By

To Protect and Serve

By: David Deschesne

The police officer’s motto is to protect and serve.

Serve what?

serve, vb. 1. To make legal delivery of (a notice or process) <a copy of the pleading was served on all interested parties>. 2. To present (a person) with a notice or process as required by law <the defendant was served with process>. – Black’s Law, 7^th ed.

A police officer serves traffic tickets and citations, which are contracts. He provides the service of pulling you over, checking your papers, inspecting your car, etc. The citation is the “bill” for those services ordering you to pay. The ticket states on its face that signing is not an admission of guilt; it is merely a receipt.

A contract must offer something of value and have consideration. “A” must offer to give something of value, and “B” must agree to pay for it under “A’s” terms. If there is no meeting of the minds, there is no contract.

Therefore, this is the contract that occurs at a traffic stop:

Offer: A police officer asks for your papers (e.g. license, registration, etc.). The thing of value he is offering is his service.

Acceptance: You give him what he asks for without objecting

Value: He provides the service of looking over your papers, car, etc.

Consideration: You agree to pay for that service.

Ticket: The ticket is merely a receipt stating that you entered into a contract with the officer, and that he did provide the service on that date, time, road, etc. The courts are merely enforcing that contract you voluntarily made with the officer. I’m sure it’s nothing personal – just business, you know. Like a waiter or waitress at a restaurant, the officer can agree to “give you this one on the house” by giving only a warning. Otherwise, you will be offered a service and have to pay the cashier (court).

A contract entered into under “threat, duress, and coercion,” however, is not enforceable because there was no agreement – no “meeting of the minds.”

Back to Law Library

©2004, David Deschesne, All rights reserved. This material may be copied and/or distributed electronically in full, with proper attribution to author and website, free if charge for non-profit, educational purposes. This is not legal advice, only analysis.

-----------------------------------------------

The Traffic Ticket

By: David Deschesne

A traffic ticket, in addition to a receipt for services, is an instrument that has value - that is, the monetary value of the fine it represents. A fine is the purchase price of an infraction. A person who speeds, gets caught, and is provided a service by a police officer, is offered, in addition to said services, the opportunity to purchase the right to speed ex post facto. The ticket is that purchase/sale agreement. Once a ticket is signed, and accepted, the signer becomes liable to pay the value of it to the entity that created the debt - the State.

Traffic infractions that damage nobody result in an officer offering to sell the right to break an infraction after it was broken. If there truly were a damaged party upon an infraction, a traffic ticket would not be necessary because the damaged party who could prove damages would be able to sue and prevail without a ticket, citation, or receipt.

Since the State is never damaged as a result of an infraction, they must generate revenue another way - by selling the right, or permission, to break an infraction ex post facto to their licensed drivers. Licensed drivers are already granted permission by the state to engage in illegal activity after submitting a fee*. Traffic tickets are simply a logical revenue-bearing extension of that original grant of authority.

*(driver's license: License = "The permission granted by competent authority to do an act which, without such permission, would be illegal, a trespass, or a tort." - Black's Law, 5th ed.)

Back to Law Library

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Debts sold are unenforceable

By: David Deschesne

If a debt, or contract, is sold to another party, without the opposing party’s informed consent, the purchaser may be unable to enforce the obligation because there was no “meeting of the minds.”

The practice of selling debts to collection agencies (that credit card companies perpetrate on a daily basis), and mortgages from one bank to another may render the original contract unenforceable by the debt collector who bought it:

“Boston Ice Co. v. Potter, 123 Mass. 28, was an action for the price of ice furnished to defendant from April 1, 1874, to April 1, 1875. The defendant was supplied with ice by plaintiff in 1873 and, becoming dissatisfied, terminated his contract and made a new one with the Citizens Ice Company. Just before April, 1875, this company sold out to plaintiff. The court found that the defendant had no notice of the change. Held, the plaintiff could not recover, as there was no meeting of the minds of these parties to this action. A man has a right to select and determine the persons with whom he will deal, and can not have others thrust upon him without his consent.” – Commercial Law, D. Curtis Gano, ©1904, p.36

Duress

By: David Deschesne

“Duress is defined to be some unlawful constraint exercised upon a man whereby he is forced to do some act against his will. It is actual or threatened violence or imprisonment.

A contract entered into by a party under duress is voidable at his option. The duress must be inflicted or threatened by a party to the contract or one acting for him and with his knowledge, and the subject of the duress must be the contracting party himself or his wife, parent or child.

In Morrill v. Nightingale, 93 Cal. 452, plaintiff procured several promissory notes to be executed by defendant under coercion and intimidation, caused by threats of arrest issued by a Justice of the Peace nor for the purpose of punishing the defendant for a crime but to compel him to pay the money or execute the notes. Held that this constituted duress and was a good defense to the action to recover on the notes.” – Commercial Law, D. Curtis Gano, ©1904, p.43

Please note that in many states, traffic code violations are NOT crimes, they are infractions. In Maine, the Motor Vehicle Code (Title 29-A) goes out of its way to state that infractions are not criminal in nature, or to be prosecuted or construed as crimes. Whenever a police officer attempts to coerce you into entering a contract with him for his service (the traffic ticket) against your will, you may enter into it (sign the ticket) under duress, and use that as a defense in court. However, the money machine that is the Traffic Violations Bureau has become so sick and corrupt, most judges will fail to follow this portion of the common law until enough people begin to assert their rights.

-----------------------------------

God's Law vs. Man's Law

By: Francis R. Folsom

I joined a tax movement back in 1979 called "Your Heritage Protection Association." The theory here was that Federal Reserve Notes do not constitute a Constitutional Dollar. And thus, no one made income in a constitutional sense. The group ended by having all assets confiscated by the IRS and the leader going to jail. The courts called the argument "frivolous." There was also a matter that the leader of this group was a felon. Personally, I don't care if the Devil himself told me the truth of the matter. The truth is the Truth.

Through the years I kept the faith and was liened and levied for over 14 years by either the IRS or the FTB. [California taxing agency] About five years ago, the IRS hit me with a levy notice for some $165,000 in so-called back taxes and interest. This kind of puts the average Joe Six-pack between a rock and a hard place. It became a matter of do or die. Something was wrong with all I have been taught.

Some years before this last levy notice, I met up with another freedom fighter (author) named Otto Skinner. I was with him all during the time he was writing his last book (as far as I know), "The Defendant." He, like Irwin Schiff, liked to fight either the 16th Amendment or the Internal Revenue Code. But like I said before, I was doing something wrong. I found that no one wins, unless very lucky, with this type of information. But Otto had a great saying that I really liked. He kept saying "You have a God given, constitutionally secured right to work and earn a living." Unfortunately he never said what that right was. When I did find out what that right was, Otto said "I was wrong." Otto was wrong.

The answer was so simple, I was surprised why I hadn't found it a long time before that. Not only that, but the answer will forever change one's understanding of that great document, the Declaration of Independence. And while it may not be the Law, it represents the intent of the Law and our Constitution. The reason for the War of 1776 was not simply a matter of "Taxation without Representation." That statement becomes the UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE CENTURY.

The Declaration of Independence tells us that there are three rights which are grants of God. They are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. Of these three, there was only one that I didn't know the constitutional meaning of. I was not alone. As a matter of fact, I have yet to find any person that I ask the question of, that can tell me what the Constitutional meaning of pursuit of Happiness is. I simply looked up the word "Happiness" in Black's Law Dictionary and there is the answer. Your right to work and earn a living is your right to the pursuit of Happiness.

Happiness.... The constitutional right [actually unalienable right]

of men to pursue their "happiness" means the right to pursue any

lawful business or vocation, in any manner not inconsistent with

the equal rights of others, which may increase their prosperity, or

develop their faculties, so as to give to them their highest enjoyment.

Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U.S. 746.

One cannot have an increase in prosperity, without the making of some form of money. And money is property. The 5th Amendment guarantees the right under the word "property." The Butchers' Union cite is full of damning remarks to the IRS. It goes on to say "The Property which every man has is his own labor, as it is the original foundation of all other property. So it is the most sacred and inviolable."

Now my only problem became in finding out whether God's word or the word of the Congress carries the most weight with the judiciary, 16th Amendment vs. pursuit of Happiness.

Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can

be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.

Miranda vs. Arizona 384 U.S. 436.

This was the case when the judge dismissed without a hearing. I knew then, I was up against an unconstitutional, outlaw Judiciary.

Thank you,

Francis R. Folsom

maray@dslextreme.com

(For questions or comments, please write directly to the writer above)

Maine Taxation, 1898

(presented by Lise Dupont McLain)

"Taxes assessed by the State - Certain taxes are assessed directly by State authorities and are paid directly into the State treasury. Such are fees fixed by law to be paid by certain persons for licenses to do business in the State at large, by trial justices, justices of the peace, and notaries public for their commissions or certificates of appointment, and by manufacturing and other corporations organized under State laws for making record and issuing certificates of organization. These are devoted exclusively to the defraying of State expenses. Of the same sort are certain pro rata taxes assessed on the average annual deposits in savings banks and similar institutions, and on the estimated value of the franchises of steam and electric railways, and of telegraph, telephone, express, and insurance companies doing business in the State......................" - Page 226

"Taxes assessed by the Towns - Taxes to defray town, county, and the major part of State expenses are assessed and collected by the town authorities. When the legislature has determined the amount required to defray the expenses of the State government not otherwise provided for, it APPORTIONS this amount AMONG THE TOWNS according to their valuation as fixed by the State Assessors, and the sum so APPORTIONED to any town is ITS STATE TAX, to be assessed upon the polls and property of its citizens, and when collected, to be paid by the town treasurer into the State treasury." Page 227

"Assessment - It is necessary to know the amount of TAXABLE property before a tax levy can be made. For this purpose assessors are elected in cities, towns, and villages having CORPORATE powers, to prepare LISTS of all TAXABLE property, and to give its valuation, which is usually assessed at less than its actual value." - Page 226

"Kinds - Taxes are of two kinds - direct and indirect. Those that are levied upon persons or property and are paid by the person upon whom they are assessed are direct taxes. Taxes collected on articles of consumption are indirect taxes. Customs and the taxes on liquors, tobacco, and beer belong to this class. The National government is supported almost entirely by means of indirect taxation, though it has power to levy direct taxes* (the name "direct tax" has a special meaning , however, in the constitution of the United States, See B. A. Hinsdale, The American Government, p. 197). The taxes assessed and collected in Maine for State and municipal purposes are direct taxes." - P 225