Law v. "law"

Defending "Criminal" Non-Violent Actions

Under Construction



Setting The Stage

Chapter 1


So I bought a new car back in January. A pretty mediocre Honda Accord. It does the job and is a good hunk of junk to tinker with. Still, for a guy saving every penny and working a restaurant job, it's worth something. Definitely would be a little upset if it were totalled.

Jumping back another 8 months or so to summer '18, I fell down a bit of a rabbit hole of legal ideas that some would brand "conspiracy theories". Admittedly much of this information is wrapped in a not-so-thin wrapper of "crazy-person" lingo; which makes it a little difficult to digest sometimes. That said, there are many nuggets of wisdom that many people have contributed to these subjects.

New car with little "baggage", a license about to expire, no registration, and no insurance. Well shoot why not go without and see if these legal theories can hold water. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a way to do this without actually being convicted. Research can be enjoyable, but for myself a real battle does a much better job at lighting a fire under my ass.

Not long after I made this decision I made the car purchase and was careful to document the purchase with a Bill of Sale (in case a cop wanted to try and claim the vehicle isn't mine). I went to a DMV and turned in my license in return for a statement that said I was unlicensed as far as the State of North Carolina was concerned. I got insurance that didn't require a driver's license, and got a "placeholder" plate that would keep me from being pulled over too often. But would clearly be not a "real" tag.

So with some slight regrets the inevitable came to pass. I got arrested.

What Happened❴My Perspective❵

I was pulled over late wednesday afternoon on the way to work. My conversation with the cop did not go well. Talking with cops who are suspicious, is not a skill I possess. But I did say something to the effect of: I'd be happy to be cited and settle this in court. I'm on my way to work, can't you just give me citations for whatever I'm charged with? His answer (after some back and forth) was essentially: Well I had half a mind to let you go on your way, but I don't like your attitude, and if you don't have insurance I'll have to take you in.

So after a struggle with my email, I found my insurance card in the glove box. Handed it to the cop, he went back to his vehicle, and 5 minutes later a very large, red-headed, female officer showed up and they both marched to my window. With no explanation of what was happening (whatever happened to the Miranda Rights recital?). He opened the door, firmly grabbed my arm, and instructed me to step out.

After an hour of waiting and traveling between locations I was told by a judge that I could be released with an unsecured bond of $500. Still not sure exactly what that means, but I was released without issue. Of course it was another 15½ hours of being trapped in town with no phone, before I got back home. But that's a whole 'nuther story for a different time.

The Plan

Do what I can to clear my name and finish this case quickly. eg. get licensed again, pay $300, get refocused on life. Gather all the evidence I can and park the files somewhere. Sometime in the future when I have more time and cash in hand, go on the offensive with a serious lawsuit.

Gathering & Sorting It All

Chapter 2

What Happened❴Testimony❵

In case I need to explain what happened in a manner that shows I don't approve of/give credibility to/consent to their behaviour.

Shouldn't get far enough to need this.

My interaction with Officer _y began at approximately 3:50pm. Did not argue. Asked why my insurance was his business, he got visibly upset and raised his voice. I was then led to believe that producing evidence of insurance would allow me to continue on my way. Yet 5 minutes after complying I was forcibly taken out of my seat and restrained in handcuffs.

Accused Of

Exactly true. Exhibit G makes this abundantly clear.

Is that possible? What is a constitutionally unlawful operation of a motor vehicle?

I, the undersigned, find that the defendant named above has been arrested without a warrant and the defendant's detention is justified because there is probable cause to believe that on or about the date of offense shown and in the county named above the defendant named above unlawfully and willfully did operate a motor vehicle on INTERSECTION OF N MAIN ST AND __ DR. highway, without being licensed as a driver by the Division of Motor Vehicles of North Carolina.

Breaking Down the Order

This is a criminal case, being conducted in a District Court. It has an assigned file number. An "Offense", "Offense Code", and a cited statute. Numbers that are mostly inscrutable without someone who knows more.

More Information

Call the court.

Because not only do they know what's up, they are the gatekeepers for any paperwork I may file. Be kind, polite, genuinely interested in their life, and patient. But also keep pushing the questions I have.

What is the name of the scheduled proceeding? Arraignment? Is it possible to file a rebuttal before I make a plea? Can I file a paper instead of appearing?

Pro Se v. Pro Per

CSG maintains that representing oneself "pro se" is inferior to representing oneself "in propria persona" because the latter is essentially purer. Some interpretations of pro se could be construed so that the defendant has a dual role of defendant and lawyer. Whereas "pro per" maintains the defendant's status as a natural person with no representation.

Reading the definitions below I'm forced to conclude that there is very little reason to fear this. It may be true, but it likely won't affect my case. So let it be known that if this becomes my downfall, this is the moment (11pm, April 16, 2019) I have decided to neglect this advice.

Proof Laws Apply

This is my ace in the hole. If I can hold them to this, it's very true that they cannot prosecute without any evidence that these (unconstitutional) statutes apply to me.

CSG's strategy is in this direction, but it is lacking in its wording. The concepts seem to make too many assumptions, and hold too many opinions.

Calling P.D. for Evidence

Was not able to get into specifics. The gentleman at the other end did agree however, that: The officer will (likely) be responsible for providing evidence and it would make sense for me to serve him with any motions I pursue. I will be serving him with the motion.

Calling District Attorney

Who do I talk to for providing me with evidence of jurisdiction? Umm..I don't know, hold on...You would have to handle that in court.

She was incredibly polite and helpful. Simply stated that with the exception of some attorneys the District Attorney does not meet with individuals outside of court.

Motion for Discovery

Was already submitted. To the court, officer, and district attorney.

Final Hearing Prep

Chapter 3

Underlying Principles

Socratic Method

Rather than making claims, you ask questions that expose contradictions. You told me that X is Y, why do you think that’s the case? Can you provide evidence to support that belief?

  1. 1st Get them to confirm their position.
  2. 2nd Get them to explain why their position is correct.
  3. 3rd Ask questions about the apparent contradictions.


Embarrass the judge enough for him to dismiss to save face. Smile, give thanks, apologize, and ask.

Moral Righteousness

It is entirely unethical and immoral to criminalize behaviour. Under our centuries old legal tradition, the only crimes were those that remove the natural rights of others, or cause harm to people or property.

Questions for the court.

Do you understand…?

  1. No.
  2. I’m sorry Your Honor, but I’m lacking clarification on a few points: –> questions

Recording (Call the Court)

  1. First before we begin, is this hearing is being recorded on audio?
  2. How soon will a copy of that be available?
  3. How will I be able to ensure I have a proper recording of these events?

On Due Process

  1. Do I have a right to a fair and meaningful hearing?
  2. Do I likewise have a right to be informed of the cause and nature of the charges and proceedings against me today?
  3. Will I be compelled to be a witness against myself?
  4. Will I be deprived of my liberty or property without due process of law?

On Presumptions

  1. Am I presumed to be innocent?
  2. Am I presumed innocent of every element of the charge?
  3. Is jurisdiction one of those elements?
  4. Then am I presumed innocent of jurisdiction?
  5. Has the prosecution provided any factual evidence regarding the element of jurisdiction as of yet?
  6. Then I motion all charges be dismissed until a time when the prosecutor can file a proper case.
  7. Denied? On what ground Your Honor?

On Pleading

Practicing Law

Questions for the prosecution.

Questions As Needed


Threat of Contempt

  1. Plead, verbally acknowledging that you are doing so under threat, duress, and coercion.
  2. Or don't plead and allow him to plead for you over your objection.

Misc Responses

"There will be no evidence today, trial is set for June 12."
If there is no evidence Your Honor, how are you justified in bringing me here under threat of violence without evidence of jurisdiction?
You will be able to prove those allegations at trial.
I have made no allegations Your Honor, what allegations are you referring to?
"The only is how you are pleading."
I aplogise for my ignorance Your Honor, but where is that written down? Are you saying that jurisdiction cannot in fact be challenged at any time?
Sth about refusing to plea guilty.
I intend to plea guilty, because I would like to remove this violent threat from my life.
These are not questions for today.
Do I have a right to plead guilty?
Do I have a right to make an informed plea?


Print out a few papers. 2 pages of questions with checkboxes, one for my pocket and one for my folder. Bring my journal for taking notes. 3 copies of plea of guilty. 1 page of reminders while I prep.

If this continues I may need to file a "Cause of action, motion to dismiss". And a motion/order to vacate the judge.

Primary Sources




Black's, 2nd Edition

The stopping, seizing, or apprehending a person by lawful authority; the act of laying hands upon a person for the purpose of taking his body into custody of the law; the restraining of the liberty of a man's person in order to compel obedience to the order of a court of justice, or to prevent the commission of a crime, or to insure that a person charged or suspected of a crime may be forthcoming to answer it.
Statute, n.
An act of the legislature; a particular law enacted and established by the will of the legislative department of government, expressed with the requisite formalities.
In Propria Persona.
In one's own proper person.
Legal; warranted or authorised by the law; having the qualifications prescribed by law; not contrary to nor forbidden by the law.
The principal distinction between the terms "lawful" and "legal" is that the former contemplates the substance of law, the latter the form of law. To say of an act that it is "lawful" implies that it is authorised, sanctioned, or at any rate not forbidden, by law. To say that it is "legal" implies that it is done or performed in accordance with the forms and usages of law, or in a technical manner. In this sense "illegal" approaches the meaning of "invalid." For example, a contract or will, executed without the required formalities, might be said to be invalid or illegal, but could not be described as unlawful. Further, the word "lawful" more clearly implies an ethical content than does "legal." The latter goes no further than to denote compliance, with positive, technical, or formal rules; while the former usually imports a moral substance or ethical permissibility. A further distinction is that the word "legal" is used as the synonym of "constructive," which "lawful" is not. Thus "legal fraud" is fraud implied or inferred by law, or made out by construction. "Lawful fraud" would be a contradiction of terms. Again, "legal" is used as the antithesis of "equitable." Thus, we speak of "legal assets," "legal estate," etc., but not of "lawful assets," or "lawful estate." But there are some connections in which the two words are used as exact equivalents. Thus, a "lawful" writ, warrant, or process is the same as a "legal" writ, warrant, or process.

Pro Se v. In Propria Persona

Lawful v. Illegal

Black's, 9th Edition

magistrate's court
1. A court with jurisdiction over minor criminal offenses. · Such a court also has the power to bind over for trial persons accused of more serious offenses. - Also termed police court.
2. A court with limited jurisdiction over minor criminal and civil matters. - Sometimes spelled (esp. in England) magistrates' court. -- Also termed (in England) court of petty sessions; court of summary jurisdiction.
pro se
adv. & adj. For oneself; on one's own behalf; without a lawyer.
n. One who represents oneself in a court proceeding without the assistance of a lawyer.
propria persona
adj. & adv. In his own person; PRO SE.


Appendix A

Relevant Citations

U.S. Constitution, Amendment 6

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

N.C. Constitution, Sec. 23, Rights of Accused.

In all criminal prosecutions, every person charged with crime has the right to be informed of the accusation and to confront the accusers and witnesses with other testimony, and to have counsel for defense, and not be compelled to give self-incriminating evidence, or to pay costs, jail fees, or necessary witness fees of the defense, unless found guilty.

N.C. Constitution, Article IV, Sec. 13. Forms of action; rules of procedure.

(1) Forms of action. There shall be in this State but one form of action for the enforcement or protection of private rights or the redress of private wrongs, which shall be denominated a civil action, and in which there shall be a right to have issues of fact tried before a jury. Every action prosecuted by the people of the State as a party against a person charged with a public offense, for the punishment thereof, shall be termed a criminal action.

(2) Rules of procedure. The Supreme Court shall have exclusive authority to make rules of procedure and practice for the Appellate Division. The General Assembly may make rules of procedure and practice for the Superior Court and District Court Divisions, and the General Assembly may delegate this authority to the Supreme Court. No rule of procedure or practice shall abridge substantive rights or abrogate or limit the right of trial by jury. If the General Assembly should delegate to the Supreme Court the rule-making power, the General Assembly may, nevertheless, alter, amend, or repeal any rule of procedure or practice adopted by the Supreme Court for the Superior Court or District Court Divisions.

Counsel for Sanity

Appendix B

Specific Advice, CSG

Now this Court Survival Guide is a peculiar thing. On the one hand most of it checks out logically. The advice sounds very reasonable, it isn't extreme, and encourages one to think for himself. On the other hand, this is just some strange document I found online. Using it as advice for a misdeanor case is putting an awful lot of trust in strangers.

...but based on my experiences you're often better off trusting strangers than the government. Just gotta keep a cool head and be very aware of any logical fallacies that may exist.

Just came acros Marc Stevens this week (4/20/19) and my goodness. Does this guy have so many of the answers I've been searching for. If 1215 is a treasure trove of Common Law offensive tactics, Marc Stevens is the same for defensive tactics. With an awareness of the open corruption that exists.

General Advice

I'll always recommed as a great source.

New(er) Tactics

Appendix C

Lifted from the Youtube channel AtFrontal Cortex.

The Questions

How do you plea?
  1. Before I begin, is this hearing being recorded on audio and video by that camera right there above you?
  2. How soon can I get a copy of the recording?
  3. If I do as you say, and they deny its existence, or mysteriously lose or edit it, who will be responsible and what will be the consequences?
  4. Because I cannot memorize every word said here today, and because I cannot write every word down, I'll set an audio recorder here on the desk to ensure I have a proper recording of today's events.
  5. I have seen evidence of judges all over the spectrum contradict each other and their own rules many times, so I am wondering if in this courtroom, do I have a right to a fair and meaningful hearing?
  6. Do I likewise have a right to be informed of the cause and nature of the charges and proceedings against me here today?
  7. Will I be compelled to be a witness against myself?
  8. Will I be deprived of my liberty or property without due process of law?
  9. Am I presumed innocent?
  10. Am I likewise logically, presumed innocent of every element?
  11. Is jurisdiction an element?
  12. Then am I presumed innocent of jurisdiction?
  13. Has the prosecution provided any factual evidence regarding the element of jurisdiction as of yet?
  14. In reference to the motion to dismiss I previously filed with the court, I motion all charges then be dismissed until such time as the prosecutor can file a proper case, and presume this unopposed motion will be granted. Is there any factual evidence Mr/Ms Prosecutor objecting to this motion?
  15. If I had a copy of such evidence, I would have everything I need to plea guilty right now, pay the fine, and leave with my freedom. As part of a fair and meaningful hearing, do I have a right to know whether or not a document being used to file accusations against me has been provided to the court at all, yes or no?

Marc Stevens Follower

Appendix D

Forum member Ripsaw posted this:

The following is a transcript from an actual first appearance I was involved in helping a friend....

How do you plead?
I have an unsigned plea of guilty that I will enter as soon as you provide me with the evidence the DA has given you, proving the applicability of the statute, and that this court has any jurisdiction over me.
We do!
Okay, so you believe you have jurisdiction Sir?
Yes I already said that, how do you plead?
Okay, so if you are of the opinion you have jurisdiction to hear this case, maybe you wouldn't mind sharing the evidence with me, that you relied upon to make that determination or state that opinion, right?
I Told You that Already! You violated the statute in this county and that proves it applies to you! Move ON sir and enter a plea!
Excuse me sir, but with all due respect (actually is none on your part, it is earned, not given blindly, and he hasn't earned anything but disdain) I'm simply try to preserve my due process here and asking for the factual evidence you used to prove jurisdiction over me by this court, isn't the prosecutor supposed to supply that proof to you before you may proceed against me?
He doesn't have too! The statute proves it when you broke it in our county!
Well excuse me, but Objection, you are being less than honest and are not acting in good faith here are you? I am "not" refusing to plea. I have an unsigned plea of guilty that I will enter as soon as you provide me with the evidence the DA has given you, proving the applicability of the statute, and that this court has any jurisdiction over me in the first place, to force me to plea, without fully understanding the nature and cause of the charges against me.
Motion to dismiss for lack of evidence proving jurisdiction.
Denied! this is not a motions hearing, this is a plea hearing! You are in the state, the laws apply, that's it, I'm entering a plea of not guilty and setting the trial date for this case!
OBJECTION, I want that plea withdrawn, why did you do that? are you now trying to represent me ? Have you made the determination that I am not guilty "as a judge" in this proceeding ? If so, then I motion for dismissal because the court has determined I am not guilty! If you are practicing law from the bench and made it as my attorney, without my consent, then you might as well make a motion to dismiss for me too.

[Judge ignores your objection......]

Trial date set for May 7th, next case!
Excuse me judge, but there is an objection on the table here, do you have the discretion or authority to proceed without ruling on that objection first?
Objection Denied, Overruled, you are done here son! Trial date set for May 7th.
On what grounds?
On the grounds that this court "has" jurisdiction!
Really? Can you provide cases and cite that legal principle for me where you have the right to deny due process and proceed absent evidence?
One more word from you and I will hold you in contempt of court!

Notes: the main thing is:

  1. Never stop objecting until he threatens to throw you in jail for contempt, then say you are only pleading under threat, duress, and coercion -- not guilty; or
  2. Best to never plead and let him enter one for you over your objections. He just violated your Due Process on the record.

The reason we ask so many times, and make so many objections, is to build and track a repeated case of Due Process violations on the record, that are apparent, that they can never get out of in the appellate courts. Automatic overturn.

Q: Is the issue of there being a Record, crucial to the matter of Appeal?

A: Absolutely. If the plea hearing or arraignment, or whatever their quasi outfit tries to label it, doesn't have it set to be recorded or on a record of some sort, we ask for our own reporter or request to record it ourselves.