11-15-12 my private audio [episode 188] show#39904 at talkshoe com guest karl lentz 2h12m [garbled

words/comments in brackets]
11: title 28 sec two thousand two hundred and one, creation of a remedy
13: just write a letter to the head clerk of the court, the head judge is the head clerk in your district and
you wish for the legal and lawful findings in fact and conclusions in law you could ask them a simple
questions as; does a corporation have a right to tax my property and order me to pay their debt they
claim is now due or can only a guv lay a tax upon its citizens, or because i reside within a corporate
township am i now a corporate citizen or one of its subjects? Just tell the judge that. Its that simple. You
dont have to make these things 800 pages long. And the judge has to give you an answer. And if you
dont like it you could give them the old platsky versus cia, the judge cant dismiss anything you bring
into his court.
14: platsky versus cia 1991 a man suing cia for info they had on him and they wouldnt release it. The
fed court threw out his claim all the time, 12 b 6. supreme court said no that district court cannot 12
b 6 you if you are not competent in the law, if youre an idiot, if you dont understand legalese the
judge has got to walk you thru it.
Youve got to help this man stylize his pleading so that it can proceed thru your court. They say we cant
give you legal advice. Do platsky v cia on them.
18: arent you afraid of giving people legal advice? no. supreme court ruling connelly v dixon 1957;
litigants can be assisted by unlicensed layman during judicial proceedings. If you ask me my opinion i
will give you my opinion. Legal disclaimer; we are not here to give legal advice. Good. Im here to
give lawful advice. I'll give you my lawful opinion.
21: prosecutor; one who pursues or carries on any purpose, plan or business. I dont use pro se, its a
term of art. I want to get away from legalese. I want to drag them into a court of law. I dont want to
deal with administrative hearings. I just want man against man. I just want a court of record. I dont
want to deal with legalese [cause] theyll run me over like a freight train.
Caller: comes now the injured party...
the aggrieved party. I believe aggrieved just means somebody who is seeking to reclaim rights that
were taken from them wrongly.
Aggrieved party; an individual who is entitled to commence a lawsuit against another because his or
her legal rights have been violated.
Aggrieved party; a person whos financial interest is directly affected by a decree, an order, a judgment
or statute, and is also considered an aggrieved party entitled to bring an action challenging the legality
of the decree, an order, a judgment or statute.
A lot of attorneys put in affidavits in the filings. They can put in whatever they want on paper because
its useless. Who is going to stand in open court under oath or affirmation and swear that that piece of
paper is true?
You see in open court is where you nail the attorneys.
Caller: so the certify at the bottom of the affidavit is insufficient?
From an attorney? They only certify they dont verify. Verify comes from your voice. They only certify.
The bottom of my lawsuit i verify which means i will stand in open court under oath or affirmation, put
my hand on the bible and i will verify that everything on that paper is true.
32: ive always had a precipe day, a pre trial hearing, where i lay all the rules out for everybody to
understand. So the judge knows the rules, the other side knows the rules, this is how were gonna play

this game and this is how we run it. So when we go to trial i got rid of all the BS now we only got 2
matters in controversy, we had like 30. we settled it in a pre hearing trial. If youre going to go to a
bankruptcy thing the best thing for you to do is ask for a precipe day which means pre trial day. Get all
of the big nonsense out of the way. And if there is just one thing that you cant work out in the judges
chambers thats just between you, the judge and the other party, you know what, lets take it before a
jury. We are going before a common law court of record. Only the injured party gets to speak. You are
going to have to bring the injured man here. An attorney cant speak. Those are the rules. Im relying on
the 9th amendment as a bill of rights, united states constitution article 9 and article 7. there is no such
thing as the 7th amendment. There is no such thing as the 9th amendment. The articles are the bill of
rights.
But when you say 7th and 9th [amendments] the judge knows you really dont know what you are talking
about. So you say the bill of rights of the united states constitution article 7, he knows youre talking
about a trial by jury. Not a jury trial, but a trial by jury. And if you say i have rights inalienable inherent
rights given to me by god under the bill of rights under the united states constitution article 9, he will
know what youre talking about.
37: caller, i beat the irs with a jury trial.
42: if you confess youre a convict and you still hold all your rights as a man in the public and society,
you still maintain your rights. If the jury comes down with a guilty verdict you are attainted. You lose
all your rights to property all your rights as citizen
46: what do you think about tami pepperman? The 1066 and cestue qui...
i stay away from all that stuff... any type of trust, there could be eighteen thousand trusts out there with
my name on it. As a beneficiary, i have no right to know when im a beneficiary. I have no right to know
how theyre using my name in that trust, why im in that trust or what is required of me to obtain a
benefit. So just because somebody says Oh cestue qui trust i just laugh. Anybody can create a
document with my name on it but just because they offered me this document like this birth certificate,
do i have to accept this gift that is going to cause me harm and injury? Do i have to accept an eight
hundred pound gorilla thats hungry?
58: ...you want a benefit from social security? Well then you better believe you got to take them into
administrative hearing. You have no right... the supreme court made a couple of rulings on people who
tried to drag ss into common law courts back in the sixties. The sc said you have no right to that trust,
no right to that fund, no right to that social security act, that is not yours. Everybody wanted to believe
its theirs but no, youre the beneficiary. Youre not the trustee, or trustor. Youre just the beneficiary and
you could be denied at any time.
[[im just the grantor. Gee, a thousand dollars a year not taken from me might
have made all the difference, but guess well never know. How is returning my
property a benefit? This is where we use the 'it aint me' letter]]
1:01 magistrate is just a guy who filled the wine glasses at the kings court.
1:02 when somebody gives you an order to do something you have to ask them what gives you the
authority to order me about? Like when did i give up...
1:03 anytime youre a defendant you have to realize you have absolutely no rights. You have to file a
claim against the other party that theyre interfering with your rights to a trial by jury or theyre

interfering with your rights to have a common law court of record trial proceeding over this matter...
you sue them for stepping outside of their scope of authority.
I dont say fancy words like adversarial proceedings. I just say you are doing me wrong. You are
interfering with my right. Stop interfering with my right or im going to drag your butt into a common
law court of record and im going to be compensated for every second youre interfering with my right
and im going to charge you a dollar a second and right now were up to 8 million seconds.
1:05 youre still using the words bankruptcy court. I dont move under any other court...youll never get
an answer from me...i will never file any motion, pleading, petition any answer in anything other than a
common law court of record. That is the only court that i believe has the authority to judge me because
nobody else has got the power other than 12 people to judge me. The man in the black robe is a
magistrate. He is not a judge. In america we call them judges for some reason i dont know. In england
theyre called magistrates... in this country we got it backwards.
Wait a second. Can i appeal this? Yes. Well then im not in a common law court of record.
Is that not what a newspaper notice is?
Thats not fair, nobody reads paper anymore. I just tell them straight up, you are interfering with my
rights, i want a common law trial by jury. Is there some reason why you have some lawful excuse why i
cant evoke the 9th article of the bill of rights and get myself in front of a jury? I dont care what you try
to use to try to deny it. You cant interfere with the rights of man. Youre here to protect the rights of
man... if i hear anything other than common law court of record youre interfering with my rights. a
common law court of record is the only court that the united states supreme court protects and secures
for the rights of the people. It is the only one court protected by the united states. Is there any reason
that i cant have what the constitution secures and protects for me?
1:09 how do i change my standing [as defendant] in bankruptcy case?
Start a whole new case. Theyre not defendants, theyre wrong doers, i want compensation.
1:14 irs has a very good specific job in society and i never attack the irs personally because they always
work in my benefit. If you dont know how to use the irs to your benefit your going to hate them.
1:20everything they come at me with I automatically say back you are interfering with a right to
blank and you fill in the blank.
1:23 first thing I do cease and desist letter, stop interfering with my right to do whatever and I am going
to charge you so much per day for interfering
letter goes to who ever is doing u wrong. The judge.
You can put that in the notice too; if [don't say 'if'] you dont respond within x days you acquiesce to
all terms and conditions of this notice. And if they continue say Im sorry we couldn't settle this on the
private side but looks like youve given me no choice but I am going to have to invoke my 9th article and
[7th article] under the bill of rights to invoke a common law jury trial against you.
How? do you say that in another letter?
Yes. However many days go by that you set...you could claim a wrong from 100 years ago.
The judicial act of 1793 section 31 says that your descendants can pick up your claim if you die. Man
cant be lached. No statute of limitation.
They bound themselves. You dont.
1:33 do you have a template or an example of interfering with my rights?

Im trying to remember what i gave the state of alabama. I gave them something extremely simple. I
said this is the evidence im going to use against you in a court. This is prima facia evidence. This
evidence will stand undisputed you will not be able to answer to this in a court of record. I said if
i was you id make a settlement with me as soon as possible. Said something nice and gentle like
that. And then i let 6 months go by cause i was basically relying on a federal court claim act of
1947 where the
fed has 6 months to answer [gave time lengths for ea agency in 9/19/13 call] because they say well
were a huge bureaucracy and it takes us a long time. And i was in no hurry. I was doing up my
case and learning the law a lot better than i was. So in 6 months i said is there any reason why
you failed to answer? And they just said we dont believe we owe you any money..it was a funny
answer they gave me. I loved the answer they gave me. The dhl [dept of homeland security] which
is like cps or the dept of human resources does not believe you have a claim. Ooh good, they said i
had a claim cause thats how i refer to it, a claim is a common law word, a claim. Like i staked a
claim for gold.
Dhl will not be paying you any money or giving you any relief. If you feel (oh good, only man can
feel) that you have a claim you should feel free to pursue your complaint in a court of law.
Oh my god. So if they try to dispute anything in a common law court of record a court of law is a
common law court of record. Its not a court of equity. Theres 2 courts in this country a court of law and
a court of equity. And a court of law is a common law court. So holy cow the state attorneys office sent
me this letter like 6 months ago. They dont believe i have a claim. Oh good, they dont believe? No,
they cant believe. They can only maintain. Only man can have a belief. The state can maintain, but they
cant believe anything.
Then it says dhl will not be paying you any money. Oh good, so they must think they have something
of value i want. Well as far as i know the dhl doesnt have a printing press, they cant create any money,
so i dont know what the hell theyre talking about.
Then it says; If you feel that you have a claim you should feel free to pursue your complaint in a court
of record. So they just said they will no longer be talking to me on the administrative side. It will be
quote; contact between me and you on a private side to remedy this matter outside of a court of law. So
theyre telling me take me to a court of law. Okay im going to grant you your wish. You want to go to a
court of law? Holy cow buddy. Do you realize what you just wished for? Were going to take you to a
court of law. And the only person who can speak in there is the governor himself, the attorney general
hisself and the trustee of the insurance fund of the risk management of the general liability trust fund
whos holding my money from me cause i claimed as a beneficiary of that fund cause ive been injured
because of those wrongdoers i demanded X amount of dollars and that trustee is holding up my
payment and he has no legitimate authority or lawful authority to deny my claim. I proposed him a
claim. I told him the evidence. I gave him exactly why, im a beneficiary, gimme it. He said no, not
without a court order. I said oh wonderful, so you want a court order. He said yes. I said buddy, in a
common law court of record who creates the orders? He said what? I said the prosecutor does. The
plaintiff creates the orders. Do you want an order? Youre going to love this order. And then i gave him
an order. The orders are in there. Some guy named tom murphy read me the orders. Oh boy i love your
orders theyre only one sentence long. I said damn right. Youre making an order to the waitress at
dennys youre going to say give me pancakes, sausage and a biscuit. Youre not going to give her 800
pages of how you want the biscuit made, or kill a cow, or shake the chaff off the wheat. You make it
simple. Tell it to the clerk, now hand it to the state. They know how to say im not going to grant this
man...carry out this mans order. Good. Lets set this for a jury trial. Yay, lets go. Thats your answer?
Okay lets get this show on the road. You want to have a precipe day? You want a prehearing day? You
want to get the matter of controversy out of the way? Lets do this. On day 22 were going to be sitting in
front of the jury. You ready to go? Lets go. And thats how i deal with them.

1:38 caller; you were going after them for money. Now theyre coming after you for money. How would
i fashion that letter interfering with my rights if theyre coming after me?
How do they believe that you owe them a debt? Who is claiming you owe them a debt?
The attorney for the plaintiff. Its a tax bill.
Okay, the attorney cant make a claim. Only a man can make a claim.
So what would the letter say?
So whos making a claim that you owe money? If its an attorney theyre filing a false claim, because an
attorney cant make a claim. If thats the only instrument on record before a court i dont care what kind
of court it is...
a complaint? Is that a claim?
Yes, hes making a claim right? If somebody is making a claim; ms new jersey owes xy and z money.
Xy and z is going to have to come to open court put their hand on a bible and swear under oath or
affirmation that you owe them money.
You said the first letter is to the judge.
I said if the judge is interfering with your right to... whoever is interfering with your rights you tell
them to stop interfering with your right. It could be the right to relation, the right to free association, the
right to carry a gun, the right to a jury trial. So the letters, just fill in the blank. Whoever is doing you
wrong. Say you are interfering with my right to carry a gun, etc... my stuff is addressed to anybody. My
stuff isnt case specific, one to the judge, one the mortgage company, irs, etc.. this is what you do to
everybody. You fill in the blank. You put it in the paperwork way before you walk into the courtroom.
You say to the judge i didnt get an answer back from you. I expected an answer in 3 days. I told you in
my notice that if we dont do a jury trial you are interfering with my rights. Are you trying to have a
hearing now today and youre still going to try to conduct this matter without a jury present?
Yes.
Well then im sorry mam, i dont know how to explain this to you, youre still interfering with my rights
and i dont know how youre going to proceed in this matter when i clearly established the rules as i the
prosecutor said that i will move a claim through your court. I am not coming in as a freaking defendant!
You guys gotta stop saying youre a defendant all the time. The defendant cant... theres nothing in the
rules where a defendant wins money. The defendant always loses money or he breaks even. He never
wins anything. Why do i always want to be the loser? I dont ever want to go into a game of chess or
monopoly where the best i could do is lose. I dont want to play. Whats in it for me? I dont see a reason
for me to be here. You know what, im going to make a reason for me to be here. Im going to be the
winner. Somehow im going to win or im not going to play. So youre interfering with my right to a jury
trial. Okay, somebody is claiming i owe them a debt. Who is claiming the debt? An attorney cant make
a claim. He cant claim anything. He has no idea what went on between me and the other party. He
wasnt there. He doesnt know what we agreed to or how we made the terms and conditions. He has no
clue. Hes coming in as a third... hes coming in.. so far at the end of this matter its scary. He has no clue
whats going on and im not going to sit here and explain.. turn state witness on myself and explain what
actually happened between me and the supposed person who claims i owe him a debt. Let the plaintiff
bring forth that information themselves and swear to it.
Can i tell the judge the attorney cant swear?
You told the judge in writing this right? Cause you are not opening your mouth to the judge right? Or
established that you are never going to open your mouth to the judge right?
How can i tell them theyre proceeding against me if im not in court? You are having a hearing and im
supposed to go into court and say you are still interfering with my right to a jury trial right cause you
are having a hearing cause this is all in writing now right?
You put it all in writing. If you go to court and read word for word what you wrote, judge what dont
you understand in this thing? I said i will appear when i see a jury present. I do not see a jury present. I
will not be appearing today. You are interfering with my right to a jury trial. Thats what it says right

here on line number 2. are you still interfering with my right to a jury trial? You ask the judge. Then
there is no reason for me to be here today. What is the purpose of this matter, this hearing today?
Because i dont know how you are going to move when you are in violation of the law. You are
breaking the law judge. You are interfering with my right. You cant do that. You cant step outside
the scope of your authority. You took an oath of office. You have to obey a certain set of rules.
Because we have already established the fact that she is a judge and she took an oath of office under
title 28 if youre going to a federal court judge or title 4 or 5, or under article 6 or 3 where every state
judge or employee has to take an oath of office to be bound to the constitution. Tell the judge are you
breaking your oath are you breaking your promise are you breaking your word, you contracted with the
people you would abide by the constitution. Are you telling everyone in this court room that you are
not bound by the constitution and that you feel that you can breach your contract with the people? And
im just supposed to accept that? Is that what you wish to have happen today? But you put everything in
freaking writing.
Theres no way in the world the judge is going to allow you...like i say when i do that to them they all
recuse themselves in the prehearing trial because they said holy cow! I am not going to get in this court
room with this crazy guy karl because hes going to tear me up. Hes tearing me up in my own chambers.
Im certainly not going to let him put me on a public display and tear me a new hole. Im going to recuse
myself...i went to grade school with this person. My sister had a barbecue with them last week. Im
going to recuse myself. Every judge i go in front of they all recuse themselves at the preliminary
hearing in their chambers because you put them on the spot there, in their chambers. You set up a
preliminary hearing date. a precipe day. Thats how you nail all these judges. You dont wait till open
court. Thats crazy. Thats suicide. You put them all in their place in writing. You ask for a preliminary
trial. You establish the rules. This is how im going to appear. This is how i want them to appear. Thats
where i want the jury to sit... its your case. Like packing a suit case. I want my socks over here, my
tissues over here. This is my case. my case and my suit is going to be put on in front of the jury and
theyre going to determine the merits of my suit. once you know how to play it its fun.
Caller: so i say youre interfering with my rights to a trial by jury. And thats only 1 line. Thats it, that all
i say?
Then what i would do is put the terms and conditions in it. If you insist on interfering with my
rights and i appear on the 30th day like you wished me to or you ordered me to and i dont see a jury
there i am going to be extremely upset and im going to charge you ten thousand dollars for wasting my
valuable time cause you know the rules under article 6 clause 3 you took an oath to be bound by the
constitution. Im using my 9th and 7th amendment, im using amendments right now so i dont confuse
you. Im going to say the 7th and 9th amendments. I have the right to a court of record. That is the only
form of court secured and protected by the constitution of the united states. There is no other court
established in the constitution for the people. Everything else is due to an act of congress, except the
supreme court of the united states, but thats the sc of the guv, not the supreme court of the people. Its
the sc of the guv to put the checks and balances between the executive branch and legislative branch. If
the state had a prob w/the fed or the fed had a problem with a state its their supreme court so they can
slug it out. It wasnt built for us. Out court is the court of record. Its the 12 people in the jury. 7th
amendment clearly stipulates once its decided before a jury it cant be retried or heard in any court in
the united states including the supreme court. Its that simple.
1:48 caller do you write that to the judge or do you put that in as a filing in the case?
You send it straight to the judge and none of this nonsense about putting it in the paper. If i was you i'd
send it to the judge, to the judicial review board of the state, and to the circuit court judge as well.
Youve got an out of hand crazy district court judge down here that is wholly loony tune. But you dont
say that. But at least get the grasp of what youre trying to go with. Dont make it patriotic. Dont make it
800 pages. Make it one page long. Maybe 3 sentences and youre done.

Caller; if you insist on having a hearing in 30 days and theres no jury present im going to be extremely
upset.
Yeah you better say it as nicely as you can. Im going to realize that you still dont believe that i have a
right under the constitution that this matter is more than 20 dollars and you still believe that you have
the right to interfere with that im going to be highly upset and i think that your boss is going to be upset
at the circuit court and im already notifying him as well that im putting you on notice. Im letting your
superiors know that they are going to be held liable, and you can do that writ of mandamus thing, i am
going to demand of them that you obey the law. And if you dont obey the law theyre going to take over.
So how are we going to do this mam, how we going to do this judge sir. How do you want to play this
game? Do you want me to put you on notice with your boss and say that you are not holding up your
oath of office?
Caller: so do i hope they give me an answer?
I hope they dont give me an answer. What do i want an answer for?
Caller: if they dont answer you say they are acquiescent, to the fact of a jury trial.
Im suing them! And im going to prove to the jury, i gave them time to answer. They refused to answer.
You know the rules. He knows the rules. The maxim of law tacit acquiescence is acceptance of the
rules. There you go.
Do you put that in your second letter?
No you put that in your first letter. You answer in 72 hours or 14 days or 6 months, that im going to use
it as a form of acquiescence to prove that my claim is just and true and fair. And im going to
present this evidence to the jury of why im suing you. You can sue somebody for interring with your
rights. Nobody can interfere with your rights, they cant be surrounded, revoked or taken away. If they
could take away your right to do something its a civil privilege its not a right.
1:51 caller; give us the procedure after that to establish the case for federal court.
In the first letter you said if we cant settle this matter on the private side i am going to [ ] common law
court of record and put it in a federal district court because obviously im not going to get a fair hearing
in a state court because youre a state judge. Obviously you get paid by the state so your buddies are
going to back you up. So you know what im going to do? Put it in federal court. How do you want to
deal with this? And then you want to make sure the federal rules say.. you have to abide by certain
federal rules. Shes interfering with my rights. Its a federal question and let the federal judge decide
whether or not she had a right to interfere with your rights to a jury trial.
Thats what i say to people about declatory judgments. Go right to the federal district court judge and
ask him can you give me your opinion federal district court judge. I got a fake lady judge giving me a
hard time interfering with my right to a jury trial. Can you give me my standing if i brought it before
you? How would you rule on that? Well okay, the federal judge is giving you a hard time. Yes. Okay
this is her standing, this is your standing, youre using article 6 clause 3, shes ignoring you right? Good.
He will give you the opinion and then he will send it to the judge lady. And he will say now judge lady
do you still want this lady to drag you into federal court, because i already ruled in her favor. Because
when she comes here she is going to win in a half of a heart beat because everybody here at the federal
district court already is aware of whats going on. So, are you sure you want to settle this on the private
side? Thats a declatory judgment. 1:53
1:54 caller; what about our right to clean water?
Must be tom. Did you sue the prez yet?
Were going to. Common law court of record. All 50 states want to join in, have you heard?
Yeah. Only one page right? Send to obama right?
It doesnt take much when people are discharging.
Do you have a question?
What about our right to clean water?

Nobody has the right to contaminate common ground. If you find somebody discharging on the
common ground or the common water you say, you hold them liable for doing it. Well epa is not
enforcing the law well then their boss is the prez of the US and hes a public servant so you tell the guy
in charge of dea or homeland security that im putting you on notice you have some crazy [ ] out here
that theyre the law called the epa act, clean act of 1972 and theyre failing to enforce it. Im telling you
as the executive branch that your duty is to enforce the acts of congress. Im giving you notice that if
you dont start sending some people to do their duty im going to charge you a feee of ten thousand
dollars a day and bring some guys in here from china who will start installing [filters?] and well start
billing the united states guv for failing to clean the water. We will bring in an outside contracting
agency and hand you the bill. If you dont want to..we will find somebody else to do your job.
1:56 caller can they try you again if they had 2 hung juries?
Oh yeah. What seems to be the problem that you cant settle this on the private side?
Traffic.
And you had a jury trial? Whenever i had traffic i hate going before a jury. I went backwards thru a
stop sign and i knew a jury would convict me. A jury would ataint me. I said to the judge but i didnt
break the law. Theres no injured party. And i didnt have no contract with that cop because thats my car
and i can drive it anyway i want. And the judge says well no im going to find you guilty. I said to the
judge can i bring the law into the court? What law? Its in every code book. What does it say in the
footnote? Because he read the legalese, the code. The footnote; its lawful to drive in reverse as long as
you dont damage property and another person told you that you couldnt drive that car in that manner.
Huh. He said your case is dismissed. I said no its discharged because i aint coming back because i got
better things to do than to explain to you the difference between dismissed and discharged when you
couldnt even understand the difference between legal and lawful. So what your friend did was illegal,
but what he did was not unlawful. Did he cause any property damage to anybody when he was driving
his car.
You dont need to go to the jury. You just tell the judge i did not break the law and you explain to
the judge the difference between legal and lawful if the judge is an idiot because sometimes the
judge dont know.
Well hes not a judge...
right sometimes these administrating hearing officers dont know the diff between legal and lawful. You
gotta teach them. But how you do it is you present it to them a week or two or a month or 2 before you
actually go to trial. And then you go to a precipe day with these administrating hearing judges that do in
the traffic court. You could ask them to have a preliminary hearing with you in chambers with the
prosecutor. He will give it to you. You state your case. You explain to him, look, this is what the law
says. And i actually used the virginia code of 1950, its like 16 point 1 three thirty three. Read the
footnote. It says lawful to drive in reverse in the commonwealth as long as you dont cause damage to
property or the person whos car it is told you specifically you couldnt. He said huh. I said judge its an
ancient law. I said thats law. What your reading is some legal nonsense code. The price went up from
two dollars in 1950 to fifty dollars now in 2010. your legalese always changes but the law remains the
same. The law never changes. As long as there is no injured party i can do whatever i want on this
planet and nobody can tell me no. nobody is my damn daddy. We are all people here. If you want to
drive backward i think youre a nut. But you know what? if you want to wear a black robe im going to
think youre a nut. I would never be caught dead wearing it but i like to drive backwards so i guess im a
nut too. But were all free to do whatever we want in this life aint we judge? And then you just go on
with your day. He is not going to hold you guilty. Oh yeah this makes sense. Youre going to slug this
problem out prehearing day. Dont wait till you go to court. Theres no reason why you cant say i wish
to [ ] this matter in chambers. I wish to settle this in a preliminary hearing. Is there some reason
why we have to have jury? Is there some office hours i could just meet with you and the prosecutor?

Can we have a 3 way phone call? I did that with the attorney general of virginia, i sat in the judges
chambers and we slugged it out in the judges chambers and the judge realized holy cow this guy is
going to run me over like a freight train in court and the judge recused himself. Theres a lot of ways
you can settle this and a lot of ways without opening your mouth in court.
Im sure theres some sort of rules in your civil code that says something about a preliminary hearing
trial that you demand it, that you wish it, to move the matter into some sort of a plea bargain with the
parties out of the public view. 2:02
2:03 can you explain dismiss versus discharge and how you effect that with the judge?
I tell the judge you could dismiss this because there is two types of bills in this world. Theres bills of
account and there is final bills. So now if you want to leave my citational ticket where the state or the
county could use it to create bonds or security instruments with it, fine. You could just dismiss it and
use it as a form of security instrument. Theres 2 kinds of bills. Bills of account that im still going to be
in debt to the county or the state. So you can bundle all my traffic tickets and everybody elses and you
could sell it off to an investor like a derivative. just like they did with mortgages. This is how counties
and states..theyre running out there getting traffic tickets like crazy that they just want them dismissed
not discharged because once theyre discharged they cant use it as a form of debt instrument to create
credit for their county or state.
2:05 so how do you discharge it?
You dont. Why would you want to do that, unless its hurting your insurance policy or employment. Just
let the county or state keep it. I dont care. Do you want to have ten thousand tickets with my name on it
and you could generate money for the county or state without tax, and you need investors to buy this
hokey dokey derivative bond nonsense like these mortgages on houses and somehow generate money
for the county to fix the roads and [ ] for our schools, well god bless you i will go out and generate as
many traffic tickets as you want me to as long as you...
[caller: they told me sign here and we will release you and return your property. I said re lease me, so
you are going to lease me back to someone who had a lease before?]