The Holla Forumsack invisible law

WebM version.

Thank you user, and they say chivalry is gone :3

Just don't show up to court when they call you lmao. You will never see a doctor or a lawyer on the jury stand for a reason.

No act of government that is unjust or contrary to God is a law, it has no moral force. This includes both criminal statutes under which prosecution is brought and any "law" against informing others of their inalienable right as jurors to be judge of both fact and law, and acquit any defendant prosecuted under a non-law.

My boyfriend said something similar. I think we should start to focus more on making community laws more centered on community and drain away the power of central government.

tits or GTFO
if you're a faggot GTFO

If he’s a faggot, livecam murder-suicide.

Only Holla Forums does "tits or GTFO", I'm a proud aryan woman and I have a proud aryan boyfriend.

I will not degrade myself.

You’re a whore.

Hi newfag.

...

Lurk more.

go back to >>>Holla Forums pedo

Basing my decision strictly on the law, literally, allows me to jury nullify. QED a 'no' answer with a nullification verdict is not perjury nor lying on that question.

Not really. As long as you don't tell the court that you are nullifying the law, then you are fine. The jury discusses the case behind closed doors. Only the rest of the jury knows what's happening. If you can bring the jury over to your side, just tell the court you found the defendant innocent or guilty. No need to mention nullification.

If you actually mention nullification like a retard, a higher court will just retry the case.

So just declare innocence and refuse to go along with a guilty verdict (12 Angry Men-style), because even if you don’t mention nullification the jury needs unanimity and you’ll win out anyway?

Those just get retried.

Yeah, no. This is commonplace.

Literally just sit in on any juvenile case where the kid is obviously guilty. When county lawyers have absolutely nothing to work with because their defendant shoplifted on camera, they have to plead to the jury not to ruin this kid's life just because of one stupid decision. In other words, they rely on jury nullification.

Kennedi Cotarelo is a young girl. That would be CP.
Plus, it's unladylike.

Go get 'em maiden.
How is your bird?

into the >>>/oven/ you go, degenerate

No, just a troll and a degenerate. That name is one of the hebe pedos' favorite underage camwhores.

I've seen this bullshit a couple times today. Reminder: "Tits or GTFO" is chan culture pervasive, necessary for any serious discussion board as a preventative measure against attention whores like this bitch. If you think your gender is relevant, show some tits. Otherwise, don't bring it up. I say this as a service to anons reading the thread, quoted bitch is already filtered.

yeah

I worked with the courts.

Much to the surprise of no one juries are usually stacked with a civilian employee of the police department/courts. This person becomes the foreman and runs the show. Everyone else on the jury is usually a borderline retard. Retired guys who fall asleep, fat housewives who are sad their kids went off to college, basically stupid people with no jobs and nothing better to do.

You have literally 0 chance of getting a fair trial unless you're a millionaire who can get lawyers who the judge owes a favor to.

If you ever get arrested you can hang up your trial pretty much forever. During the vous dir demand that your lawyer ask the jurors this question.

"If the trial were to end right now (before any evidence is entered) would you be able to render a verdict or would you need more information?"

You could then reject 100% of potential jurors because they dont understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty since none would say "yes"

Everything else is rigged against the defendant too of course. All of the cops will tell outrageous and blatant lies. They know no one will ever charge them with perjury because if they started prosecuting it they'd have no cops or prosecutors left. The judge will rule for the prosecutor in nearly every dispute, they'll give you a few small ones so it looks like they were fair.

Prosecutors will suborn perjury and fabricate evidence. Even for misdemeanors.

The courts make politics look clean.

This!
Anyone who doesn't understand this is ether a shill or a newfag.

if you don't want to hear that, then stop namefagging you newfag. tits or gtfo.

But I'm marrying him very soon.

Doesn’t matter, you fucking slut. Kill yourself.

This is the most redpilled reply I read, thank you so much. It fits perfectly to how North Carolina has become

I'm changing my last name to his though, we're really conservative.

I'm a white woman, only shitskins should have to go through that. We all know MGTOW is a jewish conspiracy

first off, you really shouldn't be disclosing your irl identity on a *chan board

second, you shouldn't reveal your gender(if you're not male) unless it is heavily involved with the central point of the post that you're making and is also called for, and can't be avoided without raising questions

i just want this to be a thread about courts and courtrooms with more posts along the lines of

should I start over?

Reported.

Unhand yon faire maiden, foul beast! Henceforth, likewise refrain from such acts as chansplaining!

Must be pure coincidence

Can you post more about the courts? I've been thinking going back to college for law so I can better influence my countries future, but I don't know how good I could do.

If you're stupid enough to bring up the fact that you are a woman in anonymous "culture" outside of necessity, you will get called out for it. "Tits or GTFO" is imho less to get tits, more to get women to stop fishing for attention simply because they are women. Disingenuous women have ruined more communities than I care to name, and it's better to nip attention whoring in the bud before thirsty betas lap on to them.

M8, The OP itself is posting dumb shit to veer the topic off the point.

Here's a better way to defeat the legal system:
1. redpill people (lots of them) (to Holla Forums level not shitty MRA faggotry)
2. those people become lawyers, judges, legal scholars, university professors, legal publication editors/publishers
3. those people then reform the law, slowly but steadily

How do you think current divorce laws evolved?
You think people used jury nullification for every case, to hand goods not equally but 90% to the woman?
You think they made a U-turn overnight, all of a sudden?

I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN!

Sir, why were you speeding?

I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN! I AM A SOVEREIGN CITIZEN!

How would none be able to answer yes? It's a poorly worded "question" that's actually two questions connected with an or.

y | y = y
y | n = y
n | y = y
n | n = n

The only way to answer no logically is for them to be unable to render a verdict AND to need more information.

You didn't think this one through buddy guy.

If a trial begins and ends with absolutely no evidence presented you not only can, but you MUST render a verdict.

That verdict is not guilty. All defendants have a presumption innocence that the state must overcome to obtain a guilt verdict. If the state does not overcome that burden, then you must render a not guilty verdict.

I'm guessing you've never actually spent much time in and around the court system.

i'm guessing you've never spent much time around the court system, but spent enough time around the school system

That's exactly what he was saying mr. autist.

Thanks.

I'll give you a story of a single case, so you can get an idea of what happens if you are even the slightest bit of a wave maker.

So a guy (DV) is busted for domestic violence. As far as I can tell this is what actually happened:

He has a girlfriend (GF), and is friends with another chick JC. JC works at a coffee shop a few blocks away from the guy's house and they sometimes play video games together after work. GF lives about an hour away, so this guy takes JC to a party a few houses from his place.

JC is 22 or 23 and has been a full blow alcoholic for 10 years. Black out drunk several times a week. DV is probably 35. JC has a crush on him and makes a fool of herself at the party trying to get him jealous. He goes home and goes to bed, but leaves his door unlocked so she can sleep on the couch.

A guy (WIT) is walking up to DV's apartment building and hears a girl yelling. When he gets there he sees her laying at the bottom of the apt building stairs crying and bleeding from her face. WIT calls 911.

When WIT called instead of just saying "I found a girl hurt" he reported domestic violence.

JC is a 10/10 like pic related. 5'2" with D cups and a face that looks like she's 16. She tells the cops DV is her boyfriend, but she fell and hurt herself.

The cops bang on DV's door waking him. He tells them to come back when they have a warrant. They break in and beat him so badly he ends up in the hospital.

DV files a complaint with IA and demands a jury trial. (big mistake)

At his trial DV presents his lease agreement. He lives alone. The manager testifies that he lives alone and that JC doent live there, but comes by sometimes there was no indication that they were dating. GF testifies that she's been with DV for 3 years and he's never hurt her. GF testifies DV has a scar on his dick. JC doesnt know anything about it.

None of the cop stories matched. One said he was screaming profanities. Another said he was asleep in his bed. All said he had been making "threatening gestures" All the cops admitted hitting him, but only and always 3 times. One cop admitted he hit DV because DV had laughed at him.

JC testified that she never said she had been hit until after the cops had held her for over 36 hrs and demanded she change her story.

I hear the DA (prosecutor) telling WIT in the hall between sessions that he needs to say he saw DV beating JC. WIT says it on the stand, then admits he made it up on cross.

DA knows his case isnt going well. He pulls out emails supposedly from JC and DV talking about moving in together.

DV complains they were not a part of discovery. Overruled by judge.
DV proves they are not to his email address.
DV wants to enter pictures of his injures. Overruled.
DV complains there was no arrest warrant or probable cause. Judge says "So?"
DV complains DA has provided nothing from discovery. Overruled.

911 tape is damaged. Security camera footage in stairwell supposedly showing JC drunkenly falling down the stairs goes missing in police custody.

JC claims she lived with DV for 6 mos and he drunkenly beat her every night.

Any idiot can tell DV is innocent. DV is convicted by jury after 20 mins of deliberation.

Fun exercise: How many crimes is DV the victim of?

way to reading comprehend
dolphin time for you

NO

If it's relevant to the discussion and reasonable, then Jews are just trying to destroy your ethics. Don't show your tits. Be Aryan. Fuck the kike shillls

It’s a shill, idiot.

LOL white knighting this quick and listening to a woman who hasn't
lurk moar…good lawd

NO FUCK YOU

FUCK YOU

FUCK YOU

She is getting married! She is a decent person!

REMINDER: OUR MODS ARE TRAITORS TO RACE AND COUNTRY AND SHILLS DRIVE WOMEN AWAY BECAUSE THEY FEAR ARYAN UNITY……………………………. THIS IS 4CHAN 2.0

Post another "I dont have a life thread and I'm sad"…. Fucking Jews!

Your reaction image and made up stories don't actually mean you understand the law kid.

If a trial starts, the prosecution doesn't present any evidence and rests their case, by default the jury must enter a verdict of not guilty. You don't have to present evidence your not guilty, the prosecution MUST provide evidence of your guilt.

But please continue with your made up stories about people who totally look like what ever celebrity you happen to have a saved image of handy. Or quit your bullshit, what ever.

God damn it DOX this fucking faggot PLEASE>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
====
How dare you use Wayne against real motherfuckers you Kike filth!

I am truck driver. If he lives in American or Canada I will fucking kill him.

I don't know dick about the law, but I'll try to guess.

That's one.

Pretty sure that's defamation, so two.

Three.

Four.

Five, if it they didn't lose it due to incompetence.

I'm probably wrong though.

see:

Lay off the drugs, friendo

It’s a shill.

Pretty good actually.

Pretty sure that's defamation, so two.

Perjury, not defamation.

You missed a few.

Shieeeet.

What would you have done in his position?
It's clearly by circumstance, this could have happened to most people.

Should he have been more receptive to the cops? Or just sat down and kept his mouth shut?

Clearly the cops wanted to shut him down because of the complaint.

So you're basically saying; "Give Up"?

For being a "redpilled board" some of you people are naive as fuck. Here, I'll do a quick test:

"JC testified that she never said she had been hit until after the cops had held her for over 36 hrs and demanded she change her story."

Can anyone in class explain under what legal authority the police can hold the victim of a crime for 36 hours?

"The Jews" doesn't count. And since we're here, don't give your SSN to any Nigerian princes.

Assuming what you wrote is true, would you say that courts today have more or less bullshit than in Phoenix Wright, excepting the whole "almost everyone gets convicted" deal in there? Because it sounds comparable to the amount of sheer bullshit that goes on over there.

Absolutely. He nearly has his life ruined, and did lose gun rights for life over the fact that he was a bit bull headed (but not unreasonably so) and the cops are scum.

Strange thing is that in the end it didnt matter. MD DV you spend a week in jail and pay a $500 fine. So all this was just for the cops to save face and destroy his credibility so he couldnt sue.

Never make a report to IA. If you are going to try to fight back you have to go public.

Dont get arrested, dont piss off cops and if you get the best lawyer money can buy.

Cops can generally hold anyone for questioning for up to 48 hrs. To hold them longer they must be arrested.

capped

The conviction rate here I was is 99%.

Nearly every court in the country is over 95%.

Holy shit, so Murrikan courts are literally Phoenix Wright in real life, except in USA?

i have memed irresponsibly
fuck

Are you entirely unfamiliar with the working of the legal system, or are you just pretending? Yes, they can and do hold witnesses for that long or even longer.

I dont know who/what that is.

Murrica courts (at least in my experience) are just like kangaroo courts in any country with a thin veneer of legitimacy.

I'll give you an example. In mexico if you get pulled over for drunk driving you hand the cop $200 and you drive off.

In murrica you plead out to time in drunk driving school.

You get a list of schools you can go to. How do schools get on the list? You guessed it they bribe various court officials.

This system is great for them because instead of risking getting caught taking a bribe every arrest, they only risk that one exchange of being put on the list. Most people will never know the bribes happened and instead of $200 per bribe they are getting thousands.

No they absolutely can not.

You have to be arrested to be arrested to be held for 48 hours. After 48 hours you get a bond hearing in front of a judge to determine if the police claim they had probable cause is correct.

There are two ways a police officer can detain you, if they have reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Reasonable suspicion means that the police can articulate facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe a crime has been committed or is about to. The police can briefly (key word here used by the Supreme Court in Terry v Ohio) detain, not arrest, a person to conduct an investigation. Brief is not 36 hours, and they would still have provide facts that would lead you to believe JV had committed a crime.

To hold someone longer you need probable cause and to arrest them. That means you have to bring formal criminal charges against them. What charges did the police bring against a woman who was the suspected victim of domestic violence?

You people are hearing what you want to hear and not dong your actual research, it's listen and believe in action here.

See Indianapolis v. Edmonds, 351 U.S. ___ (2000); New Jersey v. T.L.O. 469 U.S 325 (1985).

Material witnesses can be detained under certain circumstances, particularly when a violent crime is involved and the witness can be expected to provide relevant testimony.

Stop posting.

you sure 'briefly' doesn't mean within those 48 hours they have to come up with a charge and make it an official arrest?

To add to that, police also can't break into houses and beat people senseless, and if you think that doesn't happen you're fucking retarded.
God I hate summer.

You might be book right, but you're not reality right.

I was in commiefornia and I'm not a lawyer, just working in a related field.

Under CA law the 6th amendment has a definition for "speedy" 45 days for misdemeanors, 60 days for felonies. Penal Code § 1382

How often do you think that's obeyed? Literally never.

A guy filed a motion to have his case dismissed over it. The Commissioner never read his motion. The City Attorney's counter argument was "we never do it that way" Commissioner rejected it.

Not for 36 hours for a domestic assault charge they can not.

Here's an actual breakdown of the rules regarding holding a witness for anyone who actually wants to learn anything in this thread.

robertslaw.org/detention_of_witness_by_police/

the crime of being a fucking faggot and telling the cops to come back with a warrant, then laughing at them. A normal person would asked the cops if there was something wrong, been informed about JC's state, and been concerned for JC's well being and helped get her processed at the hospital or whatever.

Cops expect people to act normal and if they don't, cops will assume the worst and then act on it, because cops know the worst, have seen the worst, and have seen people getting hurt by not assuming the worst. "come back with a warrant" is what comic book villains say.

Give me some case law to prove it faggot. "Brief" has never been defined by the SCOTUS in this context.

(1) the seriousness of the crime witnessed, (2) the nature of the information the witness can reasonably expect to provide, (3) the level of proof that the witness can provide, and (4) whether there are less intrusive methods to obtain the same information.

Holding someone for 36 hours, when the witness had already testified that they had never been the victim of a crime is not a less intrusive method.

Indianapolis v Edmonds is about detaining cars at checkpoints to search for drugs, and TLO is about searching kids at public schools.

Not for you to decide.
And they set the precedent that detention of material witnesses is lawful. Not sure what point you're trying to make other than that your completely legally illiterate.

You're assuming she was astute enough to know she was being held illegally

AND

Had the will to do something about it.

AND

You're ignoring the fact that by holding her and demanding she change her story they were already committing a felony witness tampering.

No, the police have to place you under arrest to detain you for the 48 hrs in the first place.

You stupid cuck.

He was well within his rights to tell them to come back with a warrant.

Kill yourself retard.

And you're dumb enough to believe that dindus in the hood sue the cops for shit not half as blatant as this on the regular, but this guy had 10,000 violations of his most fundamental rights and didn't sue the shit out of his county, didn't appeal to a higher court, never involved the ACLU, etc.

Not at the courthouse I was at they didnt. Maybe in some nigger run town they do.

It is for the court to decide, and literally none of them would allow a victim of a crime to be held for 36 hours without being charged with a crime when they had already gave their testimony. You have no idea what you're on about.

Come back when you're done with law school and have some real world experience.

Right, in your courthouse, in your particular town, noe attorney ever had the idea to sue the shit out of the local police for blatant violations of peoples core rights and make a ton of money in the process?

Only in nigger towns are there lawyers who want to make money by suing people, not your town.

So he should be a smarmy cunt to the people that can fuck his life over and manufacture evidence without a second thought? Gotta choose your battles, hombre.

No, if domestic abuse is expected the threat of coercion and retaliation against material witnesses is very high. Detainment would probably be considered lawful, especially when noble police officers and police-funded crime experts all testify that they were trying to protect the poor helpless abuse victim. That's if it even gets to trial, which isn't likely. DA's work with the police and they don't like to cannibalize their own.

fucking degenerate

There is no need for you to pull your vagina card if what you are posting is good.

My cuck detector is giving me some weak signals here.

Oh dear, the ironing.

How? The brest is not a sexual object. We're not asking for a clitoris, just the breats.

Its the same in Australia, probably everywhere.

L O N D O N
O
N
D
O
N

celebrity?
it's a fucking dolphin
you definitely should be in dolphin time every day

...

Why doesn't the NRA start a jury nullification ad campaign? Why doesn't the legalize pot movement do the same thing? It would be so easy for either organization to make unconstitutional laws completely unenforceable. They could win the war on drugs and guns without firing a shot.

Courts are now trying to weed people out. They want to find out if you believe in jury nullification before being put on a jury. Best solid way to get out of jury duty.

...

Getting the laws removed is much more effective.

Nullification doesnt work because the juries are generally compromised. See

Did you use to date a kid name L.A. ?

Indiana state constitution:
Article 1
Section 19. In all criminal cases whatever, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conviction_rate

Lets stick to legitimate sources.

2012, 80,963, or 93 percent, either pled guilty or were
found guilty. See Table 3. The rate of conviction
remained over 90 percent, as it has since Fiscal Year 2001.

It's not 1972 any more.

Did you pass first grade you retard? You have no reading comprehension.

I'm no lawfag, im merely jewgling my way through this, but here goes:

I think there's multiple crimes here, depending on state and local laws, could include B&E(no warrant), 1 count each of assault and battery per time DV was struck. Given that DV was hospitalized, possibly aggravated assault or even, possibly, attempted voluntary manslaughter. Bonus round: all this would likely meet the criteria for "Police Abuse of Authority" laws, a federal crime. See:
Under 28 United States Code Section 1343(a)(3), to find police liability the police officer must have violated one of your Constitutional rights in order to sue in Federal court. The most common police related abuse of authority examples are unlawful search and seizure, unlawful arrest, unwarranted force during an arrest, and unwarranted use of deadly force.

So I'm counting +8 or +9 here. Who knows, maybe more.

If none of their stories match, then logically every officer except (possibly) one is committing perjury. And logically we must also assume they filed false police reports beforehand. Not sure how many cops there were here so between (cop_count -1)x2 - (cop_count)x2 crimes.

Subornation of perjury and witness tampering, +2

Perjury

As I understand, police are not liable for obstruction of justice, it only goes the other way. Other countries would consider this "perversion of justice" which is basically the same thing, but it can apply to law enforcement too. As for things that DO apply in the US: prosecutorial misconduct is likely here, with regards to failing to yield exculpatory evidence.

Another thing I saw:
more subornation of perjury and falsifying a police report

I think I'm at like 15+ crimes? I hope this guy appealed his case or otherwise got off.

Your peers are not white, red-pilled, Americans.
They fill juries up with wet-backs, dindus, and syrian-refugees.

Bumpkin

sage

It's the same in canada here too. They pick the most corpse eyed normies they can find, the most predictibly controlled by tv ones.

Secondly, our cops are secretly paid a 10% commission on every ticket they write, even if the issuee never pays up and need a certain carefully guarded number of Positive stats to get promoted. It's why they ambush people on empty roads in the dead of night, and why they are so eager to turn a misheard word into and arrest.

Another thing most folks up here are finding out is the use of Anarcho-Communists by the NDP as fifth columnnists against anyone that wants to try and improve the city of Vancouver.

Some examples:
archive.is/5eyZl

Connections between Canadian Politicians, Foriegn NGOs and The Anti-fa scum
archive.is/lCp55
archive.is/lCp55

Go back to the cuckshed Sven, it's obvious you have a desire to be fucked over by "superior" men.

Tits or GTFO. This isn't a Holla Forums tier meme but has some penchant in reality. If you gave a shit about your question your gender wouldn't enter this discussion.

basis

Fuck you autocorrect

bump

bumping by saying bump is very bad form user. please stop doing that. it shows how much of a summerfag you are.