While the site is going through updates you may notice slow downs in page loads and other glitches through out the pages. If something seems to not be working correctly wait a few minutes and try again. If the error persists message taurarious using the forum or email him at Taurarious@threepercenters.org so that he knows an issue exists.

All charges dropped against Bundy.

Just came across, so thought I’d share. Good news against those who use our government to enforce tyranny.

Link to follow.

Comments

  • Good news indeed
  • And now the Bundy's get to sue for damages ....... I wonder how that will play out ?
  • About fricking time. Considering that this is the second time myre has gotten into trouble for violating people's rights it would be nice to see him get more than re assigned.
  • Suing for damages beyond legal fees would turn problematic. They might not face criminal charges, but the civil mire they would be drug through for any more than that, and possibly even just that, would not be good for them.
  • What about damages to their ranch and killed cattle ?
  • edited January 9
    Don't forget the bullet in Ammond,s arm. Now he should have it removed and find the "purported" public officer to charge him with attempted murder during an "unlawful arrest".

    The civil penalty for false arrest is $10,000 and false imprisonment is $3,500 dollars per incident(possibly per day of incarceration).
    18 U.S. Code Subsection 2333-- Civil Remedies

    (a) Action and Jurisdiction---

    Any national of the United States injured in his or her person, property, or business by reason of an act of international terrorism, or his or her estate, survivors, or heirs, may sue therefore in any appropriate district court of the United States and shall recover threefold damages he or she sustains and the cost of the suit, including attorney's fees.

    Hear that, Guys? 3X plus court costs. Guaranteed.

    And since the Municipal United States is a foreign government and the FBI and BLM are both foreign corporations acting outside their jurisdiction to wreck havoc and attempt unlawful conversion of assets and threaten (and take, in the case of LaVoy Finicum) the lives of the American People, aka, United States Nationals, this IS an act of "international terrorism" by "uniformed officers" against peaceful non-combatant civilian Third Parties.
  • Having good reason doesn’t make the decision good. Every action they took would be under a microscope, and opinions can be slung without evidence in a civil trial. Just because many of us at least mostly agree with them doesn’t mean most of America does. Also, there is a different standard in a civil trial. Split juries in a criminal trial is good, but can mean a significant loss in a civil trial.

    The arrest wasn’t unlawful by the standards used, and the proof is that it went to trial to begin with. You can argue it all you want, but you know I am right based on the rules used to get this crap show started.

    If they are smart, they put the legal side of this to bed or it will likely crush them and any good will they have now will be more than lost.
  • edited January 9
    sradeski wrote: »
    Having good reason doesn’t make the decision good. Every action they took would be under a microscope, and opinions can be slung without evidence in a civil trial. Just because many of us at least mostly agree with them doesn’t mean most of America does. Also, there is a different standard in a civil trial. Split juries in a criminal trial is good, but can mean a significant loss in a civil trial.

    The arrest wasn’t unlawful by the standards used, and the proof is that it went to trial to begin with. You can argue it all you want, but you know I am right based on the rules used to get this crap show started.

    If they are smart, they put the legal side of this to bed or it will likely crush them and any good will they have now will be more than lost.

    There is only one standard for arrest and that is in the Bill of Rights, Article IV and Article V. of the Bill of Rights. IV. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    Probable Cause is defined here in Article V. No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject, for the same offense, to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled, in any criminal case, to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

    How it was violated is simple . The injured party must make a complaint/Claim under oath. The "State" being a legal fiction can neither swear a complaint nor prove an injury.

    On top of that, a lawful warrant MUST have a wet ink signature and the Seal of the Court. I would bet money that the warrant had neither and was computer generated making it unlawful and UN-exicutable.

    Territorial Jurisdiction is another issue and still up for dispute.
  • We go through this over and over and over. The way the game is played, it doesn’t matter what the Constitution, Bill of Rights, or any other document says, it’s how the Governmnent says it is because for now they have the power. We see this time and time again, over and over, and I’m right every single time. It’s NOT what the rules are, it’s how the group or person in charge says the game is played by the rules they allow.
  • “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
    ― Samuel Adams

    Freedom is not free, you must be willing to fight to the death if necessary. If you surrender one inch you loose period. You must place the burden of proof on the claimant and demand the proof.
  • edited January 9
    I believe that the Judge saw how she was duped by the federal prosecutor and saw that the defendants due process rights were violated and didn't want to be a party to it and by dismissing the case was her way out. If you give the judge a way out he will rule in your favor.
  • Are you implying by my statement that I am unwilling to fight for liberty?
  • edited January 10
    No, I hope you didn't take it that way. Maybe you and I have different opinions of what real LIBERTY is. Take the fight for your rights up in the court for yourself, no attorney will be competent or willing to do so. If done properly you will prevail. And if you become too big o' thorn in their side they will eliminate you. This is why I fear for AlEnewman. Most people don't have the knowledge or money to defend their rights, by no means am I an expert either, I really don't think there is any expert or special silver bullet for a fix. Most of what I post is for the participants here to research on their own.

    When going to court you are presumed to be a United States Citizen so rebutt it and make them prove it. You must be a U.S.Citizen to be with in their territorial and personum (personal) jurisdiction. The terms of the statutes are precise and defined in the U.S. Codes. here is the easiest example to understand;

    motor vehicle 18 USC sec 31 (6) Motor vehicle.-The term "motor vehicle" means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.

    If you want to know how the State can define your "automobile" as a "motor vehicle" I can explain the "Theft by Deception" and/or "un lawful conversion of property" (both are crimes) this now requires you to possess a drivers license and registration., it's by "constructive fraud" plain and simple.

    Upon the purchase of a new vehicle the retailer gets you to surrender all rights, title and interest over to the State, READ WHAT YOU SIGN!. You hold a right to possess and transfer the property as the "Registered Owner" but the States has a perfected title in the "Manufacturer Certificate of Origin"' That being said it is now a State (company owned) motor vehicle and you are a State employee having submitted an application to operate said motor vehicle in commerce for the State.

    Go down the a car dealer and ask If you purchase a car with cash or credit card if you can get the MCO. As long as the property is not used for collateral it should be no problem.
  • Fucking state owes me a shit load of back pay!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!