Hi there,
I have already been to court and pleaded not guilty to two misdemeanors, criminal mischief in the first degree and disorderly intox. This will be my second disorderly intox charge. I already applied for a public defendor and was denied. I have spoke to 1 attorney that I know in the area and he wants to charge way too much money, I think anyway. I have to appear in court in a week. Is it too late to try and defend myself, or even a good idea at all?
Please help!!
Hold on: let me see if I have this strait: YOU were charged by the city/county/state, who in turn payed a judge to uphold those laws, then placed as your main accuser, a PROSECUTER, Then, above all things, appointed a STATE EMPLOYED LAWYER!!??? iS THIS CORRECT?????
I have the actual transcrips of confesions of the witch trials, I can email them to you.
Man, this is exactly the words I use incourt:
"It is an undisputed fact that court-appointed counsel is both incompetent and beholden to the Accused's adversary. see Burgett v. Texas 389 U.S. 109, the Accused demands that the court make monies available so that the Accused may find competent impartial counsel on the Accused's own, in whom the Accused may have confidence. If these demanded monies are not made available, the Accused will stand before the court in propria persona without counsel, and under the foregoing conditions, only the Accused can speak for the Accused Chandler v. Fretag, 348 U.S. 3 ; Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806. The Accused understands that one cannot be incarcerated by the court unless one has counsel at trial. The Accused will NOT sign a waiver to counsel. The Accused will engage counsel only under the aforesaid conditions see, Argersinger v. Hamlin 407 U.S. 25 (1972) et al"
Again, this won't be rebuted.
I'd even bring this point up:
It is an undisputed fact that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that any crime for which a person may be incarcerated is an Infamous Crime Mackin v. U.S. 117 U.S. 348 et al. The Fifth Amendment provides for indictment in all infamous crimes. The Accused understands that any attempt at prosecution of this free and natural Sovereign in the absence of said indictment constitutes a willful violation of Rights by the court, and/or its officers. The Accused will demand that the instructions to the Show Cause/Grand and Trial jury include: "The jury has an unreviewable and unreversible power.. to acquit in disregard of the instructions given by the trial judge." U.S. v. Dougherty, 473 F 2d 113
And:
. It is an undisputed fact that a trial by a Common Law jury of twelve veniremen of my peers must decide all issues of Law and Fact, including my Right to argue the Constitutional bar to state unlawfulness in my theory of the case, as provided for under Article III, Section 2, Paragraphs 2; 3, and the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution for the United States. The court will take notice of Frank v. U.S. 395 U.S.147 (1969) et al, in which the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that, "...all sentence must be suspended when jury trial is denied the Accused." The Accused is aware that an attempt to enforce a fine by threat of illegal incarceration, constitutes extortion by the court and/or its officers.
