Indiana City Threatens Fines for Challenging Traffic Tickets

Bigger text (+)Smaller text (-) received:

Dear Ken and Tom: You know that I have been describing the place called "this state," "THE STATE OF TEXAS," for the past 12 years or so as the fictional area above a sheet of Saran(c) wrap laying over the land that prevents us from actually standing on the de jure dirt and acquiring the law of the land due to some presumed contract, agreement, or application that moved us into  undisclosed commercial adhesion contracts and the presumed waiving of the rights due to people, and now I find that I am supported in my deduction/supposition  by the definition given to "this state" in paragraph 6 below by Harmon Taylor who is a very well educated and experienced former Bar Card Attorney.  Now we need wide spread education so that all will clearly see through the scam of The Matrix.  Perhaps the hundredth monkey theory for understanding "this state" is soon to expand throughout the country.   L -o-

p.s.: I have also likened the place called "this state" to the place where, on a magic carpet ride, Satan took Jesus to view all the wealth and beautiful cities and the pretty people of the world in the air and promised to make Jesus the Lord of all the wealth in the air called "this state" or "The Matrix" if Jesus would only bow down to Satan.  (And) is that not about the way it is today?

p.p.s.: Would any one of you who is a Bible scholar please do a root word definition search for the term 'BAR ABBAS' and send to me the definitions that you find.  I think it means "son of Satan" or maybe "like Satan."

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Legal Reality <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 7:53 AM
Subject: [Fwd: Indiana: City Threatens $2500 Fines for Challenging Traffic Tickets]
To: Legal Reality <[email protected]>

11 December A.D. 2009

What we read in the note below is one "city's" in terrorem response to the defendant's act of compelling STATE to prove up its case.  CITY is effectively "criminalizing" the exercise of the right of asserting a defense.

To criminalize the exercise of the right of defending oneself is a very Nazi-communo-fascist thing to do. 

This mendacity shows up in all kinds of ways and places.  The note below is just one more example of it.

On the good news side, the reality must be this.  It's hurting the city, commercially, for those of us who know how to engage the commercial debate to do so.  This sounds like a statement of desperation by the city, which means that we're getting much closer to the end of the "ticket" scams.

Regarding the pending end of the "ticket" scams, let's engage in a brief review:  (be sure to check the statutes and definitions in your own STATE -- the following are conceptual; i.e., to know these is to understand the definitions in your STATE)

(1) "transportation" means removing people and/or property from here to there for profit or hire under the choice of law of the "place" called "this state;"  (this term is very rarely defined anywhere, which should be our greatest clue that it's a scam)

(2) "vehicle" is a conveyance used for "transportation" purposes (at the time relevant to the issuance of the ticket); (key is the concept of "use")

(3) "driver" is the person behind the wheel of a "vehicle;"

(4) "motor vehicle" is a "vehicle" with a motor;  (the actual definitions here will be much longer; the simplification intends to highlight the key concept, namely that "motor vehicle" depends "algebraically" on "vehicle," which depends "algebraically" on "transportation" -- if no "transportation," then no "vehicle;" hence no "motor vehicle."  We're dealing with a system that lives and breaths on semantics; so, we are compelled to learn the semantics and to argue the semantics; these are commercial scams, so we must learn to think commercially);

(5) "operator" is the person behind the wheel of a "motor vehicle;" and

(6) "this state" is the "federal area," or the "federal zone," i.e., the "hover zone."  Picture 48 contiguous States, Alaska, Hawaii,American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and all the rest of the territories and protectorates.  Now, picture above all that land a clear acrylic sheet hovering 25 feet above the land.  To "see" that clear acrylic sheet is to "see" the "place" called "this state."   I describe "this state" this way to communicate the concept that "this state" (1) has nothing to do with any State, and (2) has nothing to do with the Law of the Land as its fundamental choice of law.  The Law of the Sea applies to all matters that accrue relative to the water or relative to the air; hence, I put "this state" in the air right above wherever you may happen to be.

All "places" that operated formerly under the Common Law and that presently function with "funny money" operate out of this exact same legal "model."  All of them must have their equivalent of the "hover zone."  Thus, all of them must recognize the difference between one in the Proper Capacity and one in the FEDERAL CAPACITY.

The STATEs MAY and DO regulate "transportation" activity in "this state."  Whether one is in the "transportation" line of commerce at any given time is known best by the person receiving that "ticket."

Threatening someone with a fine for exercising his right of redress sounds very much like a screamin' violation of 18 USC §§ 241 and 242. There are likely witness-tampering crimes that apply, as well.  This is a time to study into 42 USC § 1983 and related bases for commercial claims.

As we see in the information below, very few people are actually in a position to engage this kind of debate, so those who ARE "called" to do so are doing a service to their family, friends, neighbors, communities, states, and to the nation as a whole.  Keep up the great work.

Harmon L. Taylor
Legal Reality
Dallas, Texas

Subscribe / unsubscribe :  [email protected]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:  RE: Indiana: City Threatens $2500 Fines for Challenging Traffic Tickets
Date:  Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:38:07 -0800 (PST)
Indiana: City Threatens $2500 Fines for Challenging Traffic Tickets
Lawyer sues traffic and parking courts in Indianapolis, Indiana over threatened $2500 penalty for contesting a ticket in court.

Paul K. OgdenMotorists who receive minor parking or traffic tickets in Indianapolis, Indiana are being threatened with fines of up to $2500 if they attempt to take the ticket to court. A local attorney with the firm Roberts and Bishop was so outraged by what he saw in Marion County traffic court that he filed a class action suit yesterday seeking to have the practice banned as unconstitutional.

"The deck is stacked against the motorist," lawyer Paul K. Ogden wrote. "To penalize that person for seeking justice seems wrong. I know it is done for the purpose of discouraging baseless challenges to tickets and clogging the docket, but in the process you are also penalizing people who have a legitimate defense and want a chance to present it to the court."

The city made explicit the threat of additional fines for challenging parking tickets in a November 30 press release announcing a deal between Indianapolis and a private firm, T2 Systems, to hand over operations of a parking ticket court to increase municipal income.

"Using Six Sigma process improvement strategies, it is estimated that under this program the city may collect an additional $352,000 to $520,000 in parking citation revenue over the next 12 months," the city press release stated. "If citations are not paid prior to their scheduled hearing, the city may request a fine of up to $2500 per citation. Upon receiving a judgment for an unpaid citation, individuals responsible could be subject to collections actions or having their vehicle registration suspended."

In traffic court, Judge William Young has been making good on the threats by routinely siding with police officers in disputes and imposing fines of up to $500 on anyone who challenges a moving violation ticket, no matter how minor, and loses. Those who pay without going to court do not face this extra fine.

"Unfortunately what you have happen a lot of times is that judges aren't particularly worried about whether what they're doing may be violating the law as the odds of someone ever appealing a $400 traffic ticket is remote," Ogden wrote. "I see it all the time. Trial judges flouting the law knowing they are unlikely to ever be challenged on an appeal because the litigants can't afford it."

Ogden is specifically representing three motorists affected by court policies. Toshinao Ishii received a ticket for driving 63 MPH in a 55 zone in February. Had he paid the ticket without challenge, the fine would have been $150. After Judge Young sided with the police officer in court, Ishii was fined $550. Motorist Matthew Stone was told by his doctors not to wear a seat belt over his chest as it could damage his cardiac pacemaker. He received a $25 ticket for not wearing a seat belt. After court officials threatened Stone with a $500 fine, he gave up his intention of challenging the citation. Adam Lenkowsky, who did not receive a ticket, attempted to attend a traffic court proceeding on September 23, 2009. He was barred from the court, despite the state constitutional requirement that court proceedings be open.

Ogden argues the court's practices in the first two cases violate the excessive fines clause of the state constitution as well as the clause requiring that "all penalties shall be proportioned to the nature of the offense."

"... when the people want to do something I can't find anything in the Constitution expressly forbidding them to do, I say, whether I like it or not, 'Goddammit, let 'em do it.'" --Justice Felix Frankfurter (1882-1965)

NOTICE: Presented entities are not affiliated with Freedom School.
NOTICE: If anything in this presentation is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.
       Specialty Areas

All the powers in the universe seem to favor the person who has confidence.

More & Other Information - Resource Pages
Admiralty related itemsBelligerent Claimant
BondsAttention Signing the Constitution Away
Citizenship / nationality related itemsEducation
Jerry KirkAware
JurisdictionLaw related items
Lewis MohrLuis Ewing
MoneyOath related items
Reading MaterialReading Room
StuffTax matters
Travel related
AntiShyster MagazineVideo
NOTICE: The information on this page was brought to you by people who paid this website forward so that someone such as you might also profit by having access to it. If you care to do so also please feel encouraged to KEEP THIS SITE GOING by making a donation today. Thank you. Make donation with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!

Freedom School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.
This enterprise collectively is known and generaly presented as "" - "we," "us" or "our" are other expressions of used throughout.

This is the fine print that so important. Freedom School and other information served is so for educational purposes only, no liability expressed or assumed for use.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Freedom School does not consent to or condone unlawful action.
Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and defend all Law which is particularly applicable.
Information is intended for [those] men and women who are not "US CITIZENS" or "TAXPAYERS" - continued use, reference or citing indicates voluntary and informed compliance. Support is not offered.

Freedom School is a free speech site, non-commecial enterprise and operation as there is no charge for things presented
this site relys on this memorandum and others in support of this philosophy and operation.
The noteworthy failure of [the] government or any alleged agency thereof to at any time rebut anything appearing on this website constitutes a legal admission of the fidelity and accuracy of the materials presented, which are offered in good faith and prepared as such by Freedom School and any and all [third] parties affiliated or otherwise. THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC AGREEMENT AND IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, EQUIVALENT TO A SIGNED, WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES - If the government, or anyone else, wants to assert that any of the religious and/or political statements appearing on this website are not factual or otherwise in error, then they as the moving party have the burden of proof, and they must responsively meet that burden of proof under the Administrative Procedures Act 5 U.S.C. §556(d) and under the due process clauses found in the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the national Constitution BEFORE there will be response to any summons, questions, or unsubstantiated and slanderous accusations. Attempts at calling presented claims "frivolous" without specifically rebutting the particular claim, or claims, deemed "frivolous" will be in deed be "frivolous" and prima facie evidence that shall be used accordingly. Hey guys, if anything on this site is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification. is not responsible for content of any linked website or material.
In addition, users may not use to engage in, facilitate or further unlawful conduct; use the service in a way that harms us or anyone connected with or whose work is presented; damage, disable, overburden, or impair the service (or the network(s) connected to the site) or interfere with anyone's use and enjoyment of the website.
All claims to be settled on the land - Austin, Travis county Texas, united States of America, using Texas Common Law.
All parts of this contract apply to the maximum extent permitted by law. A court may hold that we cannot enforce a part of this contract as written. If this happens, then you and we will replace that part with terms that most closely match the intent of the part that we cannot enforce. The rest of this contract will not change. This is the entire contract between you and us regarding your use of the service. It supersedes any prior contract or statements regarding your use of the site. If there exists some manner of thing missing we do not forfeit our right to that thing as we reserve all rights.
We may assign, or modify, alter, change this contract, in whole or in part, at any time with or without notice to you. You may not assign this contract, or any part of it, to any other person. Any attempt by you to do so is void. You may not transfer to anyone else, either temporarily or permanently, any rights to use the site or material contained within.

Presentation CopyrightŠ 2007, 2021
All Rights Reserved