Wasn't aware I commited a crime, need legal advice

[audiouphoria]

Hey everyone. I'm a college student and I work part time so naturally I was shocked to find out last night that a cop was going to fine me $240 over something this petty. The fine is $120 for a headlight that went out and $120 for a "modified muffler" I'm not the racing type and when I bought my car the muffler needed to be replaced because of rusting. It is not loud and I know if I had a test done on the decible rating it would be well below tolerable. I own a 4 door 1995 accord with 209K miles on it and yet the cop still found it necessary to harass me and ask me questions such as, "are you in a street racing gang?" I was more than polite with him while informing him that I'm a student, i work, and I don't race my car. What exactly are the laws on "modified mufflers" ? I live in spokane but was fined in spokane valley if that makes any difference. And how is it even lawful to fine me so much money for having one headlight out when I wasn't even aware or I would've replaced it by now. Thanks for your help.

 

[Scooterdog]

You can default the posecutor on this! If there is no victim, and no damage to propterty, you have commited no crime. This is how:

1. DECLARATION OF DEFENDANT'S STANDING

2. AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH

3. ACCEPTANCE OF OATH OF OFFICE

This takes about 20 days. But, you can ask for a continuence. (up to 60 dys in my state)

The body of each is as follows:

1. TO: ________________, (name of county) ______________ (name of DA (prosecutor))

FIRST: This is lawful notification and is sent pursuant to the federal Constitution, specifically, the Bill of Rights, in particular, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and pursuant to your oath, and requires your written response to me specific to the subject matter. Your failure to respond, as stipulated, and rebut, with particularity, everything in this letter with which you disagree, is your lawful, legal and binding agreement with and admission to the fact that everything in this letter is true, correct, legal, lawful and fully binding upon you in any court in America, without your protest or objection or that of those who represent you. Your silence is your acquiescence. See: Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385,391. Notification of legal responsibility is "the first essential of due process of law". See also: U.S. V. Tweel, 550 F.2d.297. "Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading."

1. I am a living, flesh and blood human being by the given name of
John Quincy Jones. (Note the spelling of the name, upper case is bsn, lower is human)

2. I am not the person, "JOHN QUINCY JONES", named on any papers submitted in this case and have never claimed to be "JOHN QUINCY JONES".

3. I have never been known as "JOHN QUINCY JONES", a nom de guerre and misnomer.

4. I am the sovereign spoken of in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, 370

Note: "Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but, in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom
and for whom all government exists and acts.; "Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, 370"

5. I demand that the prosecutor, should he attempt to dispute my claim of right as a sovereign flesh and blood human being, who is not subject to the law (legislative law) as stated by Supreme Court Justice Mathews in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, 370, show proof to the court that, the United States Supreme has overturned this landmark case.

6. I have no contract or agreement with STATE OF (NAME OF STATE) or any STATE OF (NAME OF STATE) agency, or any STATE OF (NAME OF STATE) municipality.

7. I have no contract or agreement with (name of county) County or any other county.

8. I am not a party of the body politic or corporate.

9. I have not joined in the above captioned suit.



Date: ____/____/____

Affiant, ______________________________________

John Quincy Jones,
c/o (street address)
city, state, by [00000]

We, the undersigned, witness this (?th) day of (?month), 2005, that the one known to us to be John Quincy Jones, did personally appear before us in (name of county) County, State of (name of state), and upon affirmation execute and affix the above signature.

**gernerals note; the case can't be beat!! It has passed for the last ten years, these papers of which we speak, I have recent Cal. Case law backing these papers"

 

[Scooterdog]

Affid. Of Truth:

I, John Quincy Jones, the undersigned, make this affidavit of my own free will and hereby affirm, under my oath, that the information contained in this affidavit is true and correct.

This affidavit is lawful notification to the (name of county Upper & Lower Case Type, (i.e., Los Angeles County)) _________ District Attorney, hereinafter referred to as the prosecutor, and is hereby made and sent to the above named prosecutor pursuant to the Federal Constitution, specifically, the Bill of Rights, in particular, Amendments I, IV, V, VI, VII, IX and X, and requires your written response to me within 10 days, via your sworn and notarized affidavit, specific to the subject matter specified in this affidavit. Notice to Principals is notice to agents, and notice to agents is notice to Principals. You are hereby noticed that your failure to respond, as stipulated, and rebut, with particularity, anything with which you disagree in this affidavit, is your lawful, legal and binding agreement with and admission to the fact that everything in this affidavit is true, correct, legal, lawful, and fully binding upon you in any court in America, without your protest or objection, or that of those who represent you. Your silence is your acquiescence.

I, John Quincy Jones, hereby affirm that the following actions and events took place:

1. I delivered to the prosecutor's office my "Declaration of Standing" on or about
_____________ (date).

2. The document notified recipient: (a) of my legal standing; that the prosecutor did
not have proper jurisdiction over me to prosecute this instant case, (b) that the
prosecutor, within a specified time period, is required as a matter of law to rebut
my charges and averments made in those letters if the prosecutor disagreed with
them; (c) that if the prosecutor failed to do so, then the prosecutor agreed with
and admitted to my charges and averments;

3. The prosecutor received the document but failed to respond to the subject matter
contained in them;

4. The prosecutor failed to rebut any of my statements, charges or averments made
in the referenced letters;

5. Pursuant to the notice contained in the letters, The prosecutor, by his or her failure
to respond to, and further, by his or her failure to rebut my charges and averments
made in my referenced document, The prosecutor agrees with and admits to my
charges contained in the referenced letters;

5. By the prosecutor's failure to rebut the charges contained in the referenced
document, he or she admits to all of my charges. The charges, to which The
prosecutor agrees, by his or her failure to rebut them, are listed below.

Exhibit A: Included his/herein documents the following facts:
A. I am not JOHN QUINCY JONES (your name in ALL CAPS).
B. I am a flesh and blood human being not subject to the jurisdiction of the prosecutor, but rather the Sovereign in Yick Wo: Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, 370"
C. I have no contract with the state of ______________, (name of state in Upper & Lower Case Type) the county of __________, (name of county where traffic trial is being held) nor the city of __________. (name of city where traffic trial is being held)
D. The prosecutor has no jurisdiction to prosecute this instant case.




AUTHORITIES
"Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed when it clearly appears that the court lacks jurisdiction, the court has no authority to reach merits, but, rather, should dismiss the action." Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026.
"This/here is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction." Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215.
"The burden shifts to the court to prove jurisdiction." Rosemond v. Lambert, 469 F2d 416.
"Court must prove on the record, all jurisdiction facts related to the jurisdiction asserted." Lantana v. Hopper, 102 F2d 188; Chicago v. New York, 37 F Supp 150.
"Jurisdiction is fundamental and a judgment rendered by a court that does not have jurisdiction to hear is void ab initio." In Re Application of Wyatt, 300 P. 132; Re Cavitt, 118 P2d 846.
"Thus, where a judicial tribunal has no jurisdiction of the subject matter on which it assumes to act, its proceedings are absolutely void in the fullest sense of the term." Dillon v. Dillon, 187 P 27
"A universal principle as old as the law is that a proceedings of a court without jurisdiction are a nullity and its judgment therein without effect either on person or property." Norwood v. Renfield, 34 C 329; Ex parte Giambonini, 49 P. 732.















Therefore I demand the court dismiss this case sua sponte due to the prosecutor's
lack of jurisdiction:
Date: ___________
________________________________
___________________________
John Quincy Jones, Affiant

We, the undersigned, witness this __th day of __________, 200_, that the one known to us to be __________________, (your name in Upper and Lower case type) did personally appear before us in Washtenaw County, State of Michigan, and upon affirmation execute and affix the above signature.


______________________________ ______________________________
(Witness Signature) (Witness Signature)


Address of Witness: Address of Witness:
______________________________ ______________________________
______________________________ ______________________________
______________________________ ______________________________

 

[Scooterdog]

Acceptance of Oath body follows;

Notice for ________________, (name) ______ (title, i.e., Judge, Commissioner, Magistrate, ________ (county) District Attorney, etc.

Point of Law: All contracts commence with an offer and only become binding upon acceptance. See: "Contracts" by Farnsworth, third edition, sect. 3.3, pages 112, 113. Infra.

The organic Constitutions of the United States of American, and the State of ____________ (name of state, Upper & Lower Case Type) and the Oath of Office of the above named PUBLIC SERVANT, amounts to nothing more than an offer of an intention to act or refrain from acting in a specified way between the respective governments and the private American people and for other purposes.

Be it known by these presents that I, John Quincy Jones, do hereby accept the organic Constitutions of the United States of America and of the State of __________ (name of state, Upper & Lower Case Type) and the Oath of Office of the above named PUBLIC SERVANT as your open and binding offer of promise to form a firm and binding contract between the respective governments, their political instrumentalities and the above named PUBLIC SERVANT and myself in my private capacity.

I expect that, as a PUBLIC SERVANT, you will perform all of your promises and stay within the limitations of your constitutions, create no unfounded presumptions, seek only the true facts and tell the truth at all times and respect and protect my right of personal liberty and private property and all rights antecedent thereto.

The foregoing Notice of Acceptance of Constitutions and of Oath of Office is made explicitly without recourse and now constitutes a binding contract and any deviation there from will be treated as a breach of contract and a violation of substantive due process.







VERIFICATION

I, John Quincy Jones, declare under penalty of perjury in accordance with the laws of the United states of America that the foregoing is true correct and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.

______________________________
(Declarer's Signature)


______________________________ ______________________________
(Witness Signature) (Witness Signature)

Address of Witness: Address of Witness:
______________________________ ______________________________
______________________________ ______________________________
______________________________ ______________________________

Dated: ________________

THIS INSTRUMENT IS NON-NEGOTIABLE




"Contracts" by Farnsworth, third edition, sect 3.3, pages 112,113

Offer and Acceptance. The outward appearance of the agreement process, by which the parties satisfy the requirement of bargain imposed by the doctrine of consideration, varies widely according to the circumstances. It may, for example, involve face-to-face negotiations, an exchange of letters or facsimiles, or merely the perfunctory signing of a printed form supplied by the other party. Whatever the outward appearance, it is common to analyze the process in terms
of two distinct steps: First, a manifestation of assent that is called an offer, made by one party (the offeror) to another (the offeree);
and second, a manifestation of assent in response that is called an acceptance, made by the offeree to the offeror. Although courts apply this analysis on a case-by-case basis, depending on the circumstances, it gives a reassuring appearance of consistency.

What is an "offer"? It can be defined as a manifestation to another of
assent to enter into a contract if the other manifests assent in return by some action, often a promise but sometimes a performance. By making an offer, the offeror thus confers upon the offeree the power to create a contract. An offer is nearly always a promise and in a sense, the action (promise or performance) on which the offeror conditions the promise is the "price" of its becoming enforceable. Offer, then, is the name given to a promise that is conditional on some action by the promisee if the legal effect of the promisee's taking that action is to make the promise enforceable. Empowerment of the offeree to make the offeror's promise enforceable is thus the essence of an offer. When does a promise empower the promisee to take action that will make the promise enforceable? In other words, when does a manifestation of assent amount to an offer? This is one of the main subjects of this chapter.

What is an "acceptance"? It can be defined as the action {promise or performance} by the offeree that creates a contract (ie, makes the offeror's promise enforceable). Acceptance, then, is the name given to the offeree's action if the legal effect of that action is to make the offeror's promise enforceable. When does action by the promisee make the promise enforceable? In other words, when does the promisee's action amount to an acceptance? This is another of the main subjects of this chapter. Because of the requirement of mutuality of obligation, both parties are free to withdraw from negotiations until the moment when both are bound. This is the moment when the offeree accepts the offer. It therefore follows, as we shall see later in more detail, that the offeror is free to revoke the offer at any time before acceptance.

 

[Scooterdog]

If they are stupid enough to go anyfurther, I have a motion to dismiss, or face federal charges. Only two Prosecutors have tried to rebut,(in all fifty states) and they have lost. My state just dimsiss's. PM me if you need moire help.

 

[Scooterdog]

End Of Case

Please, little GH, try to rebut this!* And "Carl", by the way, I posted your Cal. Case, you you went mute"

 

[Scooterdog]

And this would be MY motion to dismiss, against anyone "claiming" to be a judge:

MOTIONS TO DISMISS

I, John Quincy Jones, having appeared under threat, duress, and coercion, only to protect Aggrieved Defendant's interests, without any appearance of an adverse party, where the Judge was not an impartial party, but also prosecution, which is a conflict of interests and gives rise to violation of due process rights of the alleged defendant, who is now aggrieved because of such impartiality, and as such this court has lost immunity and any preconceived jurisdiction.

Further investigation shows that there was no probable cause for the arrest and seizure at the time of such arrest and seizure. There was no disturbance of the peace, felony, or warrant for such action, and no commission of a crime leading to another cause of action against the Plaintiff and Officer for harassment and obtaining a signature under threat, duress and coercion.



The Aggrieved Defendant is fully aware of and does not surrender or waive Rights guaranteed in the federal and State Constitutions, or his free exercise of those Rights. SEE: Brady v. U.S., 397 U.S., 742 at 748. "Waivers of Constitutional Rights must not only be done voluntarily, they must be knowingly intelligent acts done with sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances and consequences." Further, the exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime. SEE: Miller v. U.S., 230 F, 2d 286, 489. "The claim and exercise of a Constitutional Right cannot be converted into a crime." However, that is exactly what the State of ________________ (name of state, Upper & Lower Case Type) has done by converting Aggrieved Defendant's claim and exercise of Constitutional Rights into a crime. The State opposes and contradicts those Rights and brings action against Aggrieved Defendant for his/her exercise of those Rights, and in so doing, denies and defies the Constitutions, including defying Constitutional provisions against Bills of Attainder and pains and penalties. For such charges to be brought by the State against a Citizen in any court constitutes treason by those who bring and prosecute the charges. For the court to hear such charges demonstrates that the court fails to honor Constitutional Rights and fails due process of law. The presiding judge has taken an oath to uphold the Constitutions, and pursuant to that oath and his/her duties to the Constitutions, and not to fraud and color of law, the judge has the discretion to dismiss the unlawful charges, uphold his/her oath, the Constitutions and dismiss this case.


In the interest of justice and to preclude further injury to the Citizen and Aggrieved Defendant:

MOTION # 1
Aggrieved Defendant hereby motions the court to dismiss for failure to establish probable cause for the traffic stop, and a contested hearing within ninety days under the Constitution of the Untied States therefore any jurisdiction is lost in the matter.




MOTION # 2
Aggrieved Defendant hereby motions the court to dismiss for lack of prosecution at hearing. Prosecution failed to invoke jurisdiction, wherefore this court has lost any alleged jurisdiction and has denied an adversarial proceeding amounting to lack of due process.

MOTION # 3
Aggrieved Defendant hereby motions the court to suppress all evidence unlawfully obtained by the traffic stop "arrest" by the arresting officer who comes with unclean hands. The Constitution of the United States forbids that a standing army may be maintained in peace time. Such constitutional abuse of WAR POWERS, if not rebutted by some superior law, will be evidence of such willful intent to injure the rights of peaceful Citizens.

MOTION # 4
Aggrieved Defendant hereby motions the court to dismiss for failure to obtain and correct the true name of the Defendant at hearing. The Defendant has never been known as
JOHN QUINCY JONES or any other nom de guerre, and comes into this court under the American Flag of Peace, and municipality has no express authority to use marshal war powers upon this Citizen without lawful declaration. This Citizen also declares that the venue is improper, in that the alleged infraction did not occur upon any municipal property and as such must be dismissed.

MOTION # 5
Aggrieved Defendant hereby motions the court to dismiss the charge for failure to explain the nature and cause of the accusation, thereby leaving the Defendant in ignorance and without aid of knowledge to prepare a knowledgeable defense, and amounts to denial of due process.




MOTION # 6
The Aggrieved Defendant further motions the court to dismiss for statutory lack of authorization of officer to issue a "NOTICE TO APPEAR", or provide such statute that authorizes such form to be issued by a member of the executive branch. (remove preceding text if you were issued a "summons" and replace it with the following for Motion #6)

The Aggrieved Defendant further motions the court to dismiss for lack of constitutional authorization of officer to issue a "SUMMONS." The officer is a member of the executive branch of government and the Constitution forbids occupying or acting under two branches of government simultaneously, also being a violation of a public officer's oath of office.

Aggrieved Defendant objects to the martial law war powers summary judgment of this court and lack of due process and I reserve all my rights under the common law including the right to appeal, without cost and do not voluntarily waive any rights.

Submitted this (day (i.e., 8th day), month), 2005


_________________________________
(signature)

John Quincy Jones, De Jure Soli, Sanguinis, Coronea
c/o (street address)
city, state, [by 00000]





I, John Quincy Jones certify that, I have served the Office of Prosecuting Attorney a true and correct copy of the Motions to Dismiss on this (enter date (i.e., 7th)) day of (type name of month), 2005 by leaving a copy with the Clerk, also filing a copy of said legal document with the Court Clerk on the above specified date.


Affiant, ______________Scooterdog_______________________


Stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

 

[Green_Hornet]

Hey everyone. I'm a college student and I work part time so naturally I was shocked to find out last night that a cop was going to fine me $240 over something this petty. The fine is $120 for a headlight that went out and $120 for a "modified muffler" I'm not the racing type and when I bought my car the muffler needed to be replaced because of rusting. It is not loud and I know if I had a test done on the decible rating it would be well below tolerable. I own a 4 door 1995 accord with 209K miles on it and yet the cop still found it necessary to harass me and ask me questions such as, "are you in a street racing gang?" I was more than polite with him while informing him that I'm a student, i work, and I don't race my car. What exactly are the laws on "modified mufflers" ? I live in spokane but was fined in spokane valley if that makes any difference. And how is it even lawful to fine me so much money for having one headlight out when I wasn't even aware or I would've replaced it by now. Thanks for your help.

Ask the court for an extension by phone if necessary,make the repairs noted on the ticket,save the receipts. On your court date submit the receipts,the judge should reduce the fine,or dismiss the case in the interest of justice. If he does not you can appeal his ruling in district court. In California this type of ticket is known as a fix it ticket. Unfortunately Washington is a little stricter. They expect the driver not be driving a car with defective equipment to begin with. Everything Spamerdog told you is none sense,and the motions will be dismissed.

 

[Scooterdog]

I can't read what the pisa ant wrote, but I"m sure, more opinion, lies, no case law or case's to back it up.

I didn't advertise, I just gave you people knowledge for free, in the same law books they sell for law students.(Thats how I built that by the way)

The only arguments you'll find about this, is from Public Servents, it scares the hell out of them. It's legal, print it out, take it to a lawyer for fifty bucks to look over. He can only give opinion, not law as to why it wont' work. By law, it will, it has, and will continue too.

 

[Green_Hornet]

You can default the posecutor on this! If there is no victim, and no damage to propterty, you have commited no crime. This is how:

1. DECLARATION OF DEFENDANT'S STANDING

2. AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH

3. ACCEPTANCE OF OATH OF OFFICE..............

I wonder why the moderators don't delete spam on this forum? This is non-criminal traffic infraction there is no prosecutor at traffic hearings.

 

[Scooterdog]

I bet we got a lot of case law and PROOF of the BS's post. Please.

 

[Green_Hornet]

I bet we got a lot of case law and PROOF of the BS's post. Please.

You don't need case law to Ban the Spam.

 

[chopshop]

Hey everyone. I'm a college student and I work part time so naturally I was shocked to find out last night that a cop was going to fine me $240 over something this petty. The fine is $120 for a headlight that went out and $120 for a "modified muffler" I'm not the racing type and when I bought my car the muffler needed to be replaced because of rusting. It is not loud and I know if I had a test done on the decible rating it would be well below tolerable. I own a 4 door 1995 accord with 209K miles on it and yet the cop still found it necessary to harass me and ask me questions such as, "are you in a street racing gang?" I was more than polite with him while informing him that I'm a student, i work, and I don't race my car. What exactly are the laws on "modified mufflers" ? I live in spokane but was fined in spokane valley if that makes any difference. And how is it even lawful to fine me so much money for having one headlight out when I wasn't even aware or I would've replaced it by now. Thanks for your help.

IS there a law on the books in Washington that has a loud muffler exhaust bill? I kwo here in MA I have been fighting a bill that sint correct in its wording about the same thing.
IF there is a db level clearly on the books about what is too loud- then yes you are at fault and need to fight it if you feel you should.
If the office was being subjective (that'sounds loud' etc) it will probbaly get dismissed.

Contact SEMA (Speciality equipment Market Association) www.semasan.com I think is the address- and speak with Jason Tolleson- he should be able to tell you if there is a law in Washington like this. Good luck.