I’m to the point I think the arrest for a pro-rated possible tax debt of a penny a day for some single day when the tax receipt is to be shown on demand is unconstitutional on it face.
By Levi Thurston
Arrest for a debt if owed that amounts to a penny a day is not constitutional in any scenario. And it’s not a safety issue for a person on the road not be in commerce.
This filthy lie of safety is not even remotely true. Unsafe behaviour does not get a roadside waiver because someone does have a tax receipt, which, as usual just gets someone ticketed and insulted about slowing down or some other like wording.
So not having a tax receipt suddenly does not rise to this judicial lie that safety is now at stake. For a penny a day you can go on with the extortion of a ticket or the other crime is false arrest. and a degenerate judiciary which does not enforce the law as written and refuses to provide due process or enforcing the rules of evidence standards of code pleading factual sufficiency of a main statute imposing a duty or further the factual sufficiency of the terms of some enforcement statute.
Just using a enforcement statute with penalties is only a sentencing trial for how much some victim hasn’t yet paid in this extortion scheme of going into a private union hall meeting and you ain’t in the union.
You can’t argue law in this kangaroo setting and sham activity. there is no honesty in the entire scenario. You are talking at those with criminal mindset toward everyone who shows up in this RICO activity.
That woman has already been denied her due process repeatedly. The criminals in costume have conspired to give themselves complete immunity. Kust say you were a coward and ignorant of the law. and torture of innocent people to the point of roadside execution is judicially protected activity.
The amoral and highly immoral character of the so-called government is destroying this country and many innocent people are their victims.
This case has written all over it criminal conduct by everyone receiving public money. It’s too late to not violate her rights, can’t unring the bell. She should have been dismissed at the first appearance when her wicked accuser did not show up.
Continuance no longer provides immunity, her case has to be dismissed. Otherwise it’s a sham trial. If she had skipped 6 times, no way she would be treated with this extreme bias and prejudice of continuances in her favor.
Code pleading this case is essential. Every important word has to be factually supported and the willful charge is definitely required to have a main statute imposing a duty before any enforcement can be resorted to.
She is going up against a bunch of mentally challenged incompetent union members who don’t know or care about the black letter law or standing decisions exactly defining what is taxed and how to identify the taxable activity.