jpcusick
Member
Real name & identity.
Posts: 10
|
Post by jpcusick on Jan 5, 2012 17:43:41 GMT -5
"Pro se" means to self represent, as in be thy own Lawyer.
The professional Lawyers are in cahoots with the Courts, and the Lawyers will smile as they rip off the defendant parents.
Even the more honest and decent of Lawyers will betray anyone as it is built into the system and the mentality.
And it is impossible to pay enough money that the Lawyer will truly defend any parent against the Child Support system.
The Lawyers will put on a show of concern and they will talk the stuff but the defendant parents are there to be trampled.
Pro se is hard to do - but it can be done, and it needs to be done.
|
|
jpcusick
Member
Real name & identity.
Posts: 10
|
Post by jpcusick on Jan 6, 2012 12:27:30 GMT -5
I learned this perspective when watching CSPAN with Chief Justice John Roberts talking about Court cases and he said that the best way (if not the only way) to succeed is to present the argument as affecting the entire category and NOT just an individual case. This perspective is a bit tricky but the Courts do use it specifically. As in example: a defendant parent (just one parent) ask the Court for an appointed Attorney because they could not afford an Attorney which the lower Court denied. As such the argument for an Appeal was that all of the defendant parents who could not afford an Attorney were to be given a Court appointed Attorney per the US Constitutional right, and NOT just this one parent in this one case. The Courts do not like to give any one person anything but the Courts will give everyone the same thing because the Courts see that as "equal protection" which is the biggest concern. Therefore any parent arguing that the Child Support is unjust in their own case is doomed to lose, as the argument must be that the Child Support is unjust or improper or unConstitutional for every parent (or for the majority of cases) and not just one (1) case. The USA always claims for "individual rights" but under the " "Equal Protection clause"" then individual means equal with everyone else. In every case our only true weapon in Court is the US 14th Amendment where it gives us the right to "due process" and "equal protection" as there is no other way to win in a Court.
|
|
|
Post by Harrison on Jan 6, 2012 15:09:57 GMT -5
I would like you to read my post the school is out of their mind. You would think it's about truancy, but you'd be wrong!!!! Let us now what you think, please.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jan 6, 2012 16:20:47 GMT -5
Thats the problem with a large majority of family law cases and rulings cusick, that is, almost all courts and judges by pass or tip toe around the 14th amendment right of litigants, regardless if they are either defendants or petitioner......especially when it comes to child support cases and enforcement procedures. You really wouldn't believe some of the stuff I've learned helping others with domestic issues, and even pertaining to my own personal situation with these courts. Most would not even begin to believe some of the things that go on......only until they find themselves right directly facing a judge with their own litigation.
|
|
jpcusick
Member
Real name & identity.
Posts: 10
|
Post by jpcusick on Jan 6, 2012 17:11:19 GMT -5
I would like you to read my post the school is out of their mind. You would think it's about truancy, but you'd be wrong!!!! Let us now what you think, please. I did search out your thread - linked HERE, and I can not tell you how to proceed or how to fight it but I can tell my perspective on the subject itself. What I find is that the laws and Law makers see themselves as owning (or in control) of our children and of all children so that the parent(s) are in their way. That seems obvious concerning the evil Child Support and Custody laws where the laws own the children and the parents do not, but this is even more apparent in the schools throughout the USA in that the schools and the teachers view the children as being their own property. My opinion based on the info you give in your thread then the school has already decided that they know better then you, so if you push it then they are probably already prepared to take your son away from you - or to get you out of their way as like maybe jail. The school and the law and etc will now only listen to the children, as your son could press the issue and get it done but that is asking a huge thing from a 16 - 18 year old. Surely the teachers and other authorities have already spoken to your son and they know how to trick or manipulate the kids into doing what is demanded because young people do not have the maturity as does their parents. My own opinion is that having gone this far then you need to let the case die, because they will destroy you at their first chance, and they will trash your family and ruin your son too without any regard. And sad-but-true is that none of us can sue the Gov or the schools or any part of the Gov, and even if we can manage to get such a suit into any Court then it will be crushed in due time. And it gets more complicated then that. As like myself would like to challenge the Child Support in Court but since my own case is long years closed and done then I can not take the Child Support to Court because I do not have my own case and so I am shut out. That was the reason for civil-disobedience because when one does break the law THEN they will have a Court case and then it can be fought in Court, because otherwise we have no legal options. You are correct that it is not about truancy - it is about control.
|
|
|
Post by Harrison on Jan 6, 2012 17:58:29 GMT -5
Thanks for takin' a look, It was an example in most states the juvenile and family courts are one in the same. No such threat of child loss, CPS stays the hell away from me. Because I know my right and let them know it. Thanks to child support collection, on the kids I had phy. & legal custody, they long ago devastated my life. You know what they say about a man with nothing to lose......... So I hope you don't mind if I exercise my right and file suite. RCW 4.92
|
|
jpcusick
Member
Real name & identity.
Posts: 10
|
Post by jpcusick on Jan 6, 2012 21:41:10 GMT -5
So I hope you don't mind if I exercise my right and file suite. RCW 4.92 That is fine by me if you are determined to sue the State, and if the State of Washington has such procedures then that is even better, but you seem to withhold information and that troubles me because we have to become open and vulnerable if we ever want to have progress. The only reference you give is RCW 4.92 which means nothing. I have a lot of experience in my Maryland Courts, and apparently Jim on this board also knows a lot of law too, so it is very important as to the particulars unless you just want to do it alone? As like what is the basis of you suing? what particular law are you pursuing or basing your suit? and what are you seeking? as like do you want the State to pay you damages? or do you seek some kind of satisfaction or revenge or justice or cash money? Here in Maryland I know and I believe true in every Court that the only thing the Courts do decide is for cash money and nothing else. As like I wanted to get my State to stop its harassment and to stop its lies about me and I was informed by the Court that the only thing it can order is monetary settlements.
|
|
|
Post by Harrison on Jan 7, 2012 1:00:53 GMT -5
That RCW is the first step in a suite against the state, county or municipality due to the new self-insurance regulations. You first must file a "claim" with a particular jurisdictions Risk Management office...... My printer is down or we'd be working on the case against the school & PA and any help would be appreciated. It's my first offensive strike, so this truancy will be good practice before a run at the state. Hell, they rolled over every part of the 14th and then backed up over our rights. Freedom isn't free and neither are my rights. I haven't found a way to legally execute the bastards yet....so a big pile of cash will have to do. I'm kinda fond of plan A. Should be able to pick up a printer in 4-5 days, you guys will be the first to know.
|
|
jpcusick
Member
Real name & identity.
Posts: 10
|
Post by jpcusick on Jan 7, 2012 10:40:38 GMT -5
Thats the problem with a large majority of family law cases and rulings cusick, that is, almost all courts and judges by pass or tip toe around the 14th amendment right of litigants, regardless if they are either defendants or petitioner......especially when it comes to child support cases and enforcement procedures. You really wouldn't believe some of the stuff I've learned helping others with domestic issues, and even pertaining to my own personal situation with these courts. Most would not even begin to believe some of the things that go on......only until they find themselves right directly facing a judge with their own litigation. You are quite right in all of that, and yes I would believe the rooked stuff that goes on. I myself in 1994 at 38 years old that I first went to Court for Child Support in full trust expecting justice and truth and it was a surprise to me to find out the law and the Courts have betrayed our trust. It is a hard thing to believe without firsthand experience, and most people refuse to believe me and my story based on their still riding their trust in the system. You are correct that it all circles around the US 14th Amendment because that 14th is the only thing that truly restricts the State laws and gives us citizens our only protection from the State abuses. It is also rather ironic that the 14th was created directly after the Civil War in 1868 as part of the "reconstruction" as we all would not have this otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Harrison on Jan 7, 2012 13:37:21 GMT -5
I was jokin around with Jim the other day and came up with a label for that surprise. I called it Court system shock syndrome or cssss. I thought today I would go through my truancy post and refresh my memory and start getting the list of violantion put together. Tom turns 18 on the 22nd and I would like to file our "claim" Mon. the 23rd. Stop our clock on day one. Feel free to see what you can come up with jp.
|
|
|
Post by Harrison on Jan 7, 2012 17:57:14 GMT -5
Plan A, covered by any rules of war. Seems I mislabeled my plans, cause that plan has no paper spit balls in it.
|
|
|
Post by Harrison on Jan 7, 2012 18:53:20 GMT -5
jp, Checked out your web site, it looked good. Having an optic problem I did find the gray on black hard to read and I couldn't read all I would have liked.
|
|
jpcusick
Member
Real name & identity.
Posts: 10
|
Post by jpcusick on Jan 8, 2012 11:55:13 GMT -5
You are quite right in all of that, and yes I would believe the rooked stuff that goes on. In my sentence above I meant to say "crooked" as I forgot the "c" onto rooked. And my Mozilla spell check did not catch it either as I guess "rooked" is somehow a proper word? Apparently it could have been an accurate online Freudian slip = "Rooked" defined. Of course I could have "Edited" the posting, but in my experience then a forum "edit" gives the appearance of a dishonesty or a flip-flop or other negative perspectives even when that is not accurate, so I try to never "edit" any of my postings. The appearance alone must be avoided, IMO. ========================= I was jokin around with Jim the other day and came up with a label for that surprise. I called it Court system shock syndrome or csss. That is really rather funny in an ironic kind of way. For me I had always thought of it as like my "Day-of-Enlightenment" about the crookedness of the Court, but now I say you are being more accurate than I. It is better to learn that the law and Courts are a fraud, but that is NOT a happy reality. Plan A, covered by any rules of war. Seems I mislabeled my plans, cause that plan has no paper spit balls in it. I like that perspective of being "war plans" because this is a type of war. Most people remind me of the foolish monkey - and then "pop goes the weasel". jp, Checked out your web site, it looked good. Having an optic problem I did find the gray on black hard to read and I couldn't read all I would have liked. I have often wondered about that, so I just went and changed my website's background into a lighter color. And now it has Abe Lincoln (R) on the top, but I like Abe. I might change it again in time after I give it some new evaluation but I will try to remember to keep it easier to read. This is also one of the privileges of a free provided hosting website in that it can be changed quickly and easily.
|
|
|
Post by Harrison on Jan 8, 2012 13:04:28 GMT -5
Not many realize Abe's stance on that scuffle. It also shows your not a yes man, and are willing to promote a good idea regaurdless of it origin. You keep Abe!!! I love the new back ground on your site jp, a very regal look and easy to read. I even liked most of what I read, not an fan of the presidents. If your state is silly enough not to put you in office, go west young man!! Washington could use a GOOD (D) on it's ballet
|
|
jpcusick
Member
Real name & identity.
Posts: 10
|
Post by jpcusick on Jan 9, 2012 11:50:52 GMT -5
It also shows your not a yes man, and are willing to promote a good idea regardless of it origin. You keep Abe!!! To become so flexible and accommodating did not come easy for me, and now I learned to agree with anyone or anything unless it crosses some hard principles. A person needs to rightly know our limitations, and know rightly where to make a stand. In fact I see this as a big issue in regard to the Child Support and Custody laws, because even when people do see the laws are wrong and are hurtful and self destructive to our entire society - then they still stick to the evil system simply because they refuse to bend or change or improve, and that refusal is mostly stubborn egotism. I love the new back ground on your site jp, a very regal look and easy to read. I say I like it better now too. So thank you for the advice. I even liked most of what I read, not an fan of the presidents. I understand, but that is not a discussion for this forum. If your state is silly enough not to put you in office, go west young man!! Washington could use a GOOD (D) on it's ballet What I say is that people like your self and like Jim and others like ourselves need to seek election in our own States and then that gives each of us a platform to denounce the evil system and a possibility of actually doing the reform our self, and I do my campaigning here in Maryland while you do your election where you are, and then we strike at the beast from many directions. Running for election is not very complicated, even if in some States it is more expensive, but the internet gives my campaigning a lot of empowerment and it cost me very little. Just do not seek any financial contributions as money is all they care about. After my civil disobedience (6 years) against the evil Child Support system then I finally got released from Maryland prison in mid 2003 and was homeless, destitute, disabled, but I got myself up and out of it in early 2004. Then I started campaigning in 2005 for the 2006 election for a local State Legislature office of 29b and I lost getting 13% of the vote which was a respectable double digit result, see Cusick linked HERE. Then I ran again in 2007 for the 2008 election for the US Congress 5th District and I lost again but I did receive 19,067 votes which was 17% so I did better in that campaign, see me linked HERE. Then for the just last past 2009 - 2010 election cycle I ran for Maryland Governor and I got 46,411 votes, see link HERE. Now this election term 2011-2012 (voting day April 3rd) then I do have a State wide base and a chance of winning. Each election including this election then I am running against a big rich incumbent which gives me a far harder chance of success, but there was no other way for me to run as politics is a rough game. So I suggest that you guys run for election in your own areas as it gives us a big platform and it gives the message to those that are in power, so I have been winning even when I lose.
|
|