Class, Rodney Dale

[Lambkin]

Discussion of his re-arrest on federal charges on Revolution Radio.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2p6-aFi7p4

[wserra]

When did this happen? Source?

The federal indictment was filed last September.

Class has been a busy little beaver. Filed just this week:

03/26/2014 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Gladys Kessler: Status Conference as to RODNEY CLASS held on 3/26/2014. Motion Hearing set for 4/7/2014 at 10:45 AM in Courtroom 26A before Judge Gladys Kessler. Bond Status of Defendant: Defendant continued on Personal Recognizance; Court Reporter: Lisa Foradori; Defense Attorney: A. J. Kramer; US Attorney: Peter Lallas; (tth) (Entered: 03/26/2014)

03/26/2014 25 MOTION for Verification for Declaratory Status Under the Tenth Amendment by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted," Signed by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (dr) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 26 MOTION for Requirment and wish for Dismissal by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted," Signed by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (dr) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 27 MOTION for Federal Rules Violations and Willful Fraud Upon The Court As Grounds For Motion Of Dismissal, And A Request For Summary Judgment by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted," Signed by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (dr) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 28 MOTION for Objection to Government's Omnibus Response by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted," Signed by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (dr) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 29 MOTION Writ of Error Coram Nobis Memorandum In Law, Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 60 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 46 (and Administrative Notice) by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (mlp) Modified on 3/27/2014 (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 30 MOTION for a Show Cause Hearing on Formal Complaint by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted," Signed by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (dr) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 31 MOTION for Requirement and Wish for Dismissal, (Judicial Notice: U.S. District Court has limited jurisdiction and venue) by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 32 SECOND MOTION to Quash and Strike Prosecution's Response for Failure to State Facts and Conclusions in Law by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14 (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 33 SECOND MOTION for A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel (and Judicial Notice: Fraud upon the Court) by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 34 MOTION for Discovery: F.R.C.P. Rule 37, F.R.C.P. Rule 16, (and a Clarification of Verbal Communications Used by the Plaintiff) by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 35 MOTION to remove united states code 28 section 2672 administrative adjustment of claims by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (erd) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 36 MOTION Objection to government's omnimbus response: Re: What the living flesh and blood man with a sould, a being/natural person, was subjected to after being unlawfully arrested by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (erd) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 37 MOTION for Discovery F.R.C.P. Rule 37, Rule 16 and a Clarification of Verbal Communications Used by the Plaintiff by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (hsj, ) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 38 MOTION Administrative notice and demand: writ of error coram nobis memorandum in law, Fed.R.Civ.P. Rule 60 and Fed. R. Civ.P.46 by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (erd) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 39 MOTION for Requirement to Have the Plaintiff Appear Before the District Court by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (hsj, ) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 40 MOTION for Prayer for Verification for Declaratory Status and Inquisition Status of Declarant by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (hsj, ) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 41 MOTION Administrative notice; in the nature of writ of error coram nobis & a demand for dismissal or state the proper jurisdiction by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (erd) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 42 MOTION Objection to government's omnibus response: Re: What the flesh and blood man with a soul, a being/natural person, was subjected to after being unlawfully arrested by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/14. (erd) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 43 JUDICIAL NOTICE MOTION to Remove United States Code 28 Section 2672 Administrative Adjustment of Claims by RODNEY CLASS."Leave to File Granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (hsj, ) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 44 MOTION to Take Judicial Notice Federal Rules Violations and Willful Fraud Upon the Court as Grounds for Motion of Dismissal and a Request for Summary Judgment by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (hsj, ) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 45 MOTION to Take Judicial Notice Fraud Upon the Court 2nd Motion for Lawyer A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (hsj, ) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/26/2014 46 MOTION to Take Judicial Notice Verification for Declaratory Status Under the Tenth Amendment by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to File Granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/26/2014. (hsj, ) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/27/2014 47 SECOND MOTION for Discovery: F.R.C.P. RULE 37, F.R.C.P. RULE 16 and a Clarification of Bonds Used by the Plaintiff by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/27/14. (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/27/2014 48 MOTION by Congressional Act: A Right to Act as a Private Attorney General, and by Constitutional Authority: to Receive Letters of Marque and Reprisal by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/27/14. (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

03/27/2014 49 MOTION in the form of a Demand for Dismissal or State the Proper Jurisdiction (and Administrative Notice: in the Nature of Writ of Error Coram Hobis) by RODNEY CLASS. "Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler on 3/27/14. (mlp) (Entered: 03/27/2014)

Now, that's enough nonsense to satisfy the most masochistic court.

There really is no reason to download and link to all of these. Still, because Class' output is particularly authentic frontier gibberish, I link to two. His "MOTION by Congressional Act: A Right to Act as a Private Attorney General, and by Constitutional Authority: to Receive Letters of Marque and Reprisal" is a trenchant, almost metaphysical, analysis of the relationship between the power Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 11 of the Constitution grants to Congress and some ninny who carried various guns (including a .44 rifle) onto Capitol Grounds. And "MOTION to Take Judicial Notice Fraud Upon the Court 2nd Motion for Lawyer A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel by RODNEY CLASS" is an in-depth analysis of how the refusal of Class' stand-by counsel to accept that Class' bullshit is really rainbow sherbet constitutes a fraud on the Court.

BTW, nd, Class is free on bond. A hearing on these (ahem) "motions" is scheduled for April 7 at 10:45. Judge Kessler's next hearing on that day is 10:46.

[notorial dissent]

I was going to say, that the one on "Letters of Marque and Reprisal" sounded like a true gold mine of true Classian BS, thank you for that bit of humor. I see that they did insist on him having an attorney :sarcasm mode: I wonder why?? :sarcasm mode off:(we really really do need a sarcasm smiley) Does one get the feeling that the current judge has taken to disposing of Classes droppings by letting him rant, gathering them all up in to one bundle and then dealing with them all at one time?

Him being out was not mentioned in the article I saw, and I find it a bit hard to believe, but you never know. On the other hand, he will keep poking at this until it falls over on him, so the likelihood of him running away is probably small.

[notorial dissent]

Having finished my coffee beforehand, and quite glad that I did, I waded through the document in question. I will give Rod credit where credit is due, he does have a fervent, albeit fetid, imagination. He is approaching PAMian proportions with some of his claims and imaginings, and I can see from this where some of his wilder delusions come from.

[LPC]

A hearing on these (ahem) "motions" is scheduled for April 7 at 10:45. Judge Kessler's next hearing on that day is 10:46.

I couldn't help but notice that all of the docket entries for the motions include "'Leave to file granted" by Judge Gladys Kessler." What's that all about?

Why does a defendant need leave of court to file a motion? Is it because Class is represented by counsel?

But what's the point of requiring leave of court if the court is going to allow every motion?

Regardless of the answers to those questions, I expect that the judge is following the more conservative approach of allowing Class to file the motions, and then denying them on the merits, rather than denying him the right to file the motions and then run the risk of being reversed on procedural grounds.

But the whole "Leave to file granted" thing still seems odd.

[LPC]

And "MOTION to Take Judicial Notice Fraud Upon the Court 2nd Motion for Lawyer A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel by RODNEY CLASS" is an in-depth analysis of how the refusal of Class' stand-by counsel to accept that Class' bullshit is really rainbow sherbet constitutes a fraud on the Court.

I had trouble getting past the cover page, which is in itself a gem.

Some other highlights:

1. The first section begins by stating that "Paragraphs 1 through 16 are incorporated herein in their entirety by reference." What *follows* is paragraphs 1 through 16. I know these kinds of guys are at best mimics, with no cognitive abilities, but really.

2. The first paragraph quotes 28 U.S.C. 2255 in its entirety, which is titled "Federal custody; remedies on motion attacking sentence." Class himself is not in custody, and hasn't yet been tried, much less sentenced. So there is almost two pages of wasted paper.

3. On pages 7-8 he quotes the Second Amendment, but then also quotes a "Foot note" (probably from the US Code) that paraphrases the holding of the Supreme Court in United States v. Miller that the 2nd Amendment did not give an individual citizen a constitutional right to possess a sawed-off shotgun. How this helps Class's own case is never explained.

4. The second section begins by stating that paragraphs 1 through 30 are "incorporated herein in their entirety by reference," and the next numbered paragraph is 17. Paragraphs 17 et seq. apparently get to the heart of the matter, which has to do with willful fraud, collusion, and coercion because the AUSA and the public defender failed to file entry of appearances, in violation of "Rule 11" (of the rules of civil procedure?).

[wserra]

Why does a defendant need leave of court to file a motion? Is it because Class is represented by counsel?

I suspect that's right. Someone represented cannot file pro se papers. I further suspect that I wrote too quickly when I referred to the long-suffering A.J. Kramer as "stand-by counsel". I also believe that this order from last month has something to do with it. Note that "as soon as possible" is bolded in the original.

I had trouble getting past the cover page, which is in itself a gem.

I must say that I had never heard of a "Constitutional Bounty Hunter" before.

[grixit]

Isn't applying for a letter of marque the very definition of putting yourself under admiralty jurisdiction?

[fortinbras]

What is the potential sentence if Class is convicted? How did he bring guns onto the Capitol campus? A lot of tourists simply have mental blanks about having (legal) guns in their cars or RVs and then parking their cars in "sensitive" areas, leaving the guns in their cars (maybe having forgotten all about them momentarily) while they sightsee without any weapons on them personally. Every now and then at the Capitol -- and at airports -- they encounter a tourist with a handgun in her handbag, perfectly legal back home, and intended only for protection from muggers and the like, and they simply didn't think to disarm when they went out this morning.

Lexis-Nexis produced no newsclippings, but I found this on the internet:
http://dccrimestories.com/write-in-cand ... s-capitol/

[Lambkin]

How did he bring guns onto the Capitol campus?

According to the report, he left numerous weapons in plain view in an unattended vehicle, illegally parked.

[morrand]

Some other highlights:

1. The first section begins by stating that "Paragraphs 1 through 16 are incorporated herein in their entirety by reference." What *follows* is paragraphs 1 through 16. I know these kinds of guys are at best mimics, with no cognitive abilities, but really.

Well, no, that makes sense. He can write anything that he wants, but until he's incorporated it into the filing, it has no effect, see? (Not like it'll actually be any more effective now that it's been incorporated, of course.)

Spiffy set of seals on page 14, too. Do you suppose there's any significance to his "public bounty hunter" seal being affixed upside-down?

[wserra]

I think that, at long last, Judge Kessler has had enough. After a Faretta hearing, she ruled that he can represent himself. She also ruled that, since Class has filed fifty-seven motions so far this year, the clerk will not accept any more without leave.

Since that order - this week - nearly twenty people have attempted to appear as "Third-Party Intervenor". Since there is no intervention in criminal cases, "Leave to File Denied" x 20.

Judge, this is going to rob us of some well-deserved comic relief.

[The Observer]

Judge, this is going to rob us of some well-deserved comic relief.

You should be more understanding. Not all court rooms have the space to have a 3 ring circus going on or to accomodate the 73 clowns emerging out of the miniature car.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Judge, this is going to rob us of some well-deserved comic relief.

You should be more understanding. Not all court rooms have the space to have a 3 ring circus going on or to accomodate the 73 clowns emerging out of the miniature car.

But this is what wserra is complaining about. Surely the judge could have somehow got the +20 extras to be included as co-defendants and then have them all held on $250,000 (each) bail until a large enough courtroom was ready.

[LPC]

Since that order - this week - nearly twenty people have attempted to appear as "Third-Party Intervenor". Since there is no intervention in criminal cases, "Leave to File Denied" x 20.

I think I can speak for all of us when I say, "WTF?"

I mean, forget about whether you can intervene in a criminal case. Why would you want to?

The usual reason to intervene is because you have an interest in the subject matter. So the wannabe intervenors either (a) want a piece of the punishment (i.e., lock us up instead), or (b) want a piece of Class themselves (i.e., let us punish him). Either is weird, but the latter is at least semi-rational.

[notorial dissent]

I think it is more than likely, that the "Third-Party Intervenors" are filing on behalf of Rod. Pity we'll probably never know what his "Intervenors" were filing, unless they post some of them on one of the websites, which I am half way expecting. I'll bet they are a real comedy exercise in and of themselves, his stuff not withstanding. He seems to have a small but very dedicated collection of groupies, for lack of a better word, who think he is a legal genius and going to bring down the system. Now how he is going to ever do this, when he can't seem to beat even a parking ticket is beyond me, but they are about as delusional and fanatical as I've seen, and did I mention completely clueless as well?

I really do feel sorry for that judge if she lets him go pro se, as he will drive her up the wall with his nonsense before the trial is even more than started based on prior history.

[wserra]

I think it is more than likely, that the "Third-Party Intervenors" are filing on behalf of Rod.

I think it's virtually certain that's what was happening.

I really do feel sorry for that judge if she lets him go pro se

She already did. Better for us, worse for her.

[notorial dissent]

I guess I should have qualified that and said let him continue going pro se.

I don't suspect there was much she really could do, as big of a fruit cake as I think he is, I don't think he meets the legal definition of incompetent or really incapable, but he is in his own little world of legal reality which does not overlap in the slightest with the rest of the universe, and he will not be able to put anything like a functioning defense when it comes down to it, and I'm pretty sure he will do his level best to turn the trial in to a circus.

[GlimDropper]

One of the relevant case documents courtesy of the Native Born Citizen blog:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :
v. RODNEY CLASS, :
Defendant. :

GOVERNMENT’S OMNIBUS RESPONSE TO THE DEFENDANT’S MOTIONS SEEKING MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF

The United States of America, by and through its attorney, the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, hereby files the following response to Defendant Rodney Class’s various pro se motions seeking miscellaneous relief.

Factual and Procedural Background

1. On May 30, 2013, defendant Rodney Class was arrested by United States Capitol Police for possessing firearms on Capitol Grounds. Found inside the defendant’s vehicle were three loaded firearms as well as multiple knives and axes. The defendant was charged in District of Columbia Superior Court on May 31, 2013 with Carrying a Pistol under D.C. Code § 22- 4504(a). After a three-day period of detention under D.C. Code § 22-1322(b), the defendant was released on conditions of release including a stay-away order from the District of Columbia.

2. On September 3, 2013, a grand jury indicted the defendant in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on two charges: Possession of a Firearm on Capitol Grounds, in violation of 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(1), and Carrying a Pistol (Outside Home or Place of Business), in violation of D.C. Code § 22-4504(a).

3. On September 5, 2013, the defendant surrendered to United States Capitol Police, and was arraigned on the indictment before Magistrate Judge Facciola that same day. At the time of arraignment, the government did not oppose the defendant’s release, but requested that (1) he be placed in the D.C. Pre-Trial Services’ Agency’s High Intensity Supervision Program (HISP), (2) that he be monitored using a GPS device, (3) that he be ordered to stay away from U.S. Capitol Grounds, (4) that he be placed on home confinement, and (5) that he be ordered to relinquish possession of any and all weapons.

4. After hearing argument from counsel, Judge Facciola ordered that the defendant be released on personal recognizance, that he be monitored by GPS device, that he report as directed by Pre-Trial Services for the Western District of North Carolina, and that he stay away from the District of Columbia except for court-related matters. Judge Facciola also ordered that the defense produce an inventory of weapons in the defendant’s home, but deferred the government’s request that he be required to surrender his weapons during the pendency of this case.

5. At a hearing before the Court on September 12, 2013, Judge Wilkins ordered the defendant to remain on GPS monitoring, to surrender any additional weapons to his daughter within 24 hours of the hearing, and to submit an inventory of weapons to the court. A further status date was set.

6. Thereafter, at successive status hearings, the Court excluded time under the Speedy Trial Act in the interest of justice as the defendant conferred with his attorney.

7. On January 3, 2014, the defendant, although still represented by counsel, filed the following pro se motion: “Enter my Appearance: Requirement for Motion For In Camera Hearing; ‘Corpus Delicti’ To Be Produced (Habeas Corpus).” On January 6, 2014, the document was entered on the docket [Doc. No. 7].

8. On January 17, 2014, the case was transferred from Judge Wilkins to Judge 2 Gladys Kessler.

9. On January 27, 2014, the defendant filed five pro se motions [Doc. Nos. 10-14]. At a status hearing on February 3, 2013, the government inquired of the Court which motions would require a response. The Court indicated that it wished the government to state its positions to each of the defendant’s requests for relief, but that memoranda of law on each point was not necessary. The Court also ordered a competency evaluation of the defendant.

10. On February 7, 2014, the government filed an Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief [Doc. No. 17].

11. From February 18-27, 2014, the defendant filed four pro se pleadings [Doc. Nos. 20-23]. On March 7, 2014, the government filed an Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief [Doc. No. 24].

12. On March 26, 2014, the defendant filed 24 additional pro se pleadings. These were styled as follows: “Take Judicial Notice: Verification for Declaratory Status Under the Tenth Amendment,” [Doc. No. 25], “Requirement and wish for Dismissal; Take Judicial Notice: United States District Court has limited jurisdiction and venue,” [Doc. No. 26], “Take Judicial Notice: Federal Rules Violations And Willful Fraud Upon The Court As Grounds For Motion Of Dismissal, And A Request For Summary Judgment,” [Doc. No. 27], “Objection to Government’s Omnibus Response: RE: What The Living Flesh And Blood Man With A Soul, A Being/Natural Person, Was Subjected To After Being Unlawfully Arrested,” [Doc. No. 28], “Administrative Notice and Demand: Writ of Error Coram Nobis,” [Doc. No. 29], “Formal Complaint; Prayer for Relief and Constitutional Question in Law,” [Doc. No. 30], “Requirement and wish for Dismissal; Take Judicial Notice: United States District Court has limited jurisdiction and venue,” [Doc. No. 31], “2nd Motion to Quash and Strike Prosecution’s Response for Failure to State Facts and Conclusions of Law,” [Doc. No. 32], “Take Judicial Notice: Fraud Upon the Court, 2nd Motion For Lawyer A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel,” [Doc. No. 33], “Motion for Discovery,” [Doc. No. 34], “Judicial Notice Motion to Remove United States Code 28 Section 2672 Administrative Adjustment of Claims,” [Doc. No. 35], “Objection to Government’s Omnibus Response RE: What The Living Flesh And Blood Man With A Soul, A Being/Natural Person, Was Subjected To After Being Unlawfully Arrested,” [Doc. No. 36], “Motion for Discovery,” [Doc. No. 37], “Administrative Notice and Demand: Writ of Error Coram Nobis,” [Doc. No. 38], “Requirement to Have the Plaintiff Appear Before the District Court (This Court),” [Doc. No. 39], “Administrative Notice; In the Nature of Writ of Error Coram Nobis & A Demand For Dismissal or State the Proper Jurisdiction,” [Doc. No. 41], “Take Judicial Notice: Prayer for Verification for Declaratory Status and Inquisition Status of Defendant,” [Doc. No. 40], “Objection to Government’s Omnibus Response: RE: What The Living Flesh And Blood Man With A Soul, A Being/Natural Person, Was Subjected To After Being Unlawfully Arrested,” [Doc. No. 42], “Judicial Notice Motion to Remove United States Code 28 Section 2672 Administrative Adjustment of Claims,” [Doc. No. 43], “Take Judicial Notice: Federal Rules Violations And Willful Fraud upon The Court As Grounds For Motion Of Dismissal, And A Request For Summary Judgment,” [Doc. No. 44], “Take Judicial Notice: Fraud Upon the Court, 2nd Motion for Lawyer A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel,” [Doc. No. 45], “Take Judicial Notice: Verification for Declaratory Status Under the Tenth Amendment,” [Doc. No. 46], “2nd Motion for Discovery: F.R.C.P. Rule 37, F.R.C.P. Rule 16, And a Clarification of Bonds Used by the Plaintiff,” [Doc. No. 47], “By Congressional Act: A Right to Act as a Private Attorney General, and by Constitutional Authority: to Receive Letters of Marque and Reprisal,” [Doc. No. 48], and “Administrative Notice; In the Nature of Writ of Error Coram Nobis & A Demand For Dismissal or State the Proper Jurisdiction,” [Doc. No. 49].

13. On March 26, 2014, the Court held a status hearing at which the Court set a hearing on the defendant’s motions for April 7, 2014.

Argument

14. The government’s position with respect to each of the requests for relief is as follows.[1]

Defendant’s “Take Judicial Notice: Verification for Declaratory Status Under the Tenth Amendment” [Doc. No. 25]

15. The government construes the above pleading as a request that the Court declare the defendant a “Private Attorney General.” The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Requirement and wish for Dismissal; Take Judicial Notice: United States District Court has limited jurisdiction and venue,” [Doc. No. 26]

16. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of jurisdiction. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Take Judicial Notice: Federal Rules Violations And Willful Fraud upon The Court As Grounds For Motion Of Dismissal, And A Request For Summary Judgment” [Doc. No. 27]

17. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss the indictment for, inter alia, procedural violations. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Objection to Government’s Omnibus Response: RE: What The Living Flesh And Blood Man With A Soul, A Being/Natural Person, Was Subjected To After Being Unlawfully Arrested” [Doc. No. 28]

18. The government construes the above pleading as a reply in further support of the defendant’s prior motions and a motion to dismiss for prosecutorial misconduct. The

1 To the extent the government misconstrues the relief sought by the defendant, the government respectfully requests leave to respond orally at the Court’s April 7, 2014 hearing on the defendant’s pleadings.

government opposes any request to dismiss the indictment. Insofar as this pleading responds to the government’s February 7, 2014 Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief, [Doc. No. 17], and its March 7, 2014 Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief, [Doc. No. 24], the government stands on its prior pleadings.

Defendant’s “Administrative Notice and Demand: Writ of Error Coram Nobis” [Doc. No. 29]

19. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Formal Complaint; Prayer for Relief and Constitutional Question in Law” [Doc. No. 30]

20. The government construes the above pleading as a request that the Court sanction undersigned counsel and former Assistant United States Attorney Andrew Finkelman. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Requirement and wish for Dismissal; Take Judicial Notice: United States District Court has limited jurisdiction and venue” [Doc. No. 31]

21. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss the indictment for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “2nd Motion to Quash and Strike Prosecution’s Response for Failure to State Facts and Conclusions of Law” [Doc. No. 32]

22. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to strike the government’s March 7, 2014 Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief, [Doc. No. 24]. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Take Judicial Notice: Fraud Upon the Court, 2nd Motion For Lawyer A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel” [Doc. No. 33]

23. The government construes the above pleading as expressing the defendant’s wish to represent himself. As to this request, the government takes no position.

Defendant’s “Motion for Discovery” [Doc. No. 34]

24. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Judicial Notice Motion to Remove United States Code 28 Section 2672 Administrative Adjustment of Claims” [Doc. No. 35]

25. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Objection to Government’s Omnibus Response RE: What The Living Flesh And Blood Man With A Soul, A Being/Natural Person, Was Subjected To After Being Unlawfully Arrested” [Doc. No. 36]

26. The government construes the above pleading as a reply in further support of the defendant’s prior motions and a motion to dismiss for prosecutorial misconduct. The government opposes any request to dismiss the indictment. Insofar as this pleading responds to the government’s February 7, 2014 Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief, [Doc. No. 17], and its March 7, 2014 Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief, [Doc. No. 24], the government stands on its prior pleadings.

Defendant’s “Motion for Discovery” [Doc. No. 37]

27. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Administrative Notice and Demand: Writ of Error Coram Nobis” [Doc. No. 38]

28. The government construes the above pleading as a request to dismiss the indictment for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and improper venue. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Requirement to Have the Plaintiff Appear Before the District Court (This Court)” [Doc. No. 39]

29. This two-sentence pleading appears to request the presence of the United States before this Court. As at prior proceedings, counsel for the United States will continue to appear before this Court.

Defendant’s “Administrative Notice; In the Nature of Writ of Error Coram Nobis & A Demand For Dismissal or State the Proper Jurisdiction” [Doc. No. 41]

30. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Take Judicial Notice: Prayer for Verification for Declaratory Status and Inquisition Status of Defendant” [Doc. No. 40]

31. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Objection to Government’s Omnibus Response: RE: What The Living Flesh And Blood Man With A Soul, A Being/Natural Person, Was Subjected To After Being Unlawfully Arrested” [Doc. No. 42]

32. The government construes the above pleading as a reply in further support of the defendant’s prior motions and a motion to dismiss for prosecutorial misconduct. The government opposes any request to dismiss the indictment. Insofar as this pleading responds to the government’s February 7, 2014 Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief, [Doc. No. 17], and its March 7, 2014 Omnibus Response to the Defendant’s Motions Seeking Miscellaneous Relief, [Doc. No. 24], the government stands on its prior pleadings.

Defendant’s “Judicial Notice Motion to Remove United States Code 28 Section 2672 Administrative Adjustment of Claims” [Doc. No. 43]

33. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Take Judicial Notice: Federal Rules Violations and Willful Fraud Upon the Court as Grounds for Motion of Dismissal, and a Request for Summary Judgment” [Doc. No. 44]

34. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss the indictment. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “Take Judicial Notice: Fraud Upon the Court, 2nd Motion for Lawyer A.J. Kramer to Step Aside as Ineffective Counsel” [Doc. No. 45]

35. The government construes the above pleading as a request for the defendant to represent himself. As to this request, the government poses no opposition.

Defendant’s “Take Judicial Notice: Verification for Declaratory Status Under the Tenth Amendment” [Doc. No. 46]

36. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss. The government opposes this request.

Defendant’s “2nd Motion for Discovery: F.R.C.P. Rule 37, F.R.C.P. Rule 16, And a Clarification of Bonds Used by the Plaintiff” [Doc. No. 47]

37. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to compel discovery. The government cannot discern the documents or information sought by the defendant and therefore opposes his request for relief.

Defendant’s “By Congressional Act: A Right to Act as a Private Attorney General, and by Constitutional Authority: to Receive Letters of Marque and Reprisal” [Doc. No. 48]

38. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss or a request that the defendant be declared a “Private Attorney General.” The government opposes both requests.

Defendant’s “Administrative Notice; In the Nature of Writ of Error Coram Nobis & A Demand For Dismissal or State the Proper Jurisdiction” [Doc. No. 49]

39. The government construes the above pleading as a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The government opposes this request.

Respectfully Submitted,

RONALD C. MACHEN JR. UNITED STATES ATTORNEY BAR NO. 447-889

By: _____/s/_____________________________ PETER C. LALLAS

And Rod's copious and frequently humorous audio commentary on his process is available on his Talk Shoe page.

As best as I can tell Rod has never won a single court case not even the traffic ticket he appealed to the Coast Guard. Yet somehow his repeated, continuous and ongoing lack of any kind of success with the legal system is attributed not to any flaws in his scholarship but rather to the courts not abiding by the rules and procedures as he believes them to be.

When all he was facing were traffic tickets he could afford to take his lumps and chalk up his failures to the other side "cheating" and his sovereign guru cred was intact. But now he's facing criminal weapons charges and prison time. I don't think a legitimate, competent attorney could get him off scott free from these charges so the real question is how much more time will he serve for sticking to his sovereign stupidity and if he's pig headed enough to do that extra time just to keep his guru cred intact.

47 minutes of recent Talk Shoe audio of him making me think he thinks it is. And the (current) most recent recording, 15 minutes of Rod addressing the 3rd party interviener issue and providing (his most concise) proof for how, even with the rule book open and in front of him, he can't clear his own bull crap out of his head enough to understand what he's reading.

[LightinDarkness]

I was listening to Rod's latest insane broadcast on talkshoe and may I just say...this man thinks very highly of himself. He mostly refers to himself as "we" - which I thought was only a thing for royalty and popes. Also, not sure if we knew this, but apparently he has an ankle bracelet slapped on him due to his DC case.

This is my first foray into listening to Rod and the arrogance is simply overwhelming. He truly thinks he is a sov'run warrior of the Light against a vast and evil conspiracy of the Dark Cabal. And that if you file the paperwork, the courts shall flee from before him...and of course he thinks he knows the right paperwork to do that. He even bragged that he has filed 63(!) documents in one of his cases.

Thats a common sov'run thing, I guess, filing so many documents that it becomes absurd, but I wonder why they do that. Do they think that the sheer volume of paper is going to impress someone or something?