proceedings held before Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts: Plea Agreement Hearing as to RODNEY CLASS held on 11/21/2014. REFERRAL TO PROBATION OFFICE for Presentence Investigation as to RODNEY CLASS. Sentencing Memoranda/Motions due by 1/30/2015. Sentencing set for 2/9/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 before Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts. Bond Status of Defendant: Personal Recognizance with Electronic Monitoring; Court Reporter: William Zaremba; Defense Attorney: PRO SE/A.J. Kramer; US Attorney: Jeffrey Pearlman; Pretrial Officer: Vaugh Wilson; (hs) Modified on 11/24/2014 (hs). (Entered: 11/24/2014)
11/21/2014 CORRECTED***Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts: Plea Agreement Hearing as to RODNEY CLASS held on 11/21/2014, Guilty Plea entered as to Count 1s., REFERRAL TO PROBATION OFFICE for Presentence investigation. Sentencing Memoranda/Motions due by 1/30/2015. Release Order issued. Sentencing set for 2/9/2015 at 10:00 AM in Courtroom 9 before Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts. Bond Status of Defendant: Personal Recognizance with Electronic Monitoring; Court Reporter: William Zaremba Defense Attorney: PRO Se/A.J. Kramer standby counsel; US Attorney: Jeffrey Pearlman; Pretrial Officer: Vaughn Wilson; (hs) (Entered: 11/24/2014)
11/21/2014 167 WAIVER of Right to Trial by Jury as to RODNEY CLASS, Approved by Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts on 11/21/2014. (hs) (Entered: 11/24/2014)
11/21/2014 169 PLEA AGREEMENT as to RODNEY CLASS (hs) (Entered: 11/24/2014)
11/21/2014 170 ORDER; Setting Conditions of Release as to RODNEY CLASS: Personal Recognizance/Electronic Monitoring, Signed by Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts on 11/21/2014. (hs) (Entered: 11/24/2014)
11/17/2014 166 LEAVE TO FILE DENIED – Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus submitted by Dwight Class, non-party, as to RODNEY CLASS. “Leave for non-party to file petition DENIED,” signed by Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts on 11/13/14. This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. (A copy of the front page of the document mailed to RODNEY CLASS and Dwight Class.)(mlp) (Entered: 11/17/2014)
What are they up to this time? More knitting patterns filed with courts?
“EMERGENCY National Liberty Alliance FLORIDA MEETING – TUESDAY 11-18-14 at 8PM EST Call-in number (605) 562-3140 – access code 385698, PRESS *6 TO MUTE/UNMUTE Every Floridian needs to attend this meeting of grave importance, any Florida leaders with conflicting meetings are to cancel and attend this mandatory Florida meeting and advise their attendees to attend this meeting. Thank You.
Meeting of grave importance. I guess a $0.02 stamped letter was returned?…
An incredible string of failed lawsuits.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF LINCOLN THOMAS O. BRANFORD October 24, 2014 – FRIDAY
Circuit Court P:Andrisa Kylie133036 State v Walker Christopher Robert 303 Trial Twelve Person Jury / Attempt Elude Police/Vehicle / Felon/ Fail Carry/Present License
Circuit Court P:Hupp Jw133411 State v Walker Christopher Robert 303Trial Twelve Person Jury / Failure To Appear-1 / Felony
Circuit Court13T1378 State v Walker Christorher Robert 303Hearing / DWS/Violation / Violation303/ Driving Uninsured – Tracking w/133036
Chris’s trial November 6, 2014. Chris was eventually found not guilty according to Laura, which makes his failure to appear particularly painful, as this is a felony charge.
Seems Chris wanted to subpoena the jurors who were at his original trial, when he failed to show up. Christopher Robert, family of Walker… What a foolish person. The judge explains that the previous jurors are not going to be on the present venire. Judge explains that both sides have the opportunity to inquire if the jurors were present.
The official transcript of Terry’s first arraignment has been published and agrees with the audio recording which was made, apparently without Court approval.
Klayman is not getting any traction.
Larry Elliott Klayman, Petitioner
Mark Zuckerberg, et al.
Docketed: September 15, 2014
Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Case Nos.: (13-7017)
Decision Date: June 13, 2014
~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sep 11 2014 Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 15, 2014)
Oct 29 2014 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 14, 2014.
Nov 17 2014 Petition DENIED.
That’s not the end, however, as Irion confirmed that he has already filed an appeal and a new motion to arrest judgment with the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals.
“We’re doing everything we can,” Irion said.
Slim Cognito at the Fogbow has done a partial transcription of Terry’s latest ‘interview’
And Terry keeps speaking in public about the events surrounding his arrest… Does he not understand that anything he says will be used against him? He freely testified against himself to the FDLE and now he is giving them more. Fascinating…
“I was called for jury duty, grand jury. They asked for a volunteer for foreman. I raised his hand. . I like to run things. I was charged with the responsibility of looking out for public corruption, communism, communistic organizations and efforts being made in the county. A member of the public brought information to me, the Common Core curriculum. The way it was presented to me, I did initial investigation. It was my responsibility. I prepared little package. I asked the state attorney to convene the grand jury. He finally agreed. He set a date. I asked the SA to do three things, 1. Send out jury instructions. 2. Send a copy of FL supreme court grand jury handbook and 3 send a copy of US constitution, with instructions to read before meeting. He sent out the rule book from the supreme court and instructions but not the constitution and not suggestion that they read all of this. They were not prepared. The SA, contrary to his statutes, and instructions put before the court, violated a number of statues and he also violated my position as grand jury foreman to the point he committed felonies. I think about eight was the total.
I quickly called an end to the session to void the grand jury session because he corrupted it. I quickly put together a 7-page report to the judge. I outlined everything that occurred. What I said was his infractions, presented to the judge, who to this day has never responded. Instead she referred it to the chief judge. I then filed a copy because I was getting very concerned about the way the court was handling things. I presented a copy to the sheriff. The clerk of court recorded those documents. About two hours after that, she pulled them back out. Now that’s a felony in itself. That is federal and state violations and the federal is 10 years in prison with fine, state is 3 years in prison with fine. Apparently that’s not considered a crime because nothing’s been done.
I gave a copy of allegations to sheriff. I have not received any acknowledgement from any of them. No investigations, no findings, no response at all. I went several days before I finally got a response out of chief judge but he didn’t respond. He charged me with failing to reach out to him when I had the problem with the SA and basically it was all my fault. It was several days before I found out this guy was in existence, I think he was just trying to cover himself.
I found out some people were putting together the people’s grand jury. I contacted them. They said they would consider the case. I tried it with the people of the statutory grand jury but it was corrupted so I will try it with the People’s Grand Jury formed under common law. I presented this to them and they issued a true bill on the common core curriculum. I also presented the case that I had with the SA. They issued a true bill on that. I filed that and took them to the sheriff. I said I’m done. I did my duty. I did what I swore to do and this is over.
The next thing I know I’m getting a call from the FDLE. I was anxious to talk to them and explain o them what was going on. I expected them to investigate my allegations both on CC and the SA. Instead they were investigating me. During a second interrogation, they started it with where did I find statues that gave me the right to form a grand jury and take my own actions, _____ went right over their heads. They said, “Well did you have your grand jury sworn in by a judge?” I said first of all it’s not my grand jury, it’s the people’s grand jury. I didn’t force the people to come together and d this. They did it because they were worried about the way things were handled. I said, No, a judge didn’t swear them in. They were sworn in by the clerk. I think this grand jury even had a sgt. at arms. They can do pretty much anything they want because they’re the people. . This is the peoples grand jury.”
Now I’m the subject of the investigation. I answered all of their questions. I showed them the law. I’m not talking statutes. I’m talking law, according to the supreme court. Several of the supreme court justices have rendered opinions about common law grand juries or grand juries under the common law. This is the interpretation of the constitution and the Magna Carta. Their parting comment was “We are going to have to find something to charge with Mr. Trussell with. We’re going to take all this stuff back to our team of attorneys, with the FDLE.” They are going to have to search through the statutes to see what fits and give it to a special judge and have him render a judgements on it. For abut 3-4 weeks nothing happened. I thought they realized I did everything according to the constitution and the law. I was very careful to follow the instructions of the court and the supreme court handbook, They came back 3-4 weeks later. Sep. 2, I heard some noise outside my gate. There were two sheriff deputies with body armor on. They said they had a warrant for my arrest, impersonating public official, simulating legal process, intimidating public officials under color of law. They made a count for each person intimidated. They threatening to put me in prison for 70 years, 3 charges, 14 counts.
One of the things I challenged them to explain was the nature and cause of the charges. How did I impersonate the public official. They haven’t named that yet. There is no criminal complaint involved in this case. There is no indictment by a SA. There is no presentment by a grand jury as required. [NBC: No presentment or indictment required as this is not a capital case] The warrant was not even signed but had a sheriff deputy’s name printed where the judge’s name should be. No valid warrant. When they finally sent the warrant through, the way it’s written its not a complete sentence. There is no verb. It is nonsensical. The order doesn’t make any sense. Its a contradictory sentence. Everything about this nobody can figure out. The information that was filed came three weeks after my arrest and the information is supposed to be in place before the warrant is even signed. [NBC: That is incorrect as well. All that needs to be in place if a probable cause warrant.] Plus they still don’t have the statement of nature and cause of charges. They refuse to give them to me.
At my first arraignment, people were filing into the courtroom and he started the proceeding before people were _____. He called my named three times. I said, “I’m here.” I had bailiffs standing behind me. I thought they would help me get my information to the judge. I know I’m not supposed to go past the bar (the gate) until I’m invited. I never heard the judge’s invitation because of all the noise. Then said the judge said “He’s not here. ________.” At this time, while the judge is walking out of the courtroom, the bailiff comes over, puts me in handcuffs and put me in jail. I stayed for 21 days before I could get another arraignment. I was found guilty and punished.
Then when I got to the next arraignment, I was wearing my jail outfit. I was in shackles and chains and led to the podium. While I was standing there I appealed to the judge for a bond. I mentioned the failure to appear. I was under the distinct impression I was in the courtroom at the time. I didn’t think the court had convened, too many things going on. You can tell the chaos in the videos. I didn’t understand what he was saying. I have a little bit of a hearing problem. I also mentioned the fact that he was not being very clear in the way he was speaking. He conceded he had seen me back there but did not know who I was. I raised my hand and stood up so he had to have seen me. So he admitted seeing me but said “I didn’t know who you were.” Why didn’t you ask? Why didn’t you do something? You saw a man standing there raising his hand. Anyhow, that was his excuse for throwing me in jail. He withdrew the charge of FTA of which I served 21 days in jail. I asked for a bond. I was already on a 5k bond. He raised my bond to 14k. Now I had not failed to appear. I had done everything under the original bond, yet he almost tripled my bond. He said I should get an attorney. I have been talking to attorneys. I’m just devastated _____counselors. _____ it’s just like, I don’t know what planet they’re on. They think if I’ve been charged, I’m guilty. All they can do is negotiate down the charges. [NBC: that’s because you have talked about your ‘adventures’ to law enforcement and the public, making the case quite straightforward’] Nobody suggested that I didn’t do anything to violate any statutes so they are not really looking at defending me and finding me not guilty. They’re just trying to narrow it down and I’ll only serve 10-15 years in prison. _____
They’re spending an awful lot of money and they’ll spend an awful lot more taking me to trial. I don’t know what to do. I have a couple (of attorneys) who are supposed to get back to me but I haven’t heard from them and I may not. I have put in a motion to represent myself as my natural self, as is my right, sui juris [NBC: Forgetting Florida Statutes again]. Once the judge gets this, which should be sometime this week, then he’ll have to establish a hearing where he can evaluate my competency to evaluate myself. Even with that _____ transcript and video recording of the proceeding, even if he does qualify me to represent myself, I will have limited constitutional rights in his court. My constitutional rights are given to me by God and now you outrank god? We’ve got a little arrogance going on here. [NBC: Yes, but by whom?]
The results of that conversations sent me to do some research. I do have limited constitutional rights in his court. In fact, I have no constitutional rights in his court. All my rights are granted by statutes. He is in a court, not of common of law and the constitution.. [NBC: Common law jurisdiction and statutory law. Since most criminal law is now statutory, he is the judge of a constitutional court] I can only be tried in a constitutional court. He is in a court of admiralty law signified by the fringed flag in the courtroom [NBC: Such foolishness]. That is also established by the black robe is he wearing. I have done the research. I have done the history of the law. The _____ represents the railing of a ship. When I went to the other side, I was on his ship, under his flag. Under admiralty law, military law. Under military law, you are guilty until proven innocent. Only under the constitution are we innocent until proven guilty. He was correct when he said I’d have limited constitutional rights. The whole court will be run as a court martial. I haven’t figured out how they justify having a jury at a court martial so they do a little bit of dance on that part of it. I understand so much more about how our court system works in this country. The fact that I was taken to jail the first time they could have given me a summons and required me to appear in court, which would not have required me to go to jail, lose liberty or pay for a bond. Instead of that they chose to arrest me. _____ they sent two armed deputies to arrest me. They went overboard from that standpoint from a constitutional standpoint. But remember they operate in a different court system than we think they do. [NBC: And as long as you believe that the Court is going to protect you from yourself and appoint you a lawyer.]
Three clueless sovereign citizens.
Driving without a license etc and then after being told to no further drive the car, still drive the car home…
Things go downhill from there.
Their neighbor Ed is a fascinating character who appears to have ‘educated’ Ed and Laura as to how to get to jail quickest.
What a fool… All he needs to do is sign the darn document and go through the judge’s evaluation as to whether or not he is fit to represent himself. ‘Demand to present himself sui juris’ is guaranteed to result in him having a fool as a lawyer, but the judge may allow him to proceed as such.
A simple ‘motion’ is so much better than a demand… Learn how to work properly in the court system, or the judge will never going to give Terry the opportunity to (re)present himself.
|11/10/2014||DEMAND TO PRESENT MYSELF SUI JURIS|
Or is Rodney stalling for time?… Poor Rodney… Will he lose his precious firearms? Will he get some jail time for failing to show up at trial?
11/10/2014 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts:Status Conference as to RODNEY CLASS held on 11/10/2014. Court finds in the interest of justice to Toll Speedy Trial in the interest of justice from 11/10/2014 to 11/20/2014. Plea Agreement Hearing set for 11/20/2014 at 10:30 AM in Courtroom 9 before Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts. Bond Status of Defendant: Defendant Committed; Commitment Issued; Court Reporter: Crystal Pilgrim Defense Attorney: PRO SE/A.J. Kramer Standby Counsel; US Attorney: Jeffrey Pearlman; (tcr) (Entered: 11/10/2014)
His ‘simple case’ sounds like a tortured argument that since the courts did not accept his arguments, that he therefor should be granted asylum.
THIS CASE IS VERY SIMPLE
1) Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution establishes that only a “natural born” Citizen may qualify for the Office of President.
2) The term “natural born” is a legal term adjective phrase qualifier which means the legal opposite to “adopted”. The “natural born” are the offspring of citizen fathers, and the “adopted” citizens are the offspring of non-citizen fathers, who are born as “subjects” of the positive law jurisdiction of the state (federal government), and are dependent upon the positive law plenary authority of the state (lower case meaning federal government) for a bestowed “legal right” to be a citizen. They do not qualify for the Office of President because only a “natural born” citizen can qualify because my country is not a monarchy form of government that is authorized to bestow an offspring with a “legal right” to be “President”, bestowed upon the offspring at the time of birth.
3) Obama is an “adopted” citizen due to being the offspring of a non-citizen father. Thus the “United States”, as defined by both the political laws of nature, and by the Constitution, no longer exists since 2008/9, thus there is no lawful jurisdiction for Paul Guthrie to return to until Obama is removed and replaced with a legitimate “natural born” Citizen of the United States. Thus as a matter of LAW, Paul Aaron Guthrie is legally a refugee from the former Constitutional Republic of the United States, known as “The United States of America”.
Sunday Oct 26, 2014
But he is hopeful that the UK will make its decision anytime soon
Please find several Word documents attached. These are just some of the documents that I faxed to the Home Office as part of my asylum case along with the correct definition and U.S. codes that define a natural born Citizen to be the claimed and reported offspring of a citizen father. These documents will give you some idea as to why the Home Office is now caught in a trick and crisis.
Today is Sunday, November 2, 2014 and still no decision from the Home Office. I don’t expect a decision until Tuesday or Wednesday. After that time, if we have not received a decision one way or another, then my patience will have run out and then I will have to call on you to begin turning up the heat, and others must call for my release from what is a criminal confinement and an act of war against the political rights of natural born Citizens of the United States.