DMVP "Writ of Enforcement" for $20M "Lien" III

[wserra]

You think five years is speedy??

I think the law requires you to show up when directed, and that only a moron believes that his phone number substitutes for his ass.

Denied a speedy trial? Well, sue them. Oh, yeah, you tried that.

[David Merrill]

It is some kind of social convention based on guilty until proven innocent, and that is a constitutional violation. Properly serving the abatement for misnomer and judgment is different than just giving them my phone number.

SAMELSON executed a deferred prosecution without notifying me. He put the case under review for five years and three days. You know this. And you know that once I told him about my concerns for a speedy trial that he had that entry vacated from the register of action. So you go ahead and live in your deluded denial Wesley. I will stick to the facts.

And the $250K suit was against GILBERT for that tag-team prosecution with advisory counsel. But you admit that five years is not a speedy trial process; thanks.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[The Observer]

Sure I do. I have plenty of assurance. I have already convinced you all that I was denied a speedy trial. That is worth something.

Yep - that and $3.25 will get you a cup of joe at Starbuck's. But it ain't $20 million.

And the $250K suit was against GILBERT for that tag-team prosecution with advisory counsel.

Oh, was this another 'suit' that you lost? That has to make you at least 0 for 4 in court.

[notorial dissent]

Merrill, “speedy trial” implies / requires that there actually be a trial, that you had been arrested and arraigned and a trial date set. None of that happened. You had not been brought to court until after you were arrested this last time, so there was no trial or clock to be ticking. The “speedy trial” rules did not come into play until after you are arrested and brought before the court. Unless the statute of limitations on the charge expires before you are officially charged, you can be arrested and tried at any time up until that expiration, so long as you are charged before the expiration tolls. The only thing that happened, was that you are such an insignificance and so incredibly lucky that they didn’t bother looking for you and that you some how didn’t manage to get yourself arrested in the mean time. You just got very very lucky, but if you continue in this your luck will run out, and someone will notice the number and variety of fraud laws that you are breaking and decided to take action against you, and you will either end up as a permanent resident at the Pueblo facility, or as a short term guest at Cañon City where you big mouth will do you no end of good.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Merrill,

Who?

[notorial dissent]

You know, SFBFKDMVP, wordsalad boy...

[David Merrill]

Merrill, “speedy trial” implies / requires that there actually be a trial, that you had been arrested and arraigned and a trial date set. None of that happened. You had not been brought to court until after you were arrested this last time, so there was no trial or clock to be ticking. The “speedy trial” rules did not come into play until after you are arrested and brought before the court. Unless the statute of limitations on the charge expires before you are officially charged, you can be arrested and tried at any time up until that expiration, so long as you are charged before the expiration tolls. The only thing that happened, was that you are such an insignificance and so incredibly lucky that they didn’t bother looking for you and that you some how didn’t manage to get yourself arrested in the mean time. You just got very very lucky, but if you continue in this your luck will run out, and someone will notice the number and variety of fraud laws that you are breaking and decided to take action against you, and you will either end up as a permanent resident at the Pueblo facility, or as a short term guest at Cañon City where you big mouth will do you no end of good.

Quite revealing.

What happened is that a private court, an office of profit was served a proper abatement for misnomer. From the register of action it looks like SAMELSON decided to honor the abatement but in an ex parte discussion with the DA decided to defer prosecution for five years and three days on what I call "indefinitely deferred arrest warrant" on the $20M bill for violating my speedy trial right.

A deferred prosecution, as posted definition here, would involve bringing me before the court - which I can prove was as easy as dialing the phone number on the abatement, and informing me of the plan and me accepting terms of this five year probation. Then of course during the course of that term I would need to be charged or convicted of a similar crime to arouse the earlier prosecution.

This social compact, which I have nothing to do with, is not only based on guilt before innocence, it is a family protection mechanism. When the "crime" is obviously not very manacing for example, or there is no evidence or witness, then the objective is to give benefit of the doubt to the accused and let things continue peacefully in the self-governance of the home. In other words, social services of the DA, decides that it would be better to keep an eye on things for a decided term - deferred prosecution.

As it turns out SUTHERS and SAMELSON took a gamble. We will be able to convince David to take a week of community service rather than risk going to Canon City for 18 months. David will be like everybody else and gladly plead guilty - whether he committed the crime or not.

They lost. Now there is a lien for $20M against their fidelity bonds.



Regards,

David Merrill.

[The Observer]

What happened is...

is really this:

Once you were aware that your mother complained to the authorities, you decided to lay low and hope that you wouldn't be charged and arraigned. And that worked for a great while. If you had *really been bothered* by your belief that the government was keeping you from receiving a speedy trial, you would have been filing your useless paperwork sometime during that 5 year period rather than wait for arraignment. You would have been challenging the court over "deferred prosecution" - we won't bother talking about the invalidity of that issue. But you didn't do that, did you? Obviously you thought that the whole issue of an elder-abuse charge against you had been dropped. You were betting on the statute of limitations expiring due to the apparent inactivity of the government. And just as obvious, you had no thought about getting a $20 million "lien" against the government during that time frame. All you were thinking of at that point was saving your hide.

When you finally did get hauled into court, you were embarrassed and angry that the government hadn't forgotten about the issue, that they had the audacity to actually bring you into court and put you into the position of having to publicly face trial for a crime that nearly every member of society sees as being one based on cowardice, cruelty and evil. So you decided to lash out and try to punish the government for coming after you. And this is the baseless scheme you came up with.

[David Merrill]

What happened is...

is really this:

Once you were aware that your mother complained to the authorities, you decided to lay low and hope that you wouldn't be charged and arraigned. And that worked for a great while. If you had *really been bothered* by your belief that the government was keeping you from receiving a speedy trial, you would have been filing your useless paperwork sometime during that 5 year period rather than wait for arraignment. You would have been challenging the court over "deferred prosecution" - we won't bother talking about the invalidity of that issue. But you didn't do that, did you? Obviously you thought that the whole issue of an elder-abuse charge against you had been dropped. You were betting on the statute of limitations expiring due to the apparent inactivity of the government. And just as obvious, you had no thought about getting a $20 million "lien" against the government during that time frame. All you were thinking of at that point was saving your hide.

When you finally did get hauled into court, you were embarrassed and angry that the government hadn't forgotten about the issue, that they had the audacity to actually bring you into court and put you into the position of having to publicly face trial for a crime that nearly every member of society sees as being one based on cowardice, cruelty and evil. So you decided to lash out and try to punish the government for coming after you. And this is the baseless scheme you came up with.

Nope. That is not what really happened.

[The Observer]

But no explanation why you didn't initiate legal action for five years if you felt you were being denied due process in getting a speedy trial. Until you can explain that little oversight, my explanation makes the most sense.

[David Merrill]

But no explanation why you didn't initiate legal action for five years if you felt you were being denied due process in getting a speedy trial. Until you can explain that little oversight, my explanation makes the most sense.

I had an abatement for misnomer in place and published within hours and a timely judgement in place ten days later.

[The Observer]

I had an abatement for misnomer in place and published within hours and a timely judgement in place ten days later.

None of which initiated a filing in court. So the question remains.

[David Merrill]

I had an abatement for misnomer in place and published within hours and a timely judgement in place ten days later.

None of which initiated a filing in court. So the question remains.

You go ahead and think that. The world is a lot safer.

[The Observer]

You go ahead and think that. The world is a lot safer.

Getting laconic on us, David? Is that what it takes to get you to pipe down and stop peddling your malarkey - to have be to confronted daily with the failures of your oversights and missteps? Did you really think we were not going to point out the irony of you complaining about not being given a trial for 5 years given the fact that during that same time you were sitting on your butt and not doing anything constructive towards that end?

[wserra]

Did you really think we were not going to point out the irony of you complaining about not being given a trial for 5 years given the fact that during that same time you were sitting on your butt and not doing anything constructive towards that end?

Not to mention being on a warrant for not appearing.

[David Merrill]

I ordered the transcipt where SAMELSON evaded the abatement today - for the evidence repository.

If things are the way you suppose he would not have falsified the register of action.

[The Observer]

Regardless of what you thought the judge did, what we know is that you did nothing for five years. Just think, you could have had a speedy trial by just walking in the courtroom and identifying yourself and asking for trial. And you didn't do it. You wouldn't have had to even pay a filing fee.

[wserra]

Just think, you could have had a speedy trial by just walking in the courtroom and identifying yourself and asking for trial.

I have to quibble (what else do lawyers do?) - that shifts the burden to some extent. A defendant has no responsibility to bring himself to a speedy trial. But to claim that the speedy trial clock runs during the time that he is on a bench warrant is a variant on the classic definition of chutzpah.

[David Merrill]

Note the cite Wesley. You, inside the Bar are unable to break your mind out of the bonds of the criminal syndicalism and face the truth. You are like SAMELSON in chambers as I form the record. I ordered up the transcript of the very first hearing where we discussed the abatement:



[Note that the cash is lawful money - right there in chambers of the chief judge!]



Not much of that came through on the Register of Action. But enough to prove cognizance of the abatement right there in the case file. If SAMELSON agreed with you Wesley, he might have simply explained it in terms of the post-1933 (supplanting the county courts with the Bar) facts - that the abatement had no effect on pleadings and gone on to his explanation on that expensive $20M trial day about how police get to pick and choose when to make an arrest - untrue! Furthermore he would not have run down to Records to vacate his 5 year and 3 day Review after I mentioned it - criminal malfeasance of his office to falsify the record!



Magistrate MIX has acknowledged chuzpah for us Wesley. Me placing SAMELSON's arrest warrant into the federal record awaiting action by the US Marshal.

David Merrill's chutzpah

Talk about chutzpah Wesley. No wonder he said nothing as I pulled out my camera in chambers yesterday morning. There was the no-nonsense security guard right behind me and yet no complaint issued. I am the court of record - David Merrill. He knows what he did and I can prove it - in fact I already did.

All I am saying is do not mix chutzpah up with sinderesis. I enjoy you recognizing the shifting of burden. SAMELSON even tried to shift his burden to have dialed up that phone number on the first page of the abatement and advise me it failed - to the police, you recall. I have the transcript of him actually saying in open court that police get to pick and choose when they make an arrest, as he scrambled downstairs to vacate his five year and three day Review from the Register of Action!


Regards,

David Merrill.

[The Observer]

I have to quibble...\

Quibble noted. And I was addressing David's chutzpah in trying to pretend that the court injured him in not bringing him to trial quicker while he was on the lam.