A Manhattan man was found guilty on two charges related to fishing without a license today in a trial that saw him being removed early in the trial in handcuffs.
Ernie Tertelgte, 52, represented himself against misdemeanor charges of obstructing a peace officer and resisting arrest. Tertelgte faced a jury trial for two charges related to fishing without a license.
Before the jury was even selected, the 52-year-old man was removed from the courtroom after he objected multiple times to the proceedings.
Tertelgte then watched the court proceedings from a nearby room via video and remained handcuffed.
The charges against him stem from an Aug. 31 incident which a state game warden attempted to cite Tertelgte for fishing without a license at the Three Forks Pond, which is a state-managed area.
In court, FWP warden Adam Pankratz said Tertelgte refused to give him his name when approached. He was fishing with his 11-year-old son that day and the warden told the court he and a Three Forks police officer repeatedly tried to stop the situation from escalating, but Tertelgte refused to comply.
Tertelgte did not get a chance to cross examine witnesses.
Tertelgte was fined $150.
The case is gaining national attention as a video of Tertelgte's initial appearance in Three Forks has been viewed more than 400,000 times.
http://www.kbzk.com/news/tertelgte-found-guilty-by-jury/
Dear labor, Looked at that and read the above story, thought it was true and posted it. Was going to give a few thoughts on basic legal procedure in an instance such as this.
Before doing that, I decided to do some reverse speech to insure that this is a strue story. Here's some of what I pulled out of RS:
"I advise you I won't commit with a dogcatcher right, I woofed you. This is a spree occupy here. Genocide is happiness. My weak is scandalous. I'm totally false here. Voltage is for sale, we're all terrorists. Judee going to put you on the run. Basically I want to be famous. I'm corrupt, we fist people with jacks. I foos the buyer here. I tale a fish. My weapins great. I fish mice with men. I arranged it to storage you. I'm of yesterday. I'll be conquered with a truce. My fist already went underground. I'm fooling. We're basing racial. I encourage individual terror. This is simply mouses virtue. I claim Jewish rule. I'm a badge rat. We'll erase the sell man, thank you."
So what are we do figure from these reverse speech statements here? Look like a Basic Judee boursed op?
Basic legal procedure before trial is to put the allegations to a grand jury to see if there is probable cause first, before going to trial. Rather than talk about legal procedure, In this instance, does reverse speech give us some clues that there is an entirely different scenario being played out here?
I thank our elders from space for teaching me to read reverse speech. I love you all.
Ernie Tertelgte, 52, represented himself against misdemeanor charges of obstructing a peace officer and resisting arrest. Tertelgte faced a jury trial for two charges related to fishing without a license.
Before the jury was even selected, the 52-year-old man was removed from the courtroom after he objected multiple times to the proceedings.
Tertelgte then watched the court proceedings from a nearby room via video and remained handcuffed.
The charges against him stem from an Aug. 31 incident which a state game warden attempted to cite Tertelgte for fishing without a license at the Three Forks Pond, which is a state-managed area.
In court, FWP warden Adam Pankratz said Tertelgte refused to give him his name when approached. He was fishing with his 11-year-old son that day and the warden told the court he and a Three Forks police officer repeatedly tried to stop the situation from escalating, but Tertelgte refused to comply.
Tertelgte did not get a chance to cross examine witnesses.
Tertelgte was fined $150.
The case is gaining national attention as a video of Tertelgte's initial appearance in Three Forks has been viewed more than 400,000 times.
http://www.kbzk.com/news/tertelgte-found-guilty-by-jury/
Dear labor, Looked at that and read the above story, thought it was true and posted it. Was going to give a few thoughts on basic legal procedure in an instance such as this.
Before doing that, I decided to do some reverse speech to insure that this is a strue story. Here's some of what I pulled out of RS:
"I advise you I won't commit with a dogcatcher right, I woofed you. This is a spree occupy here. Genocide is happiness. My weak is scandalous. I'm totally false here. Voltage is for sale, we're all terrorists. Judee going to put you on the run. Basically I want to be famous. I'm corrupt, we fist people with jacks. I foos the buyer here. I tale a fish. My weapins great. I fish mice with men. I arranged it to storage you. I'm of yesterday. I'll be conquered with a truce. My fist already went underground. I'm fooling. We're basing racial. I encourage individual terror. This is simply mouses virtue. I claim Jewish rule. I'm a badge rat. We'll erase the sell man, thank you."
So what are we do figure from these reverse speech statements here? Look like a Basic Judee boursed op?
Basic legal procedure before trial is to put the allegations to a grand jury to see if there is probable cause first, before going to trial. Rather than talk about legal procedure, In this instance, does reverse speech give us some clues that there is an entirely different scenario being played out here?
I thank our elders from space for teaching me to read reverse speech. I love you all.
Patrick Sullivan April 5, 2013 at 7:15 PM
Founding father Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) and law professor George Wythe (1726-1806) worked on revisions of Virginia's statutes from 1776-1779.
During this time, they had ascertained, that a crime could not be perpetrated against a corporation.
As a derivative of this concept, an officer of the state could not carry forward with a criminal prosecution as the state itself is a corporation. The corporation is an artificial, useful creation of structured rules with duties and attendant obligations. Would we not consider it merely as an operating system?
The Virginia constitution of 1776, while having a Bill of Rights, had no provision for the Grand jury process. In 1789 the Grand jury process was included in the 5th Amendment to the Federal constitution in Washington D.C.
The several states completed ratification of the constitution with the inclusion of the first ten amendments, The Bill of Rights. The United States of America came into being in 1791 as a nation. Does this not give us certainty that Grand jury process began as the law of the land in 1791?
The 5th amendment to the American Bill of Rights requires a Grand jury to establish 'probable cause' that a crime has been committed. If the allegations made convince the grand jurors that the allegations are more probable than not, then the Grand jury will issue a True Bill. This will give the state corporation privity to the issue and provide legal standing to move forward in a court of law with a criminal action.
The founders' original intent was that anything that would interfere with a persons life, liberty or pursuit of happiness, had to have a Grand jury make the call on it first. Property is covered in the 7th amendment.
Can we not make the connection here on a bill collector's position as a corporation? Is it not clear that it requires a Grand jury to act before any warrant for arrest can issue?
Thomas Jefferson proposed that all issues involving $20 or more, a right to trial by jury be guaranteed. This was included in the American Bill of rights and made the law of the land in 1791. The 7th amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial in all issues involving $20 or more.
"In Minnesota, judges have issued arrest warrants for people who owe as little as $85 -- less than half the cost of housing an inmate overnight. "
The fellow who for $85 was taken away and held for ransom; is that not $65 over the trial by jury guarantee?
In American law, was he not entitled to a jury trial to decide the issue first? Can we only wonder what Thomas Jefferson would say about this?
Is there not a deeper and more significant issue involved in who it is that issues the bourse; bourse the thing we call money?
Can labor not take control of the bourse so that we can straighten this out nice and sweet?
When can we hope that labor will take over the issue of money? Labor; when will you STRIKE THEM OUT?
The Return of Debtors' Prison
http://badlawyernyc.blogspot.com/2010/06/return-of-debtors-prison.html?showComment=1365203717773#c4249991261760640665
Founding father Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) and law professor George Wythe (1726-1806) worked on revisions of Virginia's statutes from 1776-1779.
During this time, they had ascertained, that a crime could not be perpetrated against a corporation.
As a derivative of this concept, an officer of the state could not carry forward with a criminal prosecution as the state itself is a corporation. The corporation is an artificial, useful creation of structured rules with duties and attendant obligations. Would we not consider it merely as an operating system?
The Virginia constitution of 1776, while having a Bill of Rights, had no provision for the Grand jury process. In 1789 the Grand jury process was included in the 5th Amendment to the Federal constitution in Washington D.C.
The several states completed ratification of the constitution with the inclusion of the first ten amendments, The Bill of Rights. The United States of America came into being in 1791 as a nation. Does this not give us certainty that Grand jury process began as the law of the land in 1791?
The 5th amendment to the American Bill of Rights requires a Grand jury to establish 'probable cause' that a crime has been committed. If the allegations made convince the grand jurors that the allegations are more probable than not, then the Grand jury will issue a True Bill. This will give the state corporation privity to the issue and provide legal standing to move forward in a court of law with a criminal action.
The founders' original intent was that anything that would interfere with a persons life, liberty or pursuit of happiness, had to have a Grand jury make the call on it first. Property is covered in the 7th amendment.
Can we not make the connection here on a bill collector's position as a corporation? Is it not clear that it requires a Grand jury to act before any warrant for arrest can issue?
Thomas Jefferson proposed that all issues involving $20 or more, a right to trial by jury be guaranteed. This was included in the American Bill of rights and made the law of the land in 1791. The 7th amendment guarantees the right to a jury trial in all issues involving $20 or more.
"In Minnesota, judges have issued arrest warrants for people who owe as little as $85 -- less than half the cost of housing an inmate overnight. "
The fellow who for $85 was taken away and held for ransom; is that not $65 over the trial by jury guarantee?
In American law, was he not entitled to a jury trial to decide the issue first? Can we only wonder what Thomas Jefferson would say about this?
Is there not a deeper and more significant issue involved in who it is that issues the bourse; bourse the thing we call money?
Can labor not take control of the bourse so that we can straighten this out nice and sweet?
When can we hope that labor will take over the issue of money? Labor; when will you STRIKE THEM OUT?
The Return of Debtors' Prison
http://badlawyernyc.blogspot.com/2010/06/return-of-debtors-prison.html?showComment=1365203717773#c4249991261760640665
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
America has no civil imprisonment. Debtors prison is gone.
Doesn't exist, yet numerous people are held.
A doctor with a stack of degrees cannot legally determine the issue of sanity or insanity, only a jury can make the call.
There are other significant differences between the new American law of the land of 1791 and the original English law.
The Supremes in concert have chosen not to incorporate the 5th or the 7th into state law.
Can we wonder why these two chapters of the Bill of Rights are denied by the Supreme's in state law?
These 2 amendments, found in the ten that make up the Bill of Rights are by and far, the absolutely most precious and important of them all.
Why the Supremes leave them out at state level?
Here’s what the 7th tells us: If the issue is for $20 dollars or more, a trial by jury is guaranteed, if demanded.
Thank you Thomas Jefferson for that one.
Debt is civil.
To make a thing into a imprisonment issue, it must first be turned into criminal.
The only way to do that in accordance with American law is to give it to the 23 people that make up the Grand jury call.
The defining point between civil and criminal issues has multiple aspects, not the least of which is the question of intent.
Intent is for the Grand jury to determine, an aspect of probable cause.
The Grand jury determines if a criminal allegation(s) will or will not proceed to the courtroom to be prosecuted.
Gun goes off while cleaning it, passerby gets it. Terrible accident; manslaughter or murder?
For this example we'll say the Grand jury finds no probable cause that there was intention to harm.
If they feel it was truly an accident, then no probable cause that a crime was committed. No true bill issued.
In whatever direction they decide, One way or the other, the Grand jury is delegated to make the call in American law.
The family of the deceased still has a remedy, take it to a civil court to address the damages.
IN the issue of indebtedness A person lacking funds may wish to pay the debt, its only lack of funds that are hindering it.
So there exists no mind of the criminal, no criminal intent to do wrong.
As to the original debt that the debtor was called into court for, a civil action can be filed with a jury demand, and the debt itself and the manner in which it is being collected, can be tested in front of a trial court.
This guarantee is found in the 7th, the gift from Thomas Jefferson to us.
As to a debt or other issue, to take one from their life liberty or property, a Grand jury is the designated party to first make the call.
So the 5th and the 7th together give us the Grand jury and the trial court to decide what it is about, and what we should do to remedy it.
These procedural elements of American law take the issues from the hands of the specialists and put them into the hands of those most affected by the outcome, the people of the community.
Yes, the Grand jury can subpoena the gnomes in Switzerland or anyone else for that matter.
The gnomes don’t have to show up in the Grand jury room.
Failure to appear is not to be ordinarily construed as evidence of criminal intent.
Of course If they choose to show, it would give them a chance to give their own side of the story.
Its basic; A grand jury is the only party that can turn an allegation of wrongdoing into a prosecutable offense.
The question of Debt does not bypass legal procedure in legal process.
Even though the Supreme's have chosen to not incorporate the 5th and the 7th chapters of law in the states, the question of privity to the issue remains.
A Grand jury is required in American law to certify the state and its agents as a competent authority to carry forward in a criminal case.
Privity to an issue is needed to Provide legal standing to proceed.
The Grand jury establishes privity by making a finding of probable cause and can authorize the issue of a true bill.
When Intent is the issue; Grand jury makes the call.
The Accidental shooting, if it's later found otherwise, Then a Grand jury can be recalled and hear the allegations again with the new evidence provided.
No double jeopardy, because it never went to trial in the first instance.
“Is it more probable than not that the evidence presented supports the allegations that a crime has been committed?
If so a true bill is issued.
Is it Less probable that the evidence presented shows that a crime has been committed?
If yes, No true bill issued.
From that point on it’s all civil.
Monetary damages or other things, no imprisonment.
Its that simple.”
Are there more important issues than this to deal with such as getting hold of the bourse?
Probably so, yet, by looking to the provisions of the 5th and the 7th, is it likely that we can transition into a new day with a return of the Bill of Rights?
This time fully moth proofed and understood?
Show us the way things are divided between civil and criminal in American law and how to proceed in each way?
Reveal to all how useful are these procedural elements of American law.
Who said the golden rule is: “He who has the gold makes the rules?”
If you go to buy some gold, what could you hand the clerk? Would the clerk accept cash for gold? Gold and cash, are they all variations of the same thing; measures used to exchange the values created by Labor?
While the 5th and 7th are real important, in the hierarchy of priority, is issue of bourse and who issues it the biggest of them all for us to address first?
When you Labor, have the bourse in your hands will you see that the Bill of Rights are instituted once again and when that’s done have the 5th and the 7th incorporated at the state level?
Will you think of founding father Thomas Jefferson, let me show you, let me show you the way to go.
And the good thing he had for us when he insisted that in any issue concerning more than $20 dollars, the right to a jury trial is guaranteed?
Jefferson insisted the bill of Rights include the right to a jury trial for all of us in monetary things and had this made law the law of the land in 1791.
One question remains: "When will you Labor act to take control of the bourse?"
At the top of the list Is there anything other than control of the bourse needed to move us all forward into peace?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qLAIskTQXUc/TBqYN51qy3I/AAAAAAAAAKc/57nkbaZ7mag/s200/debtors+prison+in+america.JPG
Monday, April 23, 2012
Our Future In Chains: The Debtors Prison System Returns
Michael Edwards
Activist Post
Read article here:
http://www.activistpost.com/2010/06/our-future-in-chains-for-profit-debtors.html