Arthur Jay Hirsch, “the Fiddle Man” of Lawrenceburg, Tenn., is challenging the state’s claims in commerce against the vital property right of free travel on the public highways. Defending criminal charges allows him standing to overturn a lawless operation of the state’s executive branch. (Photo David Tulis)
LAWRENCEBURG, Tenn. (May 2, 2016) — Confusion reigned at my hearing today in Lawrence County’s circuit court. As you may recall, the previously recused prosecutor pro tem in my first traffic case, Tammy Rettig, has been re-appointed by Judge Russell Parkes to represent the state in my second case by March 30 order, a case which is on appeal.
I am under accusation for exercising the constitutionally protected right to travel by car or truck, insisting I do not have to yield any rights by applying for state privileges in commerce such as a driver license or a state-registered and regulated motor vehicle.
By Arthur Jay Hirsch
Judge Parkes said he made the iffy re-appointment based on the advice of the Office of Court Administrators whose Nashville officials denied my claims about a conflict of interest. In January I fired back at Ms. Rettig with a civil lawsuit claiming abuse of process and fraud, and Ms. Rettig had recused herself in further action against me, citing conflict of interest.
➤ Without legal basis, county courts convert cellphones, laptops into weapons to suppress free press
Judge Parkes, who had reappointed Ms. Rettig, also had scheduled today’s hearing. Its purpose was to determine the status of the criminal charges against me, hear plea offers and/or set a trial date.
Ms. Rettig was under orders to be in the courtroom and represent the state.
But she failed to appear.
There were no documents of recorded explanation for her absence — no notice, no request for withdrawal. Miz Rettig had not communicated with me or with the court about not wanting to prosecute my case. The local (recused) DA mumbled something about a rumor that Ms. Rettig was intending to recuse herself again and was looking for a district attorney from another district to be a special prosecutor pro tem.
Plea offer ignored
Judge Russell Parkes of Lawrence County circuit court smiles at a photo op at the close of an adoption case. (Photo Facebook)
Tammy Rettig, bumptious but absent district attorney
Not only was she careless about her presence. Ms. Rettig failed to address a certified good faith plea offer of Feb. 16 or a followup letter Feb. 22 even after she had been reappointed by Judge Parkes. I’d been expecting to meet with her this morning and get the matter resolved before coming before the judge since that was one of the main purposes for the hearing — to press the parties toward a settlement.
Judge Parkes said his court is “in the dark” about what was going on. He would call the OCA again during his lunch break and try to find a solution to the problem of appointing a willing special prosecutor pro tem, he said.
Scribbled lunchtime motion to dismiss
During the lunch break I drafted a handwritten motion to dismiss and a motion for a hearing to show cause why Rettig should not be held in contempt of a court order.
I rushed to the clerk’s office and had the motions file stamped. I returned to the courtroom and gave the motions to the clerk and a note for Judge Parkes that I wanted to speak on the record before he called the OCA.
As the last item on the docket for the long morning session (9 a.m. -1 p.m.) the judge called me to the podium.
I pointed out that Ms. Rettig is still the state’s prosecutor as of this day, May 2, since there is no document to the contrary in the record. Judge Parkes agreed.
I said Ms. Rettig had not communicated with me or the court as to any desire to withdraw from her appointment as prosecutor and that she had a duty to appear in court today. I’d wasted four hours of my time because of her failure to appear, I said.
Had I failed to appear, would not the judge have immediately signed a capias warrant for my arrest? I demanded. He said yes.
Judge saves state
In view of the moral requirement not be a “respecter of persons” and not to be partial, I declared, and to apply the rules and law equally between the state and me, the accused, I moved that he enter an order dismissing the case with prejudice for cause since Ms. Rettig was absent
The judge said the rules call for a five day period for filing motions before hearing. (This claim is absurd since I didn’t know five days prior that Ms. Rettig was not planning to appear.) Judge Parkes said he would schedule a hearing May 24 to hear my motions.
“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God,” Paul says in Romans 8:28, “to those who are the called according to His purpose.”
The Judge set my trial date for Aug. 4 – unless a plea agreement is worked out. I told him I wanted to ask him some questions regarding a “bench trial.” He seemed uncomfortable — lots of Catch 22 questions regarding the law and the state’s fraud against the constitutionally protected right to travel await him. I told him I would bring it up later.
God’s people — please pray
I believe the Lord is at work confusing and confounding the court and the prosecutor. God’s promises are sure and I’m standing on them for a victory over the enemies of truth and righteous justice that the name of the Lord Jesus may be praised, honored and glorified! (Ps. 91:14-16)
Friends, thank you ever so much for your long-term prayer support. Please continue. I’m standing on God’s Word and defending our God-given, inherent rights and the rule of law against the state’s idolatrous, humanistic and perverse statutes.
Let me help you be successful in business with AM 1240 Hot News Talk Radio in Chattanooga
You may also enjoy these related essays by David Tulis and Roger Roots
How state gains control of public right of way & innocent private activity
Passport Challenge event in city brings Hispanic right to travel into view
‘Fiddle Man’ of Lawrenceburg demands verdict be overturned, right to travel
Free-range motorist seeks to vaporize charges, asks they be heard ‘in agency’
‘Fiddle man’ vows appeal after jury rejects constitutional protections
Hirsch rips judge who led jury to rule against constitutional rights
Christian laborer on trial to defend right to travel, have gun in truck cab
‘Fiddle man’ sues trooper, 2 prosecutors for oppression day before trial
‘Fiddle man’s’ defense hobbled as lawyer bails; pray for his cause, need for funds
State lacks grounds to prosecute free user of roads, fiddler says in motion
Restoring our ancient rights one case at a time: Mr. Hirsch goes to trial
How state snips quills of constitutional rights, manhandles ‘free’ people
Bid to uncover harassment on state highways stonewalled
Program to harass motorists not in statute, doesn’t exist, chief says
Behind the modern driver license: Absolutism of administrative law
Driver license system voluntary, Gnome of Strawberry Plains says amid new prosecution
New defense for aliens, liberty lovers: No requirement to obtain driver license
If licensing scheme runs on consent, ‘illegals’ may be freer than citizens
The next time you get ticket, ask questions a la Scarlet Pimpernel
Mr. Kiesche, tootling about in auto, insists not ‘driving a motor vehicle’
Judges’ trick on ‘right to travel’ defied by hard-of-hearing motorists
Preserving your rights in city court; judge fields my odd liberty queries
1997 Tenn. case says you have right to travel, but not by car
The orphaned right: How states squelched Americans’ right to travel
The plaintiff is applying public policy statutes/privileges under the Law of the Sea.
The defendant is trying to counter with Constitutional law / rights under the Law of the Land.
Never the two shall meet . . . or agree.
Hence the getting-nowhere argumentation and failure to resolve, except in the state’s favor.
This is what happens when one goes beyond declaring/establishing one’s sui juris STATUS and, if disputed, then demanding production of the valid COMMERCIAL AGREEMENT(S) being held-in-due-course by the corporate agency of government that create the explicit legal disability to the claimed sui juris STATUS/standing in connection with one’s name and property.