Judge Richard Obuch violates constitutionally protected rights!

[BillBoard]

I have been an observer in this case, listen to this hearing where the man protecting his rights is assaulted by the corrupt judge.

https://www.box.com/s/w6y3tu0y91kcvoyxe44h

https://www.box.com/s/w6y3tu0y91kcvoyxe44h

Starts slow but fireworks at the end.

BillBoard

[osoab]

good to see you back billboard

[Cebu_4_2]

Surprized the judge didnt hold him in contempt and throw him in jail.

[Ares]

He can't violate the Constitution when neither he nor the defense are a party to it.

[StreetsOfGold]

That judge has that effeminate inflection in his voice.

[freespirit]

the only way to win is not to play.

[palani]

the only way to win is not to play.

In equity a win is dishonorable. Seems the role of honor and dishonor do a flip flop when law is converted to equity. Think of it as winning an argument with your wife. As a result there will no longer be any nooky in your future. Preferable to lose and maintain harmonious relations unless you want to practice the 51st way to leave your lover.

[BillBoard]

good to see you back billboard

Thank you, been a little busy helping others.

[osoab]

Thank you, been a little busy helping others.

Good to hear.

[BillBoard]

He can't violate the Constitution when neither he nor the defense are a party to it.

He is a party to it if he supposedly swore to support and sustain It.

[BillBoard]

This is a dirty judge people, take a look:

N.J. judicial panel accuses Elizabeth judge of ethical violations
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/nj_judicial_panel_accuses_eliz.html

ELIZABETH — A state judicial panel has accused a municipal court judge in Elizabeth of ethical violations for representing a city official on personal matters.

The Supreme Court’s advisory committee on judicial conduct filed the charges May 20 against Richard Obuch, one of four municipal court judges in Elizabeth.

The committee said Obuch, an attorney since 1992, represented Oscar Ocasio, then the director of policy and planning for the city, in three matters from February 2008 to March 2010.

One case, filed in September, 2008, in U.S. District Court in Newark, involved a condominium in Puerto Rico that Ocasio bought two years earlier with Antonio Rivera and Barbara Miranda Rodriguez. Ocasio contended Rivera stopped paying his portion of expenses in 2007, prompting him to seek a court order removing his name from the mortgage and the bank note.

U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan dismissed the case in February 2009, according to court documents.

Obuch also represented him in a second matter against Rivera, also filed in 2008.

In another case, Obuch represented Ocasio, who had been sued by Homebuilders Group LLC 2008.

"All three matters in which (Obuch) represented Oscar Ocasio concerned private matters unrelated to Mr. Ocasio’s position as the director of policy and planning for the city of Elizabeth," Candace Moody, disciplinary council for the committee, wrote in the complaint.

The complaint said Obuch, who still sits on the bench, violated two canons of the code of judicial conduct: he "has failed to observe the high standards of conduct expected of judges" and that he failed "to act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."

The committee will hold a hearing, not yet scheduled, before determining whether to ask the Supreme Court to impose sanctions.

Obuch declined to comment on the charges. He said he had not yet hired an attorney.

[BillBoard]

Surprized the judge didnt hold him in contempt and throw him in jail.

I guess you didn't understand that the so called judge didn't have authority to hold him in contempt.

[Ares]

He is a party to it if he supposedly swore to support and sustain It.

A court, and judge in equity is not a party to the Constitution. He'll uphold it if you are a party to it. Go after the judges's oath and his bond just watch his reaction.

Lawyers in black robes think they are all untouchable, until you threaten their livelihood.

[BillBoard]

A court, and judge in equity is not a party to the Constitution. He'll uphold it if you are a party to it. Go after the judges's oath and his bond just watch his reaction.

Lawyers in black robes think they are all untouchable, until you threaten their livelihood.

I am intrigued Ares, please explain further, thanks.

[Ares]

I am intrigued Ares, please explain further, thanks.

It's extremely convoluted and difficult to explain. But I've come across some video's of an individual who does a good job of breaking it down into simplicity that covers the subject matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2pMJyIikCk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvKu2UNHQpA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2GaxlGTyAE

[BillBoard]

It's extremely convoluted and difficult to explain. But I've come across some video's of an individual who does a good job of breaking it down into simplicity that covers the subject matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2pMJyIikCk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvKu2UNHQpA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2GaxlGTyAE

Thank you Ares, I am familiar with Dean C. Clifford.

Regarding this case, I am familiar and witnessed the incident. The cop arrested the gentleman because he would not self-incriminate. The cop took him to jail and the man claims he was not released until he was forced to share his fingerprints. The man also claims he was never given a copy of the warrant or indictment.

Here is the copy of the warrant that was given to him in court:

https://www.box.com/s/v4d1nhnol33xkm94k7e8

If you read it, it says he was involved in a motor vehicle accident; if that is the case, he was involved only as a witness as far as I could tell.

[Ares]

Thank you Ares, I am familiar with Dean C. Clifford.

Regarding this case, I am familiar and witnessed the incident. The cop arrested the gentleman because he would not self-incriminate. The cop took him to jail and the man claims he was not released until he was forced to share his fingerprints. The man also claims he was never given a copy of the warrant or indictment.

Here is the copy of the warrant that was given to him in court:

https://www.box.com/s/v4d1nhnol33xkm94k7e8

If you read it, it says he was involved in a motor vehicle accident; if that is the case, he was involved only as a witness as far as I could tell.

I'm still reading up on this myself, and lack the knowledge to proceed. He obviously cannot hire an attorney to do this for him as it goes against the BAR. File a Civil suit, in a civil court claiming that he was not driving in a motor vehicle, but was exercising his common law right to travel. The officer, prosecution, judge etc have no proof that Mr. so and so was being employed at the time of this accident and no operators license is required to travel upon the road ways when not transporting goods and people in the pursuit of commerce.

However, if he is responsible for damages he will have to recognize that and attempt to reach an agreement with the complaining party before going into civil court.

[osoab]

does it matter if the box isn't checked where the judge signed?

[Ares]

does it matter if the box isn't checked where the judge signed?

Not in statutory / equity courts. Law really doesn't apply. It is whatever they say it is. Judges have even been quoted saying as such. Erwin Schiff found that out during his own trial when they wouldn't let him use the 16th Amendment for his defense. Judge said he would not let that ruling in his court room. That's enough to tell you right there, that the court isn't operating within the confines of the supreme law of the land. So if it isn't operating within those boundaries, whose boundaries and what "law" are they using?

Why so many courts can legislate from the bench, the constitution has no bearing in statutory / equity courts. So don't attempt to use it as a defense. At the same time you are being brought in, sue them in a civil court. That court belongs to you and under your ( common law) if that is what you are using to sue them with.

[BillBoard]

I'm still reading up on this myself, and lack the knowledge to proceed. He obviously cannot hire an attorney to do this for him as it goes against the BAR. File a Civil suit, in a civil court claiming that he was not driving in a motor vehicle, but was exercising his common law right to travel. The officer, prosecution, judge etc have no proof that Mr. so and so was being employed at the time of this accident and no operators license is required to travel upon the road ways when not transporting goods and people in the pursuit of commerce.

However, if he is responsible for damages he will have to recognize that and attempt to reach an agreement with the complaining party before going into civil court.

See that's the thing Ares, there is no injured party making a complaint against him, he was standing at the corner next to me when the accident happened.

We saw the whole thing, when the cop showed up, he began asking people who was involved in the crash.

When he approached my friend the cop asked "Did you hit him?" (meaning the victim) My friend's jaw dropped and didn't respond for a second, the cop became belligerent asking him if he spoke English, the only thing he said was that he didn't have anything to say.

I tried to intervene but my friend told me to be quiet. The cop then told him he was under arrest, my friend asked why and all the cop said was that my friend was acting suspicious.

Then the cop kept asking him questions and my friend replied that he could not answer any questions without assistance of counsel. Then the cop told him that he could shove his lawyer up his ass!

[Ares]

See that's the thing Ares, there is no injured party making a complaint against him, he was standing at the corner next to me when the accident happened.

We saw the whole thing, when the cop showed up, he began asking people who was involved in the crash.

When he approached my friend the cop asked "Did you hit him?" (meaning the victim) My friend's jaw dropped and didn't respond for a second, the cop became belligerent asking him if he spoke English, the only thing he said was that he didn't have anything to say.

I tried to intervene but my friend told me to be quiet. The cop then told him he was under arrest, my friend asked why and all the cop said was that my friend was acting suspicious.

Then the cop kept asking him questions and my friend replied that he could not answer any questions without assistance of counsel. Then the cop told him that he could shove his lawyer up his ass!

Hire a private investigator find out where he lives. Who his wife / family is. Sue him and his wife in a civil court, name his wife as an accessory to the crime. You / friend could hire an attorney if you want. But I would try to represent myself. Sue the shit out of him in common law court. Put him in his place.

[BillBoard]

Hire a private investigator find out where he lives. Who his wife / family is. Sue him and his wife in a civil court, name his wife as an accessory to the crime. You / friend could hire an attorney if you want. But I would try to represent myself. Sue the shit out of him in common law court. Put him in his place.

Ares I can't sue the cop since I have not been injured myself, but my wife and I did sign affidavits for Harry stating what we witnessed; also, there was another couple with us that saw the whole thing.

[palani]

Facts are irrelevant. What counts is procedure. Specifically notice and opportunity to respond. IRS uses this technique all the time. If they send you a notice that you owe a million bucks and you respond "I don't owe that much" then you have just admitted you owe something. The fact is there is nothing owed. Completely irrelevant.

So you give the guy his due process and THEN lien him up. House, car, snowmobile, motorcycle. You prevent him from selling anything, make it difficult for him to move anywhere, put yourself next in line for his assets, garnish his wages and generally prove that you can be as much of a pain in the ass as he is.

[BillBoard]

Facts are irrelevant. What counts is procedure. Specifically notice and opportunity to respond. IRS uses this technique all the time. If they send you a notice that you owe a million bucks and you respond "I don't owe that much" then you have just admitted you owe something. The fact is there is nothing owed. Completely irrelevant.

So you give the guy his due process and THEN lien him up. House, car, snowmobile, motorcycle. You prevent him from selling anything, make it difficult for him to move anywhere, put yourself next in line for his assets, garnish his wages and generally prove that you can be as much of a pain in the ass as he is.


Palani that is brilliant!

Let me see if I get this right, if you have a dispute with someone, you give them notice. If they ignore you, they pretty much concede your point. Is that it?

How about the record, how can you keep a public record in case your procedure is challenged?

[palani]

Palani that is brilliant! I didn't think it up. That is what the system uses against you. Why not use their own tools against them?


Let me see if I get this right, if you have a dispute with someone, you give them notice. If they ignore you, they pretty much concede your point. Is that it? If they ignore you then you get nothing but silence from them. Silence is agreement. How can you have a dispute with someone who agrees with you?


How about the record, how can you keep a public record in case your procedure is challenged? Provide NOTICE. After 10 days provide NOTICE OF FAULT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE. After another 10 days provide NOTICE OF DEFAULT (aka RESPONDENTS CONFESSION OF JUDGMENT). As they have entered dishonor by failing to respond you might repeat the process using a notary to witness the dishonor.

If you cannot properly serve them because you don't know the address or whereabouts then you do what this gentleman did in 1783:

http://i50.tinypic.com/205az46.jpg