|
NEXT TIME YOU GET A
TICKET
A friend of mine, the Scarlet
Pimpernel of Low Key Anti-Tyranny, lives in another state. He has a
very low tolerance for the petty blue light tyranny practised on us
daily – police stopping you for a tail light out (when the law says you
only need two and you have three burning), road blocks, drivers license
hassles, social security numbers demanded everywhere (neither he nor his
children have any).
So not long ago his wife was
stopped at a "routine roadblock" (as if violating your ancient rights of
freedom to travel and freedom from unreasonable search could ever be
"routine.") She didn’t have her driver’s license with her at the time, so
she gave him her name. The state trooper ran her name through the
computer, and it came back "license revoked." (She lives in one state but
has a license in another. She didn’t know it had been revoked for not
paying a parking ticket.). He gave her a ticket.
She went into municipal court
with her husband. The Scarlet Pimpernel said to the judge, "I’ll be
defending my wife." The judge appeared terminally confused, but grunted
approval.
The prosecutor put the trooper on
the witness stand, and he testified that he had run the wife’s name
through the computer, and it had come back that her license had been
revoked.
The Scarlet Pimpernel stood up to
cross examine. "Now, how did you know the drivers license had been
revoked?"
"I ran it through the computer,
and it came back invalid."
"Precisely who told you
that?
"Well, the computer."
"If that person is not in the
courtroom, your honour," the Scarlet Pimpernel then humbly said to the
judge, "that’s hearsay, and inadmissible."
Whereupon a deep silence fell
over the courtroom. For an embarassingly long time. The judge adjourned,
and returned 15 minutes later and threw down a stack of law books.
"I’m dismissing the charge of
driving with a revoked license," he said, "but finding you guilty of
driving without a license in your pocket. Fine is ten dollars, and court
costs five hundred dollars."
The Scarlet Pimpernel, nothing
downcast, immediately filled out a notice of appeal on scrap paper (he had
nothing else, and muttered loudly, loud enough for the court to hear, that
this was a lot of [expletive deleted, but, under the circumstances, not
too extreme.])
His wife never paid anything, and
they haven’t heard from the court since then, over five years ago.
The judge was subsequently chosen
"judge of the year" by his fellow "judges."
Why did the court and the
prosecutor lock up? Because they knew the Scarlet Pimpernel was dead
right. The testimony they use every day to convict thousands of
victims – the officer testifying that he called in something and got such
and such an answer from the computer – is incompetent hearsay.
First of all, the only person who could make such testimony is the
custodian of records from the state where the wife was licensed. Second,
the Scarlet Pimpernel would have to be able to cross-examine that
custodian. Third, he would have to verify that testimony with official
record copies. Fourth, if computer evidence were allowable at all, the
testimony could only come from a person who had written the software and
could verify the accuracy of it, and even then I don’t think it would fly
without an official custodian of records and somebody to testify about
inputting the data. Fifth, the officer’s testimony is hearsay because he
is not the custodian of the records and has no knowledge of them, and has
no official records before him.
In other words, every single day
the petty blue light tyranny is convicting and milking thousands of
victims with incompetent hearsay testimony. How do they get away
with it? They’ve dumbed down their victims for years with public schooling
and convinced them the law belongs only to the voodoo priests of the legal
profession.
So go ahead – have a little fun.
Try this one back on them the next time they try one on
you.
– F. Sanders
Back to the previous
page
|
