Experimentation with Law - A never ending traffic court experience

I've found myself rather interested in legal matters. Two things helped propel this stuff to the forefront of my life. 1. As CEO of Splinterlands I was handed a variety of legal matters to deal with. 2. In my personal life I've been going through a divorce for almost five years now. It turns out if you leave me in a field of study long enough I learn some things.

What I've discovered is that there's a lot of criminal behavior in the legal field and I would argue a lot of it comes from the judges themselves. They gave themselves legal immunity and ever since then they've been doing worse and worse things.

Now, most people don't experience all that much of law. You might get a parking ticket or speeding ticket at worst. In general, it's not worth fighting. So, people just pay the money and let it go. That's the point of the municipal system. They're essentially selling you sins like the church did back in medieval times. Super profitable, cost of goods sold is essentially zero.

But since I'm already entwined with law for the last 5 years I've been studying. One of the things I've picked up is a process for dealing with legal matters.

Here's the process

1. Provide Notice
2. Cease and Desist Letters
3. Professional Complaints
   a. Police complaints
   b. Attorney complaints (bar grievances)
   c. Judicial complaints
4. State Criminal Complaints
5. Federal Criminal Complaints
6. State Torts
7. Federal Torts
8. 42 USC 1983 deprivation of rights claims

It's a lot of work, but it's also very effective. Boomers tell me things like "if you do that to a judge they're going to throw the book at you." I've experienced the opposite. There's a million other people to go after to fleece for money. it's the ones that put up resistance that keep the Judges up at night. So, I've found that if I want respect in the courtroom I have to start hard. Oh, and no attorney is going to do anything that I listed above so if I want to see those things happen I have to do them myself. In truth I'm still working 6-8. Basically 1-5 are defensive strategy. 6-8 is offensive strategy and my offense still needs a lot of work.

Here's a little example of a stupid parking ticket...

I got two traffic style tickets in a relatively short period of time. One was for parking too close to a cross walk and one was for parking when the meter wasn't going/expired. In my defense the town doesn't have any paint on the sidewalk to give me due notice that I'm too close to the sidewalk and I have receipts for the time that I paid to park. So, in both cases I'm innocent, but that's not really the point. The point is to get officials to leave me alone amongst the sea of people to go after.

So, when I received these tickets I do some digging and I realize there's a lot of things wrong with the current system and I start breaking it down. At a high level the Washington District of Criminals (D.C.) appears to be abusing certain types of law inside states where they have practically no right to be there. Some of what they are doing is legal, but only under very particular circumstances, which aren't there as part of my case. They very likely aren't part of you case. The courts get away with it because government schools don't teach any law. So, even if you're a big scary dude and shout "I know my rights" it doesn't matter because what you don't know is how to defend those rights. I might have a tank in my driveway, but if I can't drive the tank it doesn't do me a lot of good.

So anyways, I wrote a rather lengthy bar greivance, judicial review, state criminal complaint, and federal criminal complaint against the judge and the people attempting to shake me down for $40x2. I filed those in the appropriate places. It's the legal equivalent of being on the receiving end of recreational nukes for a traffic case.

Again, for most people it isn't worth the effort, but I'm stuck here for the long haul and these stupid magisterial district court appearances are a perfect place to practice. My downside risk is $40 bucks and maybe some contempt if my attitude goes the wrong way. My upside gain is experimenting in law with whatever theories I'm pulled towards. You don't actually know what rights you have until you're able to defend them in court, which is a very hostile environment for people defending rights.

So, to recap, Judge 1 sends me a summons for parking tickets at the same hearing.
Judge 1 receives professional complaints, state and federal criminal complaints.

So, when I go to talk with Judge 1 before my trial because I had filed some things into court and I went to court ahead of schedule because I wanted to ensure they were in my docket. He says he's going to recuse himself and does. He punts to judge 2.

Judge 2 sends me a summons and my trial was supposed to be today. I didn't send any of my complaints to Judge 2 yet even though I've had a few weeks for the opportunity if I wanted. I figured I'd start with a clean slate with this guy.

I was supposed to see judge 2 today, but that didn't happen. When I get there the clerk checks me in. There's 4 people in the waiting room with me. The clerk says the judge is doing an arraignment right now so it'll be a few minutes. After a few minutes the clerk comes out and tells us we can go to the courtroom. All 4 people in the waiting room with me get up to go to my hearing. I was expecting 2 people, one for each officer that wrote me a ticket, but apparently I need two extra people to deal with me. The clerk says "bad news, the judge had an emergency." She points to a TV that was setup in the courtroom. "We tried to line up another judge to hear your case (judge 3) via teleconference but judge 3 recused himself. So, unless you can settle this dispute between yourselves you're going to have to come back for trial at a different day."

Now, in case you didn't catch it, the judge was already in the building. In case you didn't catch it, he had enough headsup to attempt to schedule an "emergency hearing" by teleconference with a different judge. In case you missed it, Judge 2 literally snuck out of the back of the building rather than risk speaking to me.
Judge 3 was supposed to take the call and bailed immediately as well. Apparently all THREE of those judges do not want to play legal-ball with Uncle Aggy.

Now, I'm sure there's lots of naysayers saying something like "nuh uh dude" and have all these reasons for things they believe. I'm sure there are other explanations then the judges are annoyed, scared, or annoyed and scared of me. But based on my five years of experience in the courtroom I'm starting to get a sense of how things work.

"Brave sir Robin ran away. Bravely ran away, away!"

So, I'll have a new hearing, but in the meantime I'm annoyed so I'm gearing up to modify my last criminal complaint-set with some new information and the plan is to launch another round of the legal equivalent of recreational nuclear warheads in his general direction. You might think that's overkill, but in my experience I've found that whatever bad thing I think judges are doing it's 1000x times worse when I really dig into it. So, it's a little bit of shoot first and ask questions later, but so far my approach hasn't let me down.

I'll update with a story later on if and when a judge in my county will actually sit on a case in front of me again.