ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Moderators: Prof, Judge Roy Bean

User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6107
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

ngupowered wrote:
"That's because you are looking for an explicit declaration that consent of a defendant is not required for personal jurisdiction."

- No I wasn't.

Yes, you were.

"If consent WAS required for criminal jurisdiction to attach to a defendant, then there would be at least one appellate court case affirming that."

- And your proof of this is where?
It's in the fact that the statutes in question makes it clear that jurisdiction attaches because a crime is committed within the jurisdiction of a given court. Again, just because the law doesn't use the specific words which you want to see doesn't mean that consent is required. You'd also better believe that people like Bernie Madoff and Kenneth Lay were able to afford the best in legal representation; yet the best criminal defense lawyers in American history (Clarence Darrow comes to mind) never suggested that their clients must consent to jurisdiction before a court may try them. Appellate court cases are the standard in interpreting a law; thus, if the law does not say that consent is required, and there are no appellate cases saying that consent is required, then consent is NOT required.

And again: where is your appellate court case which says that consent is required? In fact, where can you find any shred of proof that consent is required?
Last edited by Pottapaug1938 on Sun Mar 23, 2014 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
rumpelstilzchen
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2249
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 8:00 pm
Location: Soho London

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by rumpelstilzchen »

ngupowered wrote:Rumpel, again, why don't you interpret it yourself
Again you answer a question with a question.
I am asking you what do you mean by "hard evidence"?
Try again.
BHF wrote:
It shows your mentality to think someone would make the effort to post something on the internet that was untrue.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by LPC »

It's often difficult to refute silly claims, and NG's assertions are certainly silly. However, it's just occurred to me that there is a fairly recent Supreme Court decision that is pretty clearly on point.

In United States v. Alvarez-Machain, 504 U.S. 655 (1992), the Supreme Court held that a citizen and resident of Mexico could be tried in a U.S. court for violations of U.S. law even though he had been kidnapped in Mexico and brought to the U.S. by force.

From the majority opinion, quoting from an earlier decision:
Supreme Court wrote:"This Court has never departed from the rule announced in Ker [v. Illinois, 119 U.S. 436 (1886),] that the power of a court to try a person for crime is not impaired by the fact that he had been brought within the court's jurisdiction by reason of a 'forcible abduction.' No persuasive reasons are now presented to justify overruling this line of cases. They rest on the sound basis that due process of law is satisfied when one present in court is convicted of crime after having been fairly apprized of the charges against him and after a fair trial in accordance with constitutional procedural safeguards. There is nothing in the Constitution that requires a court to permit a guilty person rightfully convicted to escape justice because he was brought to trial against his will."
504 U.S. at 661-662, quoting Frisbie v. Collins, 342 U.S. 519, 522 (1952) (citation and footnote omitted; emphasis added).

I think we can now say without qualification that ngu's claim that the consent of the criminal defendant to the court's jurisdiction is required in some way has been completely refuted.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
erwalkerca
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 9:05 pm
Location: An hour from Spuzzum

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by erwalkerca »

I'm sure that bounty hunters Timm Johnsen and Daniel Kear did not consent to their extradition to Canada when the Canadian government deemed them to have kidnapped Sidney Jaffe after the pair took him against his will from Ontario to Florida to faces charges there in 1981.
Thule
Tragedian of Sovereign Mythology
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Nov 10, 2008 6:57 am
Location: 71 degrees north

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Thule »

ngupowered wrote:Jenny, you were doing just fine with your mouth closed. Btw, are you close to a kitchen?
Stay classy, Bad Gnus.
Survivor of the Dark Agenda Whistleblower Award, August 2012.
JamesVincent
A Councilor of the Kabosh
Posts: 3047
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 7:01 am
Location: Wherever my truck goes.

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by JamesVincent »

ngupowered wrote:Rumpel, again, why don't you interpret it yourself and make an offer?
Example: "Would this & this constitute a rebuttal?"
Probably because several posters have already wasted their time posting statute and law references to rebut your "theory" and you have ignored it. And, once again, you have to tried to turn the burden of proof around so that you can control the conversation flow. The burden is on you as the originator of this wreckage to prove that you are correct. I retract my earlier statement, you have gone beyond windowlicker.

Why in the world is this douchenozzle still allowed to post unmoderated? He has been provided ample time and space to bring up even one point of law and has refused. He has no original ideas, he relies on other, failed guru's for his rhetoric. We have moderated others who actually did provide their own, albeit twisted, interpretation of law and actually made an effort to engage in conversation. We might not have agreed with them but at least they made an effort.
Disciple of the cross and champion in suffering
Immerse yourself into the kingdom of redemption
Pardon your mind through the chains of the divine
Make way, the shepherd of fire

Avenged Sevenfold "Shepherd of Fire"
Quixote
Quatloosian Master of Deception
Posts: 1542
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Sanhoudalistan

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Quixote »

ngupowered wrote:Rumpel, again, why don't you interpret it yourself and make an offer?
Example: "Would this & this constitute a rebuttal?"
Ngupo, you're in a debate, not a negotiation. You don't get to decide what constitutes a rebuttal. That's up to your audience. Your current audience comprises literate, rational people. That audience has concluded that a defendant does not have to consent to jurisdiction. You have lost the debate. I have no doubt there are forums on the web in which your "it's right because you haven't said the magic words" argument would prevail. This is not one of them.
"Here is a fundamental question to ask yourself- what is the goal of the income tax scam? I think it is a means to extract wealth from the masses and give it to a parasite class." Skankbeat
ngupowered
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:26 am

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by ngupowered »

Thule, you want me to make it worse?
Analogy: seems folks here are confusing coming before the house with into/in the house.
Thx LPC, but it didn't do it. And I'll refute it, if within 24 hours I get three people saying it did.
Potta, you do realise the logical fallacies committed in your last post?
Rumpel, you're just gonna have to make an offer!
James, my only claim is that you haven't rebutted ST1. It stands.
Quixote, the only thing showing is the forum's ignorance of law. I have refuted all their arguments.
If this was my last post, you'd know I was inappropriately banned
You know I'm right you're wrong I'm wrong you know I'm right ...
I consent to ban other users and moderate their posts.
rumpelstilzchen
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 2249
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 2010 8:00 pm
Location: Soho London

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by rumpelstilzchen »

ngupowered wrote:Rumpel, you're just gonna have to make an offer!
Note how the forum jester is incapable of answering the simplest of questions.
He made a post that included the words "hard evidence". Those words were of his own choosing. However he finds it impossible to explain what he meant when he used those words that he, himself chose to use. He does not understand his own posts.

I require rebuttal to: The Gnu is a blithering idiot.
BHF wrote:
It shows your mentality to think someone would make the effort to post something on the internet that was untrue.
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6107
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

rumpelstilzchen wrote:
ngupowered wrote:Rumpel, you're just gonna have to make an offer!
Note how the forum jester is incapable of answering the simplest of questions.
He made a post that included the words "hard evidence". Those words were of his own choosing. However he finds it impossible to explain what he meant when he used those words that he, himself chose to use. He does not understand his own posts.

I require rebuttal to: The Gnu is a blithering idiot.
And to the fact that he is incapable of serious, rational debate.

Title: Delusional, Evasive Mover of Goalposts?
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
User avatar
webhick
Illuminati Obfuscation: Black Ops Div
Posts: 3994
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:41 am

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by webhick »

ngupowered wrote:Jenny, you were doing just fine with your mouth closed. Btw, are you close to a kitchen?
Lay off the sexist insults (and by extension racist or homophobic insults, should you want to get nitpicky) or I'm tapping you with the ban hammer for an as-yet undecided amount of time.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 8219
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 2:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Burnaby49 »

webhick wrote:
ngupowered wrote:Jenny, you were doing just fine with your mouth closed. Btw, are you close to a kitchen?
Lay off the sexist insults (and by extension racist or homophobic insults, should you want to get nitpicky) or I'm tapping you with the ban hammer for an as-yet undecided amount of time.
Please, please, just do it. Put this whole discussion thread out of its misery. It would be an act of mercy.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs
Lambkin
Warder of the Quatloosian Gibbet
Posts: 1206
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:43 pm

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Lambkin »

He's had plenty of time to produce whatever ideas or evidence he can come up with, and all he's got is trolling, trolling, trolling. Waste of perfectly good electrons.
Dai Kiwi
Cannoneer
Cannoneer
Posts: 83
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 7:06 am
Location: An Island South of the Equator

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Dai Kiwi »

"Bored now", to quote someone or other.

Ne cibos de troglodytae
ngupowered
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:26 am

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by ngupowered »

So yet again people arouse and stir up trouble for no good reason, enticing to eject me.
Webhick even issues threat while misconstruing my post; his mind is obviously elsewhere.
Truth is, I come here to get answers and as of lately LPC and Potta shows the right spirit by trying. But most people here simply lie, argue, post nonsense, or misconstrue my position. Fact is, people, by their own will, choose to post here, on this topic. If they don't have the rebutting evidence or are not willing to make an offer, they should remain silent.

Now, my offer to refute LPC's last post stands, if 3 people publicly understand the same. For now, it didn't do the job. You have 12 hours.
If this was my last post, you'd know I was inappropriately banned
You know I'm right you're wrong I'm wrong you know I'm right ...
I consent to ban other users and moderate their posts.
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by LPC »

ngupowered wrote:Thx LPC, but it didn't do it. And I'll refute it, if within 24 hours I get three people saying it did.
You're wrong. I've proved it.

If you had anything to refute the Ker-Frisbie line of cases, you could have posted it immediately. The reality is that you've got nothing, and you're trolling for a diversion.

All you're doing (and all you can do) is prove you're too stupid to know when you're wrong.

And you are wrong.

You lose. Get over it.
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6107
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

ngupowered wrote:So yet again people arouse and stir up trouble for no good reason, enticing to eject me.
Webhick even issues threat while misconstruing my post; his mind is obviously elsewhere.
Truth is, I come here to get answers and as of lately LPC and Potta shows the right spirit by trying. But most people here simply lie, argue, post nonsense, or misconstrue my position. Fact is, people, by their own will, choose to post here, on this topic. If they don't have the rebutting evidence or are not willing to make an offer, they should remain silent.

Now, my offer to refute LPC's last post stands, if 3 people publicly understand the same. For now, it didn't do the job. You have 12 hours.
You don't have ANYTHING with which to refute LPC's post. If you did, you would have posted it long ago. He gave you a Supreme Court decision (that's the highest court in the land) which makes clear to everyone but you that consent is not required for criminal jurisdiction to attach; and unless you can provide us with a subsequent Supreme Court decision saying otherwise, you've got nothing worthwhile to say on this point.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools
LPC
Trusted Keeper of the All True FAQ
Posts: 5233
Joined: Sun Mar 02, 2003 3:38 am
Location: Earth

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by LPC »

LPC wrote:All you're doing (and all you can do) is prove you're too stupid to know when you're wrong.
I also should have allowed for too dishonest, or too delusional.

Or what should be known as the "sovereign trifecta."
Dan Evans
Foreman of the Unified Citizens' Grand Jury for Pennsylvania
(And author of the Tax Protester FAQ: evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html)
"Nothing is more terrible than ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe.
ngupowered
Scalawag
Scalawag
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 9:26 am

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by ngupowered »

See what I mean? They instantly revert into the mind of an ignorant child, arguing, spouting irrelevances, throwing fits. Not the sign of supposedly highly professional mature people.
Truth is, LPC post is easily refuted, yet apparently finds not 3 people in support.
If this was my last post, you'd know I was inappropriately banned
You know I'm right you're wrong I'm wrong you know I'm right ...
I consent to ban other users and moderate their posts.
User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 6107
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: ngupowered On How Everyone in Jail Consented to Be There

Post by Pottapaug1938 »

ngupowered wrote:See what I mean? They instantly revert into the mind of an ignorant child, arguing, spouting irrelevances, throwing fits. Not the sign of supposedly highly professional mature people.
Truth is, LPC post is easily refuted, yet apparently finds not 3 people in support.
If it's so easily refuted, then do it. Otherwise, you're just making excuses for the fact that YOU JUST CAN'T DO IT. Put up, or shut up.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools