Believe me Robert, my father was a Posse Comitatus nut bag minus the racism,that’s why he distanced himself from them. He was also a member of the Alaska Independence party. He also hosted a conspiracy theory radio show called “radio free america” so trust me i am more than familiar with the arguments that you put forth. The fact is the courts have ruled against sovereign citizen argument time and time again. So much so that the people that MAKE A LIVING teaching it to people have been accused of, and convicted of fraud.

As to the standing requirements mentioned above, under the Sixth Amendment, the accused has the right to confront the accuser/injured party; if there is no injured party, how can you cross-examine the claimant for actual damages? Additionally, under the Sixth Amendment, the accused has the right to be informed of the nature of the accusations; the Constitution provides for Common Law criminal jurisdiction and Admiralty criminal jurisdiction; Statutory jurisdiction is neither (see http://japantoys.tripod.com/book10.pdf).

As to the goofazoidal slop, I learn it from you. Don’t you remember berating me with irrelevant and ridiculous questions, before the election?

Mark Sailors,
Your assumption that my legal points have been refuted by the courts is without evidence; the state court and prosecutor have categorically avoided my constitutional challenges, without asserting relevant case law. You can look up the cases in the courthouse.

The US Supreme Court has, for a long time, now, recognized the fundamental right of the People to travel on the highways, that a license is a tax or duty and that the legislatures may not tax a fundamental right. Rather than ruling according to precedent, the courts use all manner of subversion to avoid such rulings, assumedly, due to the great revenues generated by extrajurisdictional application of the statutes, which are only rightly applicable to governmental and commercial entities. Neither state nor federal constitutions provide the government with regulatory powers over the People; statutes are regulatory, by nature. I will say it again…the People are sovereigns, not subjects. Jurisdictional fraud is a real and provable.

Back to the subject of the article: Where is the oversight in Arcata? In one night, Alex Stillman violated the Brown Act, twice; Police Chief Chapman assumes office, though not legally appointed (denial of opportunity for public comment), and the panhandling ordinance was not legally passed (Alex Stillman was, under Brown Act law, required to recuse herself from the vote, as she did during the drafting of said ordinance). Governmental impunity breeds corruption and tyranny.

Maybe if I wasn’t so drunk and could get out of this damn garage it would make better sense to me.