Logos Radio Network

One Response to 07-30-10 Rule of Law

1. 

   nescience says:

   August 1, 2010 at 7:06 pm

   Eddie describes [at 0hr06m40s] his evolving brief regarding non-breach of the peace warrantless arrests for a misdemeanor traffic “offenses”. Such arrests are not constitutional.

   Ray (TX) [at 0hr 08m20s] is learning how to deal with traffic tickets. Eddie emphasizes the importance of communicating ONLY his three questions (“What’s the emergency and how can I help”, “Am I under arrest?”, and “Am I free to go?”) to the traffic cop. On the topics of what to say in open court, Eddie stresses that one should file all motions in writing and in court say merely “I stand on my motions as written.” (To argue orally about a part of a motion is to give the judge the opportunity to deny ALL of the motion.)

   Robert (TX) [at 0hr33m30s] describes 101 tickets over a 4-year period. He was issued a “failure to appear” in court even though he was never arrested pursuant to an arrest warrant or signed a promise to appear in court. Eddie clarifies an important legal issue: One must send a tort letter (a notification of one’s intent to sue) to the defendant (usually 60 days prior to filing the lawsuit) if the defendant was acting within his/her official capacity.

   Carl (TX) has [at 0hr41m40s] high praise for and encourages people to buy Eddie traffic seminar and Jurisdictionary.

   Randy joins our hosts and introduces [at 0hr51m] Diane Beall Templin, a long-time practicing attorney, practicing in real estate, and now running as the American Independent Party candidate for the attorney general of California. She has been trying to save people from foreclosure the past few years and learned of Randy’s seminar in San Diego and is much impressed. Diane is most impressed with his program’s great specificity, explaining that it is easy to persuade a court to issue a temporary restraining order based on the hardship endured by forcing one from his/her home but the much greater difficulty of proving to the court at the preliminary injunction hearing of the likelihood of succeeding on the merits of the case. She says that one typically is forced to deal only in generalities, but that Randy’s program gives people numerous and specific causes of action. She particularly mentions the difficulties that lenders have always faced in calculating fees under 15 USC § 1605, whereas Randy’s program calculates these with great accuracy. Diane also discusses the pros and cons of using bankruptcy filings to impede foreclosure proceedings. Randy tells us that 2-3 more homeowners have received “no answer” defaults to their lawsuits in the past 24 hours. Deborah questions him on whether other defendants are answering: he states that the majority are simply stating “We deny all allegations by the plaintiff.” Randy suggests responding with a motion to strike such an answer as non-responsive. The law requires specific and itemized answers.

   Carlos (CA) asks [at 1hr20m20s] when to file an adversary proceeding. The fact that many parties have no standing in court is discussed.

   Mark (WI) tries to entice [at 1hr32m] Diane into making a disclaimer about dispensing legal advice. Randy says that money needs to change hands for that to be a concern. Diane says she is allowed to give legal advice to people in those States where she is licensed. Mark updates us on his case. (See Mark’s other appearances on ROL shows dated July 16, 23, and 29.) He says the judge denied his motion for sanctions and he suspects that ex parte meetings occurred between the judge and opposing attorney. Randy suggests he file a motion to disqualify the judge for cause and that he file criminal accusations against the judge and attorney for the ex parte meetings. Diane says [at 1hr36m] that an attorney is required to be registered with each court in the State. For instance, she has a San Diego certification. Given that, Randy suggests that Mark might want to file a Motion Challenging Capacity to Practice Law. The attorney must be able to proof evidence of agency, standing, and capacity.

   Mike (NY) tells [at 1hr48m] of his day in court when he asked the traffic judge about the nature of the court (e.g., civil, administrative, judicial). The judge told him that it was “quasi-judicial” (creating mirth amongst our hosts).

   Russell (TX) speaks [at 2hr19m] about bankruptcy and the use of the “strong-arm tactic” on a trustee and going for three times the amount. The topic of IRS notices of lien being filed by county recorders is also discussed. (More on this below at 2hr57m and 3hr42m.)

   Ramon (TX) [at 2hr33m20s] requested that the bank (which is no longer the original moneylender) cough up the original mortgage document. Instead, he received a copy. Randy suggests that he demand that the bank prove that it has standing in the lawsuit. He also suggests that Ramon look into RemediesInRealEstate.com.

   Gene (WI) wants to know [at 2hr51m] where to go to get the elements for particular causes of action in a civil suit. Randy suggests O’Connor’s for those living in Texas and old Litigation Guides in other States. Just call up attorneys and see if they have them.

   Deborah interjects [at 2hr57m] that county recorders must file an IRS notice of federal tax lien. (See gives more specifics below at 3hr42m.)

   Gene raises [at 3hr05m30s] the 7th amendment’s common law (not statutory) basis, with which Diane agrees. Eddie mentions that the old common law allowed the jury to decide both the facts and the law and that judges are allowed not to mention this fact to juries, so they DON’T. He also gives a shout-out to the (wonderful) Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA.org), which is devoted to this issue. Diane notes that radio host Bill Barten is a very good teacher of common law lawsuits. Gene asks about the troubles that ensue because the de jure States of the Union have created corporations (“fictitious States”) in their likeness. Thus their courts are corporate entities. Deborah and Randy do not see this as a problem, insisting that the judge can still operate as a de jure judicial officer outside of his other role as a corporate officer. Eddie claims this person is operating a for-business enterprise.

   Stephen (MT) weighs in [at 3hr21m] on the common law matter by noting that Montana has reorganized its statutes in the last 15 years or so and now they are laid out in a very logical manner. The Constitution is listed first, then Title 1 (general laws and definitions), under which Part 1 (meaning of law) lists the statutes as binding and then the common law (including English common law). Stephen also asks if Texas has a “bail schedule”. A: Yes. Going before a magistrate does not require a bail.

   Dan (CT) hypothetically poses [at 3hr29m] a very hypothetical scenario involving a State’s secretary of state using State employees to write press releases via web hosting to encourage voters unaffiliated with any particular party to re-register as Republi-Crats. Diane opines that that is illegal. Randy wonders about a qui tam action. Dan notes that a copy of the state seal was used. Randy urges a grand jury investigation. Diane suggests perhaps a writ of prohibition to get the State from doing what they are doing. This is a thoroughly hypothetical scenario. (See Dan talk about a somewhat similar situation in the ROL show dated 20100726 at 0hr38m30s.)

   Deborah reads [at 3hr42m] the Texas statute entitled “Uniform Federal Lien Registration Act”, Title 3, Chapter 13, Section 14.002 (code of law not stated), per county recorders being required to file federal notices of tax lien. She says that two or three States have not passed this statute.

   Carlos (CA) returns [at 3hr51m20s] and says “No judgment, no lien” and that people should fight the non-existence of the actual lien upon which the notice of lien should be based. Randy agrees and encourages filing against the IRS employee who created the notice without a lien. Carlos also mentions that his home went up to the trustee sale. Diane says normally they file a notice of default and schedule a sale within 21 days. The bank might very well take possession. One can still file a demurrer or answer the complaint. Carlos says he is in trouble. “What should I do, Randy?” Randy suggests that since the bank has title, sue the bank. Diane suggests to file for a restraining order.