jonny sunday's pearls of wisdom

[notorial dissent]

Johnny, thanks ever so much for posting your list of fantasy accomplishments, always nice to see where your reservoirs of ignorance lie. AndyK very politely and helpfully pointed out to you the portions of your "knowledge" that have NO basis in actual legal process. It could also be pointed out that most, if not all, of the rest have no basis or validity or context or function in criminal law, and of the remainder only limited basis in civil law, which are two entirely and totally different areas of law with very different rules and requirements. Of the few remaining they are only valid if they are part of that actual type of law, and then only if what you are using them for is reality based, and it needs to be reality based and compliant with the law(s) in effect at the time. In summary, what you know, particularly and especially if you got it from Winny, is worth exactly and precisely NOTHING. After all, it worked so very incredibly well for Winny, now didn't it?

[jonny sunday]

I never said anything about the way Winston was using instruments was correct.
I never said the way he dealt with the IRS and his taxes was correct.
I never said he had all the answers regarding courts. Criminal or civil.
I never said I had solved hundreds of court cases.
Ben Lowrey doesn't even deserve any form of response and if I said something like he said, I would be moderated.

What I have said is:

Many of the concepts he shared are solid. They work 100% of the time. WS drove his truck to court every single time and his truck worked 100% of the time, but he was still found guilty. That doesn't mean his use of his truck is what caused him to be found guilty. I've used many of the things in many appearances at court for myself and observing others. I've seen things that work and things that don't. I was kicked off the last three Gordon Hall calls, before he went to jail, for telling people on the call the technique he was talking about does not work, because I had first hand knowledge. I am 100% sure the knowledge I have learned and ascertained have made me into a man who feels comfortable dealing with officers of the court, in and out of the courtroom. I have saved money in attorney fees, and negotiated better settlements with prosecutors. I have helped people move contracts through administrative process. I have helped people enforce their claims on people who owed them. I've negotiated deals for people on the phone with the other party's attorney. I've made mistakes in court and been arrested. I've written to the judge from jail, corrected the mistake and released from jail. I've had judges in my court cases shake my hand, invite me in chambers, admonished me for my conduct, and I've gone back to those courts to visit. I've had judges and prosecutors apologize to me. The probation case attorney who sat in the court and saw me in one of the court rooms walked up to me with his wife, friend, friends wife and introduced them to me. Told stories about me in the court. He told me "Judge ... Loves you. Do you remember when him and the prosecutor told you they never wanted you to go to jail that day?" I play golf in local charity events and bump into some of these judges, clerks, bailiffs, attorneys and we have a nice chat.

To say everything WS shared was fantasy land is completely ludicrous.

WS made it perfectly clear not to use his techniques. He would repeat it. "I am not telling you what you should do. I'm just telling you what I might do." People would still go ahead and dive right in. I don't know if it was because they were people with no lives, or desperate, or just gullible morons, but they jump off and do something like put their own plates on their little motor scooter and try and talk to the cops while they pee themselves in their knickers. I saw the morons too. Anyone who bought his materials or tried his techniques, that is on them and they should take personal responsibility for it.

I still don't understand why ya'll have such a vendetta against WS and why ya'll hate on him on here. Why?

[wserra]

You said "Some of the things he discussed in his videos and seminars, which I bought many of and attended a seminar in Phoenix, work 100% of the time". You haven't shown one such thing.

You said "I spent a lot of time in court and in doing administrative processes and had multiple successes in criminal and civil court". You haven't been able to verify one such win.

Until you do, you are not making such claims in the Shrout thread. And soon you won't be making such claims anywhere on this board.

Proof or silence.

[wserra]

As for Ben Lowrey, when he said something dumb - "To be clear, taxation is theft" - he was promptly called on it. I have seen him write nonsense in the past. To his credit, he has acknowledged that. You make dumbass claims with no proof at all, are frequently abusive to boot, and appear to be proud of it all.

See the difference?

[Gregg]

I started a little explanation of the Federal Reserve System a few years back, over lasagna. look it up, Johnny, and maybe you can unlearn some of the crap you're spewing about the big evil Fed...

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... erve+board

[jonny sunday]

I started a little explanation of the Federal Reserve System a few years back, over lasagna. look it up, Johnny, and maybe you can unlearn some of the crap you're spewing about the big evil Fed...

http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... erve+board

Thanks. I'll check it out.

[AndyK]

The following is verbatim a PM I exchanged with JS:

AndyK wrote:Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:26 pm

jonny sunday wrote:Sat Mar 23, 2019 4:30 pm
I would respond to your opinions but almost all of my posts are being censored by the moderators. Two of your opinions which really stick out to me are:

I know oral contract by counteroffer in open court in a criminal case or on the phone about a criminal case works 100% of the time. I've done it so many times and seen others so many times, I'm 100% certain it works. Sometimes you have to do it three times for it to be effective.

And I'm 100 certain the Russians have a secret base on the far side of the moon.
Again, provide verifiable proof or stop spouting.

Have you ever looked into the Bankruptcy of the United States Government?

Are you referring to moral bankruptcy or fiscal? The fiscal bankruptcy of the US government is bogus Internet chatter. If you actually research it, it is all based on (1) a misinterpretation of the abolition of the gold standard and (2) and James Traficant's U.S. Bankruptcy Speech: "The Bankruptcy of The United States" (United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993) which had no basis in reality

Regarding your moderation, with your permission, I will post this message.

Of course. You are more than welcome to post. I can take all the bashing and mocking from the quatloosers. It's just I cannot respond, because they moderate/censor me. Thank you for your response.

About the only way I could provide proof of how oral contracting by counter offer works is for some of the many people who went to court with me many times to speak up and give first hand knowledge testimony of the events which happened in the courts with me.

[notorial dissent]

Oh, YAWN!!!!!

[Pottapaug1938]

The following is verbatim a PM I exchanged with JS:

About the only way I could provide proof of how oral contracting by counter offer works is for some of the many people who went to court with me many times to speak up and give first hand knowledge testimony of the events which happened in the courts with me.

[/quote]

Wrong. IF you are really a lawyer -- which I doubt, you could cite at least one appellate case where this has worked. I've long since retired from the law; but the article below reminds me of something which I heard, from my Contracts professor: "an oral contract isn't worth the paper it isn't printed on." So, come on, jonny -- find us one appellate court case where oral contracting by counter offer is shown to work.

[Tevildo]

Speculating here, but I'd imagine that jonny is talking about a plea bargain. It's not entirely unreasonable to characterize a reduced sentence as a success, although it's still a conviction. Perhaps he can clarify.

[Chaos]

shirley actual court transcripts would help solve this 'mystery'.

[LaVidaRoja]

Actually, a cite to any actual court case would solve the entire problem. However, reality and jonny do not have a good/working relationship

[notorial dissent]

Actually, a cite to any actual court case would solve the entire problem. However, reality and jonny do not have a good/working relationship

That would be the nodding acquaintance which he doesn't have.

[rumpelstilzchen]

johnny sunday wrote:

I know oral contract by counteroffer in open court in a criminal case or on the phone about a criminal case works 100% of the time. I've done it so many times and seen others so many times

Well, hows about this....choose just one of your "many times" and, once you have done that, describe to us in precise detail, from start to finish, exactly what happened.

[noblepa]

johnny sunday wrote:

I know oral contract by counteroffer in open court in a criminal case or on the phone about a criminal case works 100% of the time. I've done it so many times and seen others so many times

Well, hows about this....choose just one of your "many times" and, once you have done that, describe to us in precise detail, from start to finish, exactly what happened.

And, since criminal court cases are a matter of public record, cite the jurisdiction, defendant, the crime charged and the outcome of the case. This will allow you claim to be independently verified.

[Arthur Rubin]

I've long since retired from the law; but the article below reminds me of something which I heard, from my Contracts professor: "an oral contract isn't worth the paper it isn't printed on." So, come on, jonny -- find us one appellate court case where oral contracting by counter offer is shown to work.

Although JS's "oral contract by counter offer" is without evidence, the maxim, "an oral contract is as good as the tape it's recorded on" is as good now as it was before "tape recorders" went digital.
[added]
For the record, in most cases, an oral contract is theoretically valid, but practically unenforceable as people will remember the terms differently.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Jonny - just cite the cases. What you want everyone to believe went on has no connection to the real world unless you cite the case so it can be looked up and your claim validated. Without the case cites everything is simply part of your fantasy.

[Pottapaug1938]

I've long since retired from the law; but the article below reminds me of something which I heard, from my Contracts professor: "an oral contract isn't worth the paper it isn't printed on." So, come on, jonny -- find us one appellate court case where oral contracting by counter offer is shown to work.

Although JS's "oral contract by counter offer" is without evidence, the maxim, "an oral contract is as good as the tape it's recorded on" is as good now as it was before "tape recorders" went digital.
[added]
For the record, in most cases, an oral contract is theoretically valid, but practically unenforceable as people will remember the terms differently.

That was essentially my professor's point.

[Burnaby49]

Once when I was auditing a tax avoidance scheme that relied on totally unbelievable claimed oral contracts the taxpayer's lawyer said I had to accept that the contracts were valid because the taxpayer could enforce them in court. I told him he could argue that to a Tax Court judge but I wasn't buying it. I reassessed the scheme and they didn't bother to appeal.

[notorial dissent]

I think I will go with Arthur's update of the old saw. Now I will grant that an oral contract, plea deal, etc., can be valid, but not so much unless/until they are actually memorialized to paper and acknowledged. So I would still put this with the business maxims as not worth the paper it is theoretically not printed on.